What do you think would happen if there was no political parties?

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Annee
Therefore, therefore, what's the lesson learnt? Crockett fought for the people he knew and he failed because he was one. A guy called Aesop learnt this lesson a couple of thousand years ago with his Parable of a bundle of sticks. A group of people together (a political party) can out vote any party with lesser members. That is why there are political parties and nobody no time will change that.

He failed. What did he accomplish for “his people?

He gained a name and history for himself, but did not help “his people”.

A good politician needs results to affect change.

It took me years to understand everything is politics. Life is politics. Work/career is politics. It’s a give and take to acquire what you desire.

By the time you’re an elected official, you better understand this if you want to effect change.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CaliGirl69

Then it would be simple.

Those that want bigger controlling government versus those who embrace freedom.

Define Freedom.

Is that where every single person is personally responsible and takes care of their own without sticking their nose in other peoples business?

a reply to: 1947boomer

Totally agree.

Lotteries for leaders and Direct democracy for making decisions and passing laws is the only alternative i can see but these things are also fraught with issues too.

I’m in the UK and wish voting was mandatory with one caveat. Put a box that says ‘none of the above’. This would very clearly show the numbers of disenfranchised people and spawn a new party to earn those votes. Of course we’d also need to be a constitutional republic too.

a reply to: merkins

I’m in the UK and wish voting was mandatory with one caveat. Put a box that says ‘none of the above’.

I love the "none of the above" box. But without the mandatory voting. Mandatory anything is exactly the opposite of freedom and liberty, and will be abused. A "none-of-the-above" vote will be far more powerful if those folks are making a voluntary decision to expend their time and effort to go to the ballot box.

originally posted by: CaliGirl69
What if there was no political parties to align to? Even better, what if these elected parties were only elected as volunteers? I was just trying to think of how to unite as a Nation and stop some of the corruption. My thinking is, we vote for presidents based on what they can get done in office rather then who their alignment is to. Also, if they were volunteers, I think they would care more about serving citizens then themselves. More or less to be part of the system and history of this country. What do you think would happen? P.S. (I don't want to hear it wont work, be creative)

the socialist democratic party of nova terra or something silly like that

a reply to: Boadicea

I can’t disagree with anything you said but my big fear in elections in the UK is apathy. I don’t know anybody that votes. People even accompany me to vote but don’t vote themselves. Isn’t there a saying ‘we get the government we deserve’?

People would likely vote on issues rather than on the party.

However... Much of the same farce you see today would be no different in this alternative. Somehow, some way, someone will find a way to take advantage of it.

All power eventually leads to corruption.

a reply to: CaliGirl69

I am against politics, governments, science. all that. i think we should just be an animal species like the rest.

We are not like the rest.. at all. this makes me think we are a persistent error in evolution, that at this time, has avoided extinction because we are too smart (prob.the error).

Nothing good can come from this.. Us.

originally posted by: XipeTotex
a reply to: CaliGirl69

I am against politics, governments, science. all that. i think we should just be an animal species like the rest.

We are not like the rest.. at all. this makes me think we are a persistent error in evolution, that at this time, has avoided extinction because we are too smart (prob.the error).

Nothing good can come from this.. Us.

Meerkats (females) will kill 1 out of 5 other females (usually their own family), they are very homicidal. I'd like to think we aren't that bad or at least we have in place deterrents that we hope will stifle the killing of each other. So we are better than meerkats.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CaliGirl69

Then it would be simple.

Those that want bigger controlling government versus those who embrace freedom.

Define Freedom.

God-given rights, free expression, free speech, etc. Bill of Rights, Constitution, might want to give it a read.

Is that where every single person is personally responsible and takes care of their own without sticking their nose in other peoples business?

Yep!

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CaliGirl69

Then it would be simple.

Those that want bigger controlling government versus those who embrace freedom.

Define Freedom.

God-given rights, free expression, free speech, etc. Bill of Rights, Constitution, might want to give it a read.

Is that where every single person is personally responsible and takes care of their own without sticking their nose in other peoples business?

Yep!

If the Constitution is so great — why so many Constitutional lawyers?

Uh, yeah — too bad all individuals don’t have values of integrity.

The freedom you promote only works with those who think the same.

originally posted by: merkins
a reply to: Boadicea

I can’t disagree with anything you said but my big fear in elections in the UK is apathy. I don’t know anybody that votes. People even accompany me to vote but don’t vote themselves. Isn’t there a saying ‘we get the government we deserve’?

We have the same problem here -- apathy. I think there's also a false sense of security that our freedoms are safe and cannot be lost in a generation... And there's the lack of confidence in our elections. For the first time in decades I am seriously considering not voting in the next election because I know they are corrupted.

Do you think the monarchy plays a role in people's apathy in the UK? Either in a good way or a bad way? I'm not sure how, it's just an added wrinkle for the UK that may be significant in ways I don't know!

a reply to: CaliGirl69

It would free our country from the grip of corruption and deceit.

Without party affiliation, and considering a "volunteer status" (which I really like the idea of), the representatives would have more accountability to the people that elected them as well as more commitment to them.

We would see less corporate influence which would allow for us to pass common sense legislation that we lack today.
Things like anti trust laws could be enforced better and would prevent corporations from being able to do things like control news outlets, conduct experiments on the population, buy political favors....

The MIC would have less control and there would be more transparency of government as a whole

Some of the biggest benefits of a government structure like this would be the complete lack of, if not absence of divisive politics. We wouldn't see party bashing and hate and division between citizens.

We would be able to see what our money was being spent on.

Government would be able to focus on things like borders or foreign affairs but in the public eye and not back door diplomacy or secret committee resolutions.

Presidents would be less likely to pass overreaching "executive orders" which are all unconstitutional anyway, all 50 thousand of them (executive orders)

a reply to: quintessentone

Cultures do NOT need to align. States rights would be preserved and representatives would be elected fairly without party interference in local elections, electoral colleges would be able function as intended.

a reply to: 1947boomer

Its possible but we would be better equipped to pass legislation preventing them, if we so choose. Run off votes happen frequently. True this is during primaries but instead of having several primaries that are party based they can include each candidate and they would do this thing "debate"

a reply to: beyondknowledge2

Without corrupt party influence, there would be no necessity for monetary domination.
There are many states that allow for certain candidates to file for loans or grants if they cant afford the fees
Also think about the fact that the reason it cost so much is because those are barriers that were put in place BY the politcal parties. This is what keeps them in power. Without political parties there would be no need. The same concept could be applied to advertising. Again, the corporations own the parties and most of the candidates, without parties there would be less corporate influence in regards to media coverage and advertising.

Also without parties, the corporations and businesses that would donate, would look for the right candidate to support

a reply to: St Udio

This is the way the Constutition was intended, the governors and the sheriffs were meant to have more power over their states than the president.

originally posted by: JAY1980

My political philosophy is I think married gay couples should be able to protect their marijuana crop with firearms. Where does that put me?

I think Massachusettes

If we have no political parties and we are left with a plutocratic monarchy.

Hows that? We would still have representatives that were elected in the senate and house

What would happen? Elections would happen from local goverments, to select the best (leader) for that area then they would compete with other local areas until the best one wins, no reward other than sreving tje commumity and leading it to the best place can go.......but yea...

People flock to ideas, then they give name to ideas.

a reply to: CaliGirl69

Without political parties, only the wealthiest men or women would become President.

These are all excellent replies. Thank You. I stopped voting when the 2016 election started showing its real side. If I would not of read the podesta emails on what Hillary had planned and the nerve of that tv news anchor who gave Clinton the questions prior to the debate, I might be still be blind to what politics turns people into. Its a constant witch hunt for Trump. Are they that afraid of him in the white house? Same goes for the Republicans, they need to stop trying to censure and remove people. Everyone just needs to remember they are representing citizens interests and not their own.

originally posted by: CaliGirl69
These are all excellent replies. Thank You. I stopped voting when the 2016 election started showing its real side. If I would not of read the podesta emails on what Hillary had planned and the nerve of that tv news anchor who gave Clinton the questions prior to the debate, I might be still be blind to what politics turns people into. Its a constant witch hunt for Trump. Are they that afraid of him in the white house? Same goes for the Republicans, they need to stop trying to censure and remove people. Everyone just needs to remember they are representing citizens interests and not their own.

Trump is responsible for Trump. There are only facts. There is no witch hunt.

Beyond my comprehension people still defend him.

In theory it sounds like a good idea, but in practice I think you'd just get a lot of behind the scenes alliances and groups that would basically look like the modern political party system, except that they wouldn't be wearing visible labels like liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, etc.

George was correct, bust up the current party system, lower term limits, and ban lobbyists and PACS.

Party politics get us absolutely chit-candidates, and the lesser of two evils elections. All the while spending billions to elect these corrupt flawed partisan leaders, that pander to the percentages within the party structure, while the needs and priorities of independent and 3rd party citizens never get addressed.

The Democrats spent 2.1 billion dollars for its top 2 candidates based purely on financials in 2020, Trump's candidacy another $808,756,415.44. 3 Billion dollars for absolutely crap candidates beholden to their respective party's fringe elements

2016
Name Party Receipts Disbursements
CLINTON, HILLARY RODHAM / TIMOTHY MICHAEL KAINE DEMOCRATIC PARTY $585,699,061.27 $585,580,576.76
TRUMP, DONALD J. / MICHAEL R. PENCE REPUBLICAN PARTY $350,668,435.70 $343,056,732.78

2020
Name Party Receipts Disbursements
BLOOMBERG, MICHAEL R. DEMOCRATIC PARTY $1,124,592,944.73 $1,121,170,037.27
BIDEN, JOSEPH R JR DEMOCRATIC PARTY $1,074,179,976.03 $1,073,919,500.66
TRUMP, DONALD J. REPUBLICAN PARTY $811,898,514.36 $808,756,415.44

2024
Name Party Receipts Disbursements
CASTRO, JOHN ANTHONY REPUBLICAN PARTY $20,000,000.00 $ 0.00
TRUMP, DONALD J. REPUBLICAN PARTY $18,272,903.09 $4,340,954.76
BIDEN, JOSEPH R JR DEMOCRATIC PARTY $12,108,093.47 $11,004,152.08
RAMASWAMY, VIVEK REPUBLICAN PARTY $11,418,448.56 $2,051,160.34
HALEY, NIKKI REPUBLICAN PARTY $5,125,430.77 $1,055,881.32
JOHNSON, PERRY REPUBLICAN PARTY $3,763,395.50 $1,726,919.97
SCOTT, TIMOTHY E. REPUBLICAN PARTY $1,646,201.66 $1,511,710.56
ROBERTS, ROLLAN II REPUBLICAN PARTY $1,278,180.00 $19,000.00
WILLIAMSON, MARIANNE DEMOCRATIC PARTY $933,565.93 $740,393.25