All you just said, retard, is that the collective consciousness is better than the distribution of rights. Maybe if you bothered to read why our country and government was founded on the rights of the states, then you could understand, in your very limited intellect, why centralization is a massively bad idea.
Wow, someone doesn't understand what political parties are and is really angry about it.
Political parties are not an official part of the US government- you won't find a single mention of them in the Constitution. They certainly have nothing to do with the principles our country was founded on.
What they are is a private organization of like-minded people who band together to increase their power and electability. Basically it's more effective to campaign as "John Smith, Republican" than "John Smith, independant thinking human" because voters are stupid and can't be bothered to research candidates. The parties allow them to pick someone who they probably will generally agree with.
Which leads me back to my original point: There's nothing in the Constitution about primary elections for the president. There's one election for the president and it takes place every 4 years. The only purpose for primary elections is for political parties to choose who will run under their banner. So why is the state involved in administering it and developing rules for it in the first place?
There are laws that favor the two parties though. They just write that you have to get x% on the previous general election to get a privileged primary paid for by the state. That's why you don't get to vote in libertarian primaries
All you just said, retard, is that the collective consciousness is better than the distribution of rights. Maybe if you bothered to read why our country and government was founded on the rights of the states, then you could understand, in your very limited intellect, why centralization is a massively bad idea.
Wow, someone doesn't understand what political parties are and is really angry about it.
Political parties are not an official part of the US government- you won't find a single mention of them in the Constitution. They certainly have nothing to do with the principles our country was founded on.
What they are is a private organization of like-minded people who band together to increase their power and electability. Basically it's more effective to campaign as "John Smith, Republican" than "John Smith, independant thinking human" because voters are stupid and can't be bothered to research candidates. The parties allow them to pick someone who they probably will generally agree with.
Which leads me back to my original point: There's nothing in the Constitution about primary elections for the president. There's one election for the president and it takes place every 4 years. The only purpose for primary elections is for political parties to choose who will run under their banner. So why is the state involved in administering it and developing rules for it in the first place?
People think we are a two party system because there's some law. Turns out, we're in a two party system because it just kind of turned out that way.
There are laws that favor the two parties though. They just write that you have to get x% on the previous general election to get a privileged primary paid for by the state. That's why you don't get to vote in libertarian primaries
The Whigs have entered the chat.