>4 political parties >Only 2 can be in the debates and

File: 1459095783119.gif (223KB, 600x649px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 600x649px

>>138951778
(((Two parties))) own the platforms. Literal whos kvetch. Go figure.

>>138951778

man why cant the greatest country on earth have more than..what two real parties? I mean other coutnries have so many. having a choice between many different parties would be so much better. How can 300 million people be lumped into two parties every time? I dont get it.

Yeah.

That's 90% of countries biggest issue with America, they sit right in the middle of real geopolitics and are perfectly corrupted by synthetic democrat party dominance only offset by a technically acceptably corrupt republican party. That's totalitarian and it shows, democrat party members feel they can say anything they want if it appeals to Marxist kids.

>>138952405
Liberalism vs Conservatism is quite common. Britain has the Labour party, I suppose.

File: 1484577222961.jpg (80KB, 960x940px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 960x940px

>>138952405
Wish there was a party specifically devoted to nationalism and protectionism, I hate the GOP, but I hate the Democrats/Communists more.

>>138951778
The problem with giving the other parties platforms is that the voting system (1 vote for 1 party) an end up with biggest minority wins, of coarse they could switch to a different voting system but just like metric it would cost too much

You would think they'd want as many wacky splinter parties as possible, you know MUH DIVIDE AND CONQUER

>>138951778
It's because of a rule that you need to be polling at like 15% of some horseshit. It should just be that anyone who is on enough states to be able to win enough electoral votes to win gets to be in the debate. Or at the very very least make it so that you can be in the debates if you're on the ballot in all 50 states.

>>138951778

What are those numbers in the graphic?

>>138956393

support i think