tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post1218919318263201222..comments2023-10-20T05:51:51.625-04:00Comments on The THINK 3 INSTITUTE: Open primaries vs. the Tea PartySamuel Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00934870299522899944noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post-45815185550024642072014-07-09T19:07:03.766-04:002014-07-09T19:07:03.766-04:00If anything, governments create a status quo, if t...If anything, governments <i>create</i> a status quo, if that isn't a misnomer in this context, so long as they're committed above all to protecting property and thus pre-existing special interests. In a liberal democracy like the U.S., some on the bottom can rise on the top, but there's always a bottom from which the top seeks protection.Those on top only benefit from a two-party system if you accept that bipolarchy prevents the rise of a real "left" alternative, no matter how far "left" Democrats are perceived to be.Samuel Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00934870299522899944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post-18725226991427853722014-07-07T12:31:20.830-04:002014-07-07T12:31:20.830-04:00The problem with any form of government is, ironic...The problem with any form of government is, ironically, the reason most governments continue as they are: the "status quo".<br /><br />Despite what we may think, wish or believe, governments seem to mainly act to maintain the status quo (those on top get to stay on top, those on the bottom get to continue serving those on top). In the USA, it seems that those on top have decided the easiest way they have of maintaining their monopoly on power is through a two-party system. No matter what kind of person the voters may desire or demand, we are only allowed the options given by the owners of the two parties.<br /><br />If we truly wish to see a better government, the first thing we must do is eliminate the power wielded by those two parties and force a change that either allows for more than two parties or, better yet, eliminates all parties in favor of individuals.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post-72129072665656924872014-06-30T13:19:15.611-04:002014-06-30T13:19:15.611-04:00In theory, nothing stops the Mississippi TPs from ...In theory, nothing stops the Mississippi TPs from voting for their favorite in the general election, if they have the will to sustain a write-in campaign. The main point is that parties should not have the last word on anyone's choice of candidates. If that means storming an open primary in an effectively one-party state, then so be it, I guess. Samuel Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00934870299522899944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post-36539946521099067772014-06-25T21:13:51.619-04:002014-06-25T21:13:51.619-04:00A political party's candidates should be the c...<i>A political party's candidates should be the choice of its members and no one else.</i><br />Considering how much power the two parties have in deciding whether a third party candidate is allowed to run. . .<br /><br />The way I see it, it's just throwing a monkey wrench into the machine. And that can only be a good thing in American politics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com