Non-Partisan democracy

[Bono]

it's your choose
and discuss.

Personally, I'm a great supporter of non-partisan democracy. I think it should be extended to as many levels of government as possible.

[Joe Republic]

I agree.  I'm a big fan of the Nebraska legislative system, and I wish it could be introduced in many more states, and perhaps even the federal government.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I agree.  I'm a big fan of the Nebraska legislative system, and I wish it could be introduced in many more states, and perhaps even the federal government.

Do the members have party affiliation? I know that they don't elect a majority leader, unlike the other states. That probably makes it harder for lobbyists. In NY a powerful interest will hire a lobbyist for each of the governor, senate leader, and assembly leader, and safely ignore everyone else.

[Gabu]

Very good idea.

[Alcon]

I have no issue with political parties, but personally I do not see any need to list party identification on the ballot.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I have no issue with political parties, but personally I do not see any need to list party identification on the ballot.

To make it clear that snake oilmen like Arnold are not Democrats.

[Alcon]

I have no issue with political parties, but personally I do not see any need to list party identification on the ballot.

To make it clear that snake oilmen like Arnold are not Democrats.

It would not matter what part he was under these circumstances; it would simply be a matter of endorsement.

[A18]

I agree that party affiliation should not appear on any ballot.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Anyone here ever lived somewhere where independents ran the local government or whatever? Because I have and it wasn't pretty.

[Joe Republic]

I agree.  I'm a big fan of the Nebraska legislative system, and I wish it could be introduced in many more states, and perhaps even the federal government.

Do the members have party affiliation?

Not outwardly.  I'm not sure if it extends to local politics there too, but the Democratic and Republican (or any other) parties simply don't exist in the state legislature.

[Democratic Hawk]

Bad idea - I don't think it would stand much for anything and this coming from a guy who's more pragmatic than idealistic or ideological

Dave

[Joe Republic]

Bad idea - I don't think it would stand much for anything and this coming from a guy who's more pragmatic than idealistic or ideological

Dave

How do you mean?  It simply means that party affiliations don't exist - not that ideology doesn't either.

[Democratic Hawk]

Bad idea - I don't think it would stand much for anything and this coming from a guy who's more pragmatic than idealistic or ideological

Dave

How do you mean?  It simply means that party affiliations don't exist - not that ideology doesn't either.

I just think that most political parties stand for something and in doing so they give government a purpose and a direction; whether ideological or pragmatic. I'm sure the non-partisan Nebraska legislature works but I doubt I'd like it to be the norm because it would take the excitement factor out of elections. It's partly because of this factor that I favour the Electoral College over national voting in US presidential elections

Dave

[John Dibble]

Good idea. Parties can get a stranglehold on power, as seen by our own Republicans and Democrats, making it difficult for candidates with outside the two-party box ideas to get elected.

[Bono]

Anyone here ever lived somewhere where independents ran the local government or whatever? Because I have and it wasn't pretty.

No, but I lived somewhere where parties ran the local government, and it wasn't pretty either.

[Speed of Sound]

Good idea. Parties can get a stranglehold on power, as seen by our own Republicans and Democrats, making it difficult for candidates with outside the two-party box ideas to get elected.

I concur. This would encourage more people to run for office, and we wouldnt get stuck with ugly things like the NJ Gov race candidates

[Emsworth]

Political parties should be allowed to exist, but party identifications need not (in fact, should not) appear on the ballot.

[Jake]

I have no issue with political parties, but personally I do not see any need to list party identification on the ballot.

I agree. Ballots should be non-partisan, or at least not have the option of voting straight ticket automatically.

[WiseGuy]

Parties can get a stranglehold on power, as seen by our own Republicans and Democrats, making it difficult for candidates with outside the two-party box ideas to get elected.

I agree, but I don't think we should get rid of parties.  I believe we should just make it easier for candidates to get on the ballot and appear at debates, etc.

EDIT: I also agree that political affiliation shouldn't appear on the ballot.

[MODU]

In theory it's a good idea.  In reality though, it's not very practical.  Once "choice" and "emotion" enter into an equation, it's nearly impossible to be "non-partisan."  I would rather have 3+ parties having to team together on different issues to get something resolved rather than to have two parties pretending to be non-partisan. 

[John Dibble]

Parties can get a stranglehold on power, as seen by our own Republicans and Democrats, making it difficult for candidates with outside the two-party box ideas to get elected.

I agree, but I don't think we should get rid of parties.  I believe we should just make it easier for candidates to get on the ballot and appear at debates, etc.

EDIT: I also agree that political affiliation shouldn't appear on the ballot.

True, and having parties be illegal would be against freedom of association as well. However, having non-partisan ballots would be sufficient. Plus, I think we need a better system than the plurality wins system since it is part of what encourages having only two parties or candidates being viable. I like approval voting myself, though I know there's people who don't like it.