Two party system why is that not tyrannical

Sometimes ya get good choices sometimes not but it seems like when you have 2 bad candidates the system wont allow the chance for a third choice. Our election proccess is rigged to where only republicans and democrats stay in power. Is that democracy I dont think so what ever happened to equil debates it seems the favorite candidates gets all the press time when third party and other candidates dont get equil tv coverage. The 2 favorites always seem to get special treatment when it comes to tv time. If this does not end up in politics can someone fix that its weird I put it in the politics category and it puts me in some other category

Answer #1

I don’t see anything wrong with the two-party system. The two candidates are basically “finalists” who have to go against several others to even get the nomination. Look how many people were originally running for president in this election. The American people had plenty of choices.

Answer #2

yep, democracy in this country is a sham

Answer #3

I agree RG, it is not the two party system that is the problem, it is the money influence on the candidates and politicians. But the problem with most 3rd parties is they do very little between presidential elections. Yes you will see a mayor or state-level legislator get elected from a 3rd party, but no governors, reps or senators. They just show up every four years with zero chance of winning. The only effect they ever have is as a spoiler, like Nader in 2000.

Answer #4

Yep, right on…it’s the money and the gerrymandering that are the problem for US democracy.

Yeah, the 3rd party candidates play spoiler and then stop campaigning, and the only way one of them can actually have a shot at the White House is if they are loaded like Ross Perot, who came closer than any 3rd party has in decades. Once again, it comes down to money

More Like This
Ask an advisor one-on-one!
Advisor

Chart Attack

Legal Services, Criminal Defense, Justice System