No Two Party System

[baddog]

California is a liberal state for sure, and all the liberals scream about democracy. Yet, when it really comes down to it, they have a one party system. This is worse than what they did to Biden. Talk about “freedom of choice”.

 California's "top-two" primary system allows for the possibility of two Democrats (or two candidates from any single party) running against each other in the general election for Governor

. 

Here's how it works:

1. Open Primary: California uses a top-two primary system, meaning all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, appear on the same primary ballot.
2. Top Two Advance: The two candidates who receive the most votes in the primary election advance to the general election.
3. Same-Party Matchup: Because the top two vote-getters advance regardless of party, it's entirely possible for two Democrats, two Republicans, or two candidates from any other single party to be the top two and face each other in the general election. 

In essence, the party affiliation of a candidate doesn't determine who advances to the general election; it's simply based on who receives the most votes in the primary. 

This system differs from traditional partisan primaries where each party chooses its own

 

[OlDawg]

I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.

Thomas Jefferson

[baddog]

30 minutes ago, OlDawg said:

I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.

Thomas Jefferson

True enough. I don’t consider myself a Republican, just that their conservative views run more parallel to my own. Simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the left always crying about an attack on our democracy, while giving the people two candidates with the same ideology. Might as well be in Russia where there is only one candidate……but you get to vote. Lmao

[LumRaiderFan]

3 minutes ago, baddog said:

True enough. I don’t consider myself a Republican, just that their conservative views run more parallel to my own. Simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the left always crying about an attack on our democracy, while giving the people two candidates with the same ideology. Might as well be in Russia where there is only one candidate……but you get to vote. Lmao

Kinda like the last election, here’s your Democrat candidate, no voting required.

[OlDawg]

2 hours ago, baddog said:

True enough. I don’t consider myself a Republican, just that their conservative views run more parallel to my own. Simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the left always crying about an attack on our democracy, while giving the people two candidates with the same ideology. Might as well be in Russia where there is only one candidate……but you get to vote. Lmao

Louisiana has had a jungle primary forever also. 2026 they’ll start having closed primaries where you have to register as Dem or Rep to vote like almost everyone else. No independents in the primaries. So, the biggest voting block has to choose between 2 crappy contestants from the far edges of their respective Parties.

Wow. Talk about a stupid concept. And people wonder why we keep getting further and further apart with wild swings. A minority of super ideological people selecting who the majority can pick from…

Not a fan of political Parties. We were warned.

[tvc184]

17 hours ago, OlDawg said:

I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.

Thomas Jefferson

Bravo!!

Until you read history and realize that it was Thomas Jefferson, who was the first person to help usher in the two political parties system by creating the Democrat-Republican Party.

 The Federalists had grouped together to form the Federalist Party and Jefferson wanted a party in opposition.

So the guy who didn’t submit to the whole party system was the major player in creating the current two party system and was elected as president as a Democrat-Republican Party candidate.

We all understand what he likely meant. People want to feel independent. “Nobody tells me how to vote including a political party!!”.

 That’s great and mostly true but if a person doesn’t find a bunch of mostly like minded people, he will be stranded alone on an island. 

[OlDawg]

3 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Bravo!!

Until you read history and realize that it was Thomas Jefferson, who was the first person to help usher in the two political parties system by creating the Democrat-Republican Party.

 The Federalists had grouped together to form the Federalist Party and Jefferson wanted a party in opposition.

So the guy who didn’t submit to the whole party system was the major player in creating the current two party system and was elected as president as a Democrat-Republican Party candidate.

We all understand what he likely meant. People want to feel independent. “Nobody tells me how to vote including a political party!!”.

 That’s great and mostly true but if a person doesn’t find a bunch of mostly like minded people, he will be stranded alone on an island. 

Yes. One of the great ironies in American political history. But, in Jefferson’s time, they were actually alliances that didn’t purposely institute rules to limit other candidates.

We haven’t had a really viable 3rd Party candidate in many years because every time one threatens the 2 Parties, they change the rules to make it harder/impossible to have a successful candidacy. Then, the press limits participation on top of that.

Instead of like-minded people gathering together for the betterment, it’s used as a system to limit the people’s choice.

Just another form of control that makes people believe they have a real impact.

[UT alum]

On 5/18/2025 at 11:26 AM, OlDawg said:

I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.

Thomas Jefferson

Ranked choice voting could threaten the two party system. I think it’s great and I wish Texas would adopt it. This “binary” choice system is bs. It’s not even binary. We’re just voting for one or the other side of the same coin.

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, OlDawg said:

Yes. One of the great ironies in American political history. But, in Jefferson’s time, they were actually alliances that didn’t purposely institute rules to limit other candidates.

We haven’t had a really viable 3rd Party candidate in many years because every time one threatens the 2 Parties, they change the rules to make it harder/impossible to have a successful candidacy. Then, the press limits participation on top of that.

Instead of like-minded people gathering together for the betterment, it’s used as a system to limit the people’s choice.

Just another form of control that makes people believe they have a real impact.

What third party was ever a threat and what rules are changed?

The Constitution stops any third party (which there isn’t really one).

 The biggest threat to third parties is third parties.

[OlDawg]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

What third party was ever a threat and what rules are changed?

The Constitution stops any third party (which there isn’t really one).

 The biggest threat to third parties is third parties.

Huh?

The Constitution doesn’t address political parties at all. The Democratic & Republican Parties stop 3rd Parties.

Rules that are changed:

1. Ballot access minimums & dates.

2. Debate access.

3. Defense Dept. briefing access is denied as well as other government data.

4. Funding assistance not provided like the 2 major parties.

Those pop into my head right off the top.