Abolish both parties and start afresh

[Pogo]

There's a few liberals on USMB, the rest are leftist shills.

Pogo is a leftist shill.

Link?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Why Can't This be done

Dude this is what I have been saying for the last two decades when i became aware of how corrupt our government really is and how BOTH parties are corrupt,that its a ONE PARTY SYSTEM of demopublicans and reprocrats disguised as two so the sheep think they have a choice in who gets elected.Until we can abolish both of these corrupt parties,there is no hope for the future of america OR the world. Great to see someone else out there that thinks like me.That I am not alone on this.

 

[Marion Morrison]

There's a few liberals on USMB, the rest are leftist shills.

Pogo is a leftist shill.

Link?

Link for Pogo

 

[RealDave]

Why Can't This be done

Abolish Citizens United. Most of the nastiest most untruthful ads are by PACS with unknown funding.

Shove a rag in Trumps lying mouth.

 

[Pogo]

There's a few liberals on USMB, the rest are leftist shills.

Pogo is a leftist shill.

Link?

Link for Pogo

I figured you either had a basis for your claim, or you were pulling it out of your ass.

Even though I already knew the answer I gave you the honest chance to quote me somewhere.
And you went with Option B.

Next in line please..

 

[Marion Morrison]

There's a few liberals on USMB, the rest are leftist shills.

Pogo is a leftist shill.

Link?

Link for Pogo

I figured you either had a basis for your claim, or you were pulling it out of your ass.

Even though I already knew the answer I gave you the honest chance to quote me somewhere.
And you went with Option B.

Next in line please..

Yoar Welcome.

 

[DOTR]

Why Can't This be done

Quite simply because there has been a framework built by the deep state with slots for whichever party appears. Only after tearing it down would new parties make a difference.
Start by taking power back from the Federal government. Repeal the 17th amendment.

 

[DOTR]

Democracy doesn't exist without parties. It isnt possible. What we need is a more responsive set of parties.

 

[Norman]

You can abolish the parties but the same people will still be there.

And so will the same voters. In fact, even worse voters as our IQ is declining each year, and the demographics weakening.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Why Can't This be done

Because it would be unconstitutional.

Where does the Constitution guarantee the 'right to political parties'?

The 1st Amendment.

 

[Pogo]

Why Can't This be done

Because it would be unconstitutional.

Where does the Constitution guarantee the 'right to political parties'?

The 1st Amendment.

The First Amendment says absolutely nothing about political parties.

Prove me wrong.

 

[froggy]

Why Can't This be done

Because it would be unconstitutional.

Where does the Constitution guarantee the 'right to political parties'?

The 1st Amendment.

The First Amendment says absolutely nothing about political parties.

Prove me wrong.

You can abolish the parties but the same people will still be there.

And so will the same voters. In fact, even worse voters as our IQ is declining each year, and the demographics weakening.

That's another thing most people followed their parties instead of their brains what's wrong with this country?

 

[xyz]

Why Can't This be done

Because Congress is the only one capable to do this, and they won't ban themselves. And even if they do, the Supreme Court could rule against it. The President gets a veto, but it can be overturned by Congress.

 

[Doc1]

They cannot "abolish" Party's. I would LOVE to see an amendment that limits both House and Senate terms limited to one term of 6 years each. A stipulation that there is NO dark money to be used, and that pacs abolished.

 

[Doc1]

Why Can't This be done

Because Congress is the only one capable to do this, and they won't ban themselves. And even if they do, the Supreme Court could rule against it. The President gets a veto, but it can be overturned by Congress.

Nope, it has to done through the amendment process.

 

[xyz]

Why Can't This be done

Because Congress is the only one capable to do this, and they won't ban themselves. And even if they do, the Supreme Court could rule against it. The President gets a veto, but it can be overturned by Congress.

Nope, it has to done through the amendment process.

You mean the states? The same reasoning would stand about the parties, the two parties controlling the state legislatures.

But would it really have to be done by amendment? Was there an amendment banning drugs? There was for alcohol, but that's another story.

 

[Doc1]

Why Can't This be done

Because Congress is the only one capable to do this, and they won't ban themselves. And even if they do, the Supreme Court could rule against it. The President gets a veto, but it can be overturned by Congress.

Nope, it has to done through the amendment process.

You mean the states? The same reasoning would stand about the parties, the two parties controlling the state legislatures.

But would it really have to be done by amendment? Was there an amendment banning drugs? There was for alcohol, but that's another story.

Constitutional Wording would need to be changed, just like it was when they decided a Prez could not serve more than two terms.

 

[Pogo]

Why Can't This be done

Because Congress is the only one capable to do this, and they won't ban themselves. And even if they do, the Supreme Court could rule against it. The President gets a veto, but it can be overturned by Congress.

Nope, it has to done through the amendment process.

You mean the states? The same reasoning would stand about the parties, the two parties controlling the state legislatures.

But would it really have to be done by amendment? Was there an amendment banning drugs? There was for alcohol, but that's another story.

Constitutional Wording would need to be changed, just like it was when they decided a Prez could not serve more than two terms.

Once AGAIN, in the entire Constitution there is nothing anywhere regarding political parties, at all. Therefore there is no "wording" to be "changed".

Gotta wonder where summa y'all get your search engines.

 

[Doc1]

Why Can't This be done

Because Congress is the only one capable to do this, and they won't ban themselves. And even if they do, the Supreme Court could rule against it. The President gets a veto, but it can be overturned by Congress.

Nope, it has to done through the amendment process.

You mean the states? The same reasoning would stand about the parties, the two parties controlling the state legislatures.

But would it really have to be done by amendment? Was there an amendment banning drugs? There was for alcohol, but that's another story.

Constitutional Wording would need to be changed, just like it was when they decided a Prez could not serve more than two terms.

Once AGAIN, in the entire Constitution there is nothing anywhere regarding political parties, at all. Therefore there is no "wording" to be "changed".

Gotta wonder where summa y'all get your search engines.

Yawn. Read my prior posts, then we'll talk.

 

[Pogo]

Because Congress is the only one capable to do this, and they won't ban themselves. And even if they do, the Supreme Court could rule against it. The President gets a veto, but it can be overturned by Congress.

Nope, it has to done through the amendment process.

You mean the states? The same reasoning would stand about the parties, the two parties controlling the state legislatures.

But would it really have to be done by amendment? Was there an amendment banning drugs? There was for alcohol, but that's another story.

Constitutional Wording would need to be changed, just like it was when they decided a Prez could not serve more than two terms.

Once AGAIN, in the entire Constitution there is nothing anywhere regarding political parties, at all. Therefore there is no "wording" to be "changed".

Gotta wonder where summa y'all get your search engines.

Yawn. Read my prior posts, then we'll talk.

Don't need to -- I know the Constitution.

Go ahead and show the class where this phantom "wording" is.