The fastest-growing political group in America is "none of the above"

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Where's the usual "we need a 3rd party" in this country post?

Funny you say that. I was just reading an article which (kinda sorta) speaks to that point. I'll share some of it here. It's written in the context of the NJ Guv election.

So this is why we have parties

By Thurman Hart

October 23, 2009, 8:15AM

More than half a century ago, Maurice Duverger made a couple of observations ... First, elite-based parties are rarely ideological and create a "cult of personality" type following; whereas mass-based parties are nearly always ideological and there is rarely much connection between the person running the party and its members. Second, any system that depends on a single ballot to create an electoral majority will tend to create a two-party system.

Taking the second part of that first: We have a two-party system because anyone who tries to run outside of that system is pretty much doomed to failure.

...

Whoever wins this election will do so with an actual majority of votes being cast against them. Chris Daggett will get at least ten percent of the vote, and that means that either Chris Christie or Jon Corzine only has to get forty-five percent of the vote, plus one more vote, to deny his opponent the win. With Christie and Corzine both polling at around forty percent, that might not be an easy task - they may win with an even larger percentage of voters trying to turn them out of office.

This is generally the way a third candidate impacts a race. A political party exists to solve what political scientists call "collective action problems." For example, a party keeps a list of donors (who happen to vote) and volunteers (who also happen to vote) handy, and when the right candidate comes along, they hook them up. A truly independent candidate isn't able to do this - he has to either be able to self-fund his start-up, or to very quickly raise enough cash to be competitive. Either way, an independent candidate has to fight for every single vote, whereas a party can ensure a candidate of some minimum number of votes as a given.

It is not a big news flash that our political parties are drawn up along ideological lines - Democrats are liberal and Republicans are conservative. But it is also important to understand that they are both mass-based parties. Don't believe me? Go ask twenty people at random who the state or county chair of their party is and, unless they've recently been indicted, most people won't be able to tell you. It isn't the personalities that draw people to the parties...it's the ideology they represent.

...

This, by the way, also explains why New Jersey voters return Democrats to power time and again, all the while complaining of how messed up things are. Voters are given the choice of liberal Democrats or conservative Republicans. Everyone understands that some of the people in the Democratic Party are less than upright and ethical, but they would rather have a liberal government that is corrupt than a conservative government that might be slightly less corrupt. So New Jersey elects Democrats and grinds its teeth at the corruption while Republicans wonder how long it will take for honesty to trump ideology.

According to Duverger, they'll have a long wait.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Where's the usual "we need a 3rd party" in this country post?

Well, we have a third party. The Tea Party.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I believe we are a center left nation

Left of what center? How do you define center? In an international context or the center being the geographical center (a.k.a. fly-over country). If it's the latter, then I'd agree because the geographical center is pretty damn far to the right. In an international context (as in, compared with other industrialzed nations) we're nowhere near left of center. In fact, we don't even come close to the center. We may barely see it without using a telescope.

Steve still has lots of make believe friends. Tragic, really.

[alienlovechild 75]

This, by the way, also explains why New Jersey voters return Democrats to power time and again, all the while complaining of how messed up things are. Voters are given the choice of liberal Democrats or conservative Republicans. Everyone understands that some of the people in the Democratic Party are less than upright and ethical, but they would rather have a liberal government that is corrupt than a conservative government that might be slightly less corrupt. So New Jersey elects Democrats and grinds its teeth at the corruption while Republicans wonder how long it will take for honesty to trump ideology.

At least there's competition between the two major parties at the national level where Congress and the White House have changed hands. That can't said in every state, city or county. Some places are run like one-party states because no matter how rotten the party in power is few will vote for the other party voting out of habit. Best to have some competition but there was study done showing more people are more likely to move to where they fit in politically rather than rock the boat in a new location. The result is less person-to-person with people who disagree with you politically.

Steve still has lots of make believe friends. Tragic, really.

Most of the "friends" are sock puppets badly in need of darning. Even Punch and Judy would cry.