I think there's a lot of truth in what you say, but I'm not convinced that a viable third party is possible. Our system (the "winner takes all" approach) does not allow for multiple parties. Yes, in history we've seen one party come in and another die, but it's been more than 150 years since that happened. We've never sustained a three-party system at all, though. It's just too tough for the third party to maintain any power at all since they are at a disadvantage in every single congressional election. (The Parliamentary process that most of Europe uses makes it much more possible--but raises a whole different set of problems as well)Originally Posted by BUZDAWG
I suspect the entrenchment of the current two parties would make it very difficult to have a new party arise -- one party would have to really lose power (that's basically what happened when the Republicans replaced the Whigs) and that would be tough when the split is close to 50-50.
Somehow, I think we have to create real change in the parties. That means that we have to be willing to vote against someone from a party even if it's the party we'd normally support. Otherwise, there's no real reason for people to change. For instance, the GOP knows that a significant portion of the "Christian right" would never vote Democratic--this makes the politicians take those people for granted. The same thing happens to minorities on the Dem side. It creates a certain sense of arrogance: how can they afford to throw me out?