Problem is good luck trying to get a 3rd or 4th party candidate on any ballot. Any idea how much it costs to get a Pres. contender on all 50 state ballots? Completely not feasible unless you are Ross Perot.
Figure that one out and I'll line up right behind you.
Alright, now we're getting somewhere. It looks like a lot of us can agree that a two-party system, comprised of bedfellows pretending to represent separate platforms, is running us into the ground. My question is why, once we decide to start questioning a two-party system, we assume that any reasonable alternative would involve additional parties. Screw this party garbage! What we need is leaders that will represent people instead of special interests. Unfortunately, as long as lobbying is allowed to occur, there will never be any integrity in our Legislative process. The winner will always be the one with the deepest pockets, no matter how bad their interest may be for the vast majority of the nation's populus (sp?).
The fallacy of the two-party system bears a striking resemblance (for me, anyway) to the petty disagreements between CCA, WSC, etc. with regard to fish conservation that we see all too often on the fishing boards. In the end we all want the same thing, but we let our different means to the same end become arguing points, and therefore none of us accomplish anything. Those of us who fish need to realize that, regardless of how we think we should get there, we all want the same thing. Beating up each other's efforts to make progress is destructive to everyone's cause, and it needs to stop. Each organization should support the other's efforts. We are stronger as a unified force than as multiple entities fighting amongst ourselves. That principle applies absolutely to politics as well. The only way we, as citizens, are going to get out of this pattern of getting screwed over time and time again is to stand together against the common enemy (our bought and sold legislators and the interests who own them). We need to vote ALL the incumbents out next election, to send a clear message to their successors that more of the same will not be rewarded with re-election. The first Congress that makes positive, effective change for the majority will be the first to be rewarded with a second term if I have my way.
It should be clear at this point that I do not buy into either of our two parties - I hate them both equally, because I realize that they are both motivated by the almighty dollar, and nothing else. That said, I am something of an Obama fan - not because I think he will rescue us from the mess we've gotten into, but because as long as the United States are going to be represented world-wide by a single figurehead, it might as well be one who speaks with intelligence and doesn't make us look like fools (the last guy was a major embarrassment in that regard). Those who fear him and speak out against "his" programs don't seem to offer viable alternatives to what are real problems and need to be addressed, and I think they are making a shining example of how people in this country are too hung up on personal agendas to support any positive change for the majority unless there are no short-term pains. Like most of you, I will personally be negatively impacted by this administration's plans in the short run. Because I don't have any better ideas, however, I am willing to ride this out and see what happens.