America is made up of a dozen different types of political groups. The far right battles the right left while the middle ground battles both sides on different issues and everyone inbetween. Party corruption, party stances, and blind party voting.

Why isn't America thinking anymore? Instead of focusing on real issues and real people, half of America votes according to party only. What happened to the freedom? Why aren't we using what we've got and electing ourselves a Commander in Chief who can actually lead this country for the people.

I originally suggested a REAL third party. However, I was interested in MasTequila's suggestion that instead of just dividing into one seperate new party, why not three new parties. So altogether would have five political parties in the United States.
1. Liberals
2. Democrats
3. Independents
4. Republicans
5. Conservatives

The new five party system would give America a CHOICE in the election. I realize that five candidates running at the same time (excluding primaries) are alot to follow, but America could make that easier focusing on issues and stances instead of turning our election into a political Orange County or The Hills.

The Independent party would be made of any idividuals with any stances, there would be no party stances whatsoever. Instead, anyone with any views could run as an independent and if they were to recieve enough votes they would recieve the funding for a campaign just like everyone else.

My belief in this system is primarily the Independent party. I truly believe its time for America to have a party without a history, without a set future, just individuals who believe they have the right ideas and the leadership to take the reins of America.

Criticize, pick it apart, lets work this thing into a defined system to see if it would really work. This is definitely a work in progress, an idea. But it always starts as just that. Can America have an independent party? Can America work on a five party system?

The phrase 'party system' often leads to confusion about what it actually is. I've even seen it described as a system of government - which it definitely is not. It can be seen either as the predominant representation of political parties in a legislature, or as the extent of the activity of the political parties in the electoral process.

Apart from some differences in operation the method of voting for choosing electoral representatives in the United States is basically the same as that which is used for elections to the U.K. Parliament - Simple Majority, First Past The Post, Winner Takes All, Plurality-Majority, Single Member District/Constituency, Categorical Ballot or Candidate-Centred Ballot.

In the United States (a federal style legislature) the two-party system consists of the Democrat and Republican parties. In the United Kingdom (a parliamentary style legislature) a two-party system, comprising of the Labour and Conservative parties, existed until it became a three-party system when more Liberal Democrat Members of Parliament were elected. As well as being a measure of the predominant representation in a legislature, the party system can be viewed in terms of the number of seats contested by each political party.

A further way in which a party system can be examined is by looking at part of a legislature. The best example that I am familiar with is Scotland. In the mid 1970's a three-party system became a four-party system with the election of a number of Scottish National Party M.P.'s. With the advent of the devolved Scottish Parliament, using a hybrid of FPTP and a Closed Regional List for voting, that four-party system has 'firmed-up' and the contrast with the U.K. Parliament is very significant. The effects of a change to a different method of voting can be seen in the Scottish Council elections in 2007. The post 'Scotland's Political Awakening' on my blog may be helpful.

__________________
The 'Sanitization' of Scottish History (http://follonblogs.blogspot.com/)

I think that the more legitimate choices we have the better off we would be, but they would have to included at all levels of the process. Also, I only think it could truly work if the popular vote won. Expanding the already outdated electoral college to encompass five candidates would be too confusing for most, and wasteful of our resources.

__________________
Dr. Martin Luther King:
We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, militarism and economic exploitation are incapable of being conquered.

Negative rep score: 6 (Is that really all I get?)
Edit: (Is that all I'll ever get?)