The Founding Fathers Tried to Warn Us About the Threat From a Two-Party System

Polls show that a majority of Americans say that both the Republicans and Democrats are doing such a poor job representing the people that a new, third party is needed.

I’ve repeatedly warned that there is a scripted, psuedo-war between Dems and Repubs, liberals and conservatives which is in reality a false divide-and-conquer dog-and-pony show created by the powers that be to keep the American people divided and distracted. See this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this.

In fact, the Founding Fathers warned us about the threat from a two party system.

John Adams said:

There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.

George Washington agreed, saying in his farewell presidential speech:

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Brian Fitzpatrick

    GO RON PAUL. Thanks George. Brian

  • Rene

    Thats funny because the ‘winner takes all’ method always leads to two parties, should’ve gone with proportional representation 😛

    • lessgov

      exactly…. the founders of this nation did much correctly but the two party system has turned into a disaster. unfortunately no one cared as long as they had two SUV’s in the driveway. illegal, unnecessary wars didn’t get them into the streets, nor did the wanton diminution of our personal liberties. everyone was going to get rich by investing in the stock market and that’s all that mattered. whoops……

      • Tom

        Illegal wars got them into the streets in the 60s. Someone shot a president and the wars continued. For this to work we somehow need an overhaul of the system. Clearly the math is bad and the formula have been stretched to their extrapolative limits.

  • Pingback: Polls: Americans Want Our Liberties Restored, Our Troops Brought Home and the Federal Reserve Reined In()

  • Pingback: Today’s Links September 28, 2011 | JDreport news and more, Read between the headlines and wake-up.()

  • John

    We need for everyone to push Ron Paul up to the media in ways that will make front page.
    Like use a cell system for everyone to call-in his name as the best one for 2012 or ask why he is not mentioned as often as should be when placing 2 or 3 in a debate, straw poll etc. We need one government not a two party system but a republic of one government.


  • Rob Englert

    I certainly agree with Ron Paul about these wars. This country took a wrong turn when the Neo Cons. took power and thought we could comtrol the world. I think alot of fhis is just war profiteering. Eisenhower was right.

  • Pingback: Wall Street Protest Growing - Washington's Blog()

  • Travis Ogle

    We need far less government and definitely not a two party system. Our system should be as diverse, and include as many factions as it takes to allow freedom from those that seek to use the exclusive power of government in a reign of tyranny over citizens.

    The vast diversity of opinion characteristic of the human race, requires us to forgo the “one size fits all” approach to government and make allowances for the peace and freedom of all the people. This can only be achieved by not only multiple political parties but multiple governments to support them.

    We will never be free until we can know in our hearts that the dictates of our government are acceptable to us not because of the force which can be used against us to make us comply but solely because we voluntarily espouse those dictates.

    Travis Ogle
    Pensacola, FL

    • Very well said. I have often wondered why we don’t adapt the parliamentary system, it seems to work well for all that use it.

      • Yeah … like Greece … UK … Spain …. Portugal.

        No system is any better than those who make use of it.

  • Pingback: NYC Transit Union Joins Occupy Wall Street | Philosophers stone()

  • Pingback: Wall Street Protest Growing « The Destructionist()

  • Mike L

    We need to pressure our elected officials to implement instant runoff voting (aka ranked-choice voting), rather than the current system in which the person with the most votes (yet not a majority) wins, yet a “third-party” candidate can act as a spoiler by splitting the votes of another candidate. We should be able to say, for example, “My first choice is Nader, my second choice is Gore, my third choice is Bush,” and then when Nader has the least votes, our second choices go into effect for Gore. This would benefit all third parties, right, left, and center, as people would no longer be afraid to vote for third-party candidates, knowing that their vote would not have unintended effects and that the candidate would actually have a chance.

  • Pingback: Major Unions Join Wall Street Protest «

  • Jeff Davis

    There’s only one party. They take turns. It’s a rigged game.

  • Pingback: Americans Are Protesting for the Same Reasons Arabs Are Protesting: Corruption, Unemployment and Rising Food Prices - Washington's Blog()

  • john mccrevey

    Government is not a Party
    In his 1796 Farewell Address George Washington warned against the danger and baneful effects of the spirit of party. (bold and underline added)
    “Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.”
    “I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
    This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
    The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
    Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
    It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
    There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.”
    For the full text go to
    Thus the problem of political party tribalism has been recognized from the start. Today, however, most modern Americans are delusional about the sanctity of the ‘two party system’. The two party system has become the warring factions of a single party with incumbency supported by lobbyist money and lobby written legislation. It is time to do away with political parties as they apply to the national Congress. There is no reason that an elected Representative or Senator should have more loyalty to a group outside of his own jurisdiction than to the people who live in his area of responsibility.
    There are practical steps to take to correct this situation.
    1) Elect people who will work to do away with the House and Senate rules which keep them from focusing on the real problems and issues which must be addressed in the country’s interest. When a majority party can control a legislative agenda to the point of irrelevance it is time to question the utility and function of the entire organization.
    2) All campaign contributions must come from within the district or state for which the election is being held. No national funds to any Representative or Senate campaign. If an incumbent or challenger can’t raise enough funds from his own area of responsibility does this not mean that outsiders are helping to elect him or her? Does this not dilute our concept of democracy?
    3) No contribution of over one thousand dollars per person or business entity per election will be allowed. This means no more throwing of large amounts of funds at more than one candidate as a guard against being on the wrong side after the votes are tallied. The one thousand dollars could be split between candidates but, hopefully, would not be enough to curry special favor.
    4) The candidate may contribute to his own campaign only matching funds. That is, he can contribute only up to the level of the total funds contributed by others under rules 2 and 3 above.
    The above reforms would be a start to rescuing the Republic from the Parliamentary Dictatorship under which we now suffer. Local political involvement would be increased and we may actually elect legislators who know when the campaigning is over and the legislative job begins.
    And in conclusion: “A faction or party is an elegant incognito devised to save a man from the vexation of thinking.” Ralph Waldo Emerson

  • Pingback: Today’s Links October 1, 2011 | JDreport news and more, Read between the headlines and wake-up.()

  • Pingback: Conservative Groups Support Protests()

  • Pingback: Conservatives Support Protests, Michael Moore Does Not Represent OWS | Independent News Hub()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Take Over Occupy Wall Street Protests()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Take Over Occupy Wall Street Protests | Victors Post()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Take Over Occupy Wall Street Protests | Dark Politricks()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Co-Opt the Protests | The Big Picture()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Take Over Occupy Wall Street Protests | PEOPLEUNLIKEUS()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Take Over Occupy Wall Street Protests « The Destructionist()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Co-Opt the OWS Protests | Jackpot Investor()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Co-Opt the OWS Protests : Invest My Money()

  • Pingback: OWS Organizers Blast For Attempting to Co-Opt Protest for Democratic Party | 2012: What's the 'real' truth?()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Take Over Occupy Wall Street Protests | Independent News Hub()

  • Pingback: Move On Tries to Take Over Occupy Wall Street Protests | Set You Free News()

  • Pingback: Too Smart For The Democrats «

  • Ghales

    There are just a few annoying problems with a third party. Like with Nader (whom I supported), it divided us and left us with republicans in charge. Every time someone new comes along we just get more years of the same.
    However, much as I dislike what I am about to say, I wish we could just get the indies and issue voters to agree to fill the dem party with more voices that will get what we want much sooner than later.
    I have been watching this debacle grow for 25 years now and it just gets worse. I can’t wait another 25 to try to grow another party. We have a better chance of getting decent reform to legislation by flooding the local and state dems and affecting who they choose to put in office in the first place.
    The liberals were very effectively demonized and pushed aside by the red-herring issues of the ‘welfare queen’, the abortion issue and then illegal aliens. All we got in return for that devisiveness was their going behind our back and effectively gutting every law that protected us from the growth of these too big to fail cancers called the military, bankers, outsourcing and wallstreet.
    Think about it for a while. It will work faster.

  • Pingback: Is Anyone Dumb Enough to Believe that Obama Supports the 99%?()

  • Tomas

    Remove the money, outlaw lobbyists, impose term limits. This is simple psychology, remove the rewards for the current behavior, which only attracts those who want to participate in such an immoral enterprise. Once the only rewards are those that come from serving the citizens, under the framework of the Constitution, then perhaps we’ll see better outcomes.

    The law also needs a thorough flushing. To much garbage legislation, built upon faulty logic has given us so much that is unconstitutional, yet manages to be “legal” under the current system, but certainly not moral.

    Finally, as we all realize, the federal reserve needs shuttered now. It only serves one master, and that master isn’t govt nor the citizens.

    Of course there are thousands of inequities that require addressing. Perhaps with moral leadership, those can start being corrected too.

  • Pingback: Who Is to Blame: Washington Or Wall Street?()

  • Pingback: Who Is to Blame: Washington Or Wall Street? | The Big Picture()

  • Pingback: Macro Economics – Who Is to Blame: Washington Or Wall Street?()

  • Pingback: 11 Articles On “Occupy Wall St” Protests « Truth11()

  • InnerCynic

    Well, if the founders objected so much to this idea then they failed. Maybe even deliberately. Why not a Parliamentary system, as the one they themselves were quite aware of, instead of the abomination we have today?

    • wysinwyg

      Because the founders thought it would be dangerous to have executive and legislative functions in the same governing body. They were pretty explicit about their reasoning on that. The UK has seen fit to demonstrate that this is indeed a bad idea.

      • InnerCynic

        While I agree there is danger there, as in any political “system”, at least you would have the “option” of more voices but as it is now those are constantly drowned out within the duopoly we have.

        • MeanOldMan

          I would add that I also like the ability to make legislators more accountable. It’s far easier to force the government to listen to the people it seems in a parliamentary system.

          • Tenken Ryu

            How about eliminating the electoral college, make it mandatory for students to pass the same test illegals have to take to earn their citizenship or else they cannot get licenses or drink. Make it a mandatory thing to take a government class in college and pass the same test every 5 years or face a fine. that way people vote smarter, and thus eliminating the electoral college system.

          • Elizabeth Harrison

            ummm…most people do not make it through high school!

            sorry you are in some middle class American bubble but the poor and working class Americans sadly don’t always value education. (Both of my own parents and brother dropped out of High School.)

            I do agree with you on the fact that everyone should be more educated. Specially on our own government! – In my own college government class there was a girl sitting next to me, who asked what Congress was!

            So I think our focus should be K-12th!! but at least in Texas our Governor keeps cutting funding for our Education system…

            I think Politicians prefer their voters to be uneducated!!

          • Tenken Ryu

            There lies the problem. People don’t realize they need it until they work long hours at a job they don’t like. It took me many years after high school to get back into college. It took poverty to make me realize this. I never was the person to get government handydowns. I was always a hard worker and still am. If we continue to live under government prorgrams, then we will breed a country of lazy people. Many people come from countries that don’t have 1/10 of what we offer. They come to learn and have a better life, often times even graduate at universities because they cannot get the same benefits we do. They take exams to see if they can become citizens, prove that they can be citizens. I think citizenship needs to be earned, not given. People tend to appreciate it more when earned through hard work than just given. Don’t get me wrong, some people honestly need government help, those should not be denied to them. Our forefathers fought and paid the ultimate price for their freedom, and see what great nation they have built from their hard work. Now this society is destroying what they worked so hard to achieve.

          • Leonard

            An easy “fix” would be term limits. The founders were not perfect, but they gave us the best form of Government in history. I will say they “missed” the idea of a political class becoming a reality, who’s main goal and ambition is re-election. The founders missing that idea and not making term limits mandatory is why we have the political class today, Ever wonder why Congress is in session so little? The first members of congress were men who had other work, farmers, business’s to run, they were in fact more like volunteers than career politicians. Term limits is a must.

          • Terry Lee Osborne

            gerrymandering is is main reasons that creates career politicians. I’m not against term limits per se. I would be in support of 20 year term limits any less what created unstable Congress creating laws stay there is an lets say eight-year or even four years term limit and an four eight years later Congress overturn laws they created. some of the literature does speak of this during that time. the attitude for many of them is politicians being old wise men with experience wisdom. if you are way past 40s years to be pretty old we are talking about the 1700s here. with term limits are too short we will end up with some type of bipolar freaking Congress it’s already that way anyways. that’s why I support around 20 years it’s good enough for a career but it’s not like long lifetime career.

          • Brian

            “I think Politicians prefer their voters to be uneducated”

            Prefer? I think that they have been working hard to achieve this.

          • lukedouglas
          • nikonwilly

            What a great example of how we are purposely dumb-ing down this entire nation ! Must you turn everything into a cartoon for children simply to understand or learn ? Children should not need this lunatic type presentation, but you have created a system where it’s become necessary to dumb down everything. What a sad joke this society has become.

          • lukedouglas

            Elizabeth, that is actually not correct.

            The U.S., which had some of the highest graduation rates of any developed country, now ranks 22nd out of 27 developed countries. The dropout rate has fallen 3% from 1990 to 2010 (12.1% to 7.4%). The percentage of graduating Latino students has significantly increased.

            The issue isn’t graduation rates, it is the quality and quantity of education that graduates receive. While education is improving slightly, it is still way behind where we were back over 50 years ago. Yes, I know that was before integration but even black schools back in those days had better education than many schools today. Teachers were motivated by their desire to be educators and they were supported by parents who taught their kids to respect teachers.

            Today, parents jump all over teachers if their little ‘Johnnie’ and ‘Suzie’ are not treated as ‘royalty’ or if they get a bad grade because they did not ‘measure up’. Parents better get educated themselves and understand that their ‘special’ kids are not going to be ‘special’ to employers who will happily give them a nice ‘pink’ slip when they can’t do the job!

            Sorry for the rant but, dammit, people need to wake up! We’re in trouble in this country and it isn’t the damn Muslims! It’s the Republican and Democratic control of everything!

          • fingerlakesguy

            Actually the graduation rate in the USA is above 80%

          • afraidtospeakout

            Funding does not mean an literate society….Adams homeschooled his children(it wasn’t called home schooling then) and our society was educated then…..

          • Brian

            Yeah, what you say makes sense… But how would this be accomplished when the people who make our laws (congress) are the ones who benefit from a ignorant society?

          • lukedouglas

            Then quit being ignorant! That is the ‘real’ solution. Become a literate voter. For well over 40+ years, Congress approval ratings has not be above 30% yet their re-election rate is over 80% for the House and over 90% for the Senate. That is a horrible disconnect for the voters. You think you’re guy is just fine but it’s those other liberals or conservatives in others states that are the problem. WRONG! It’s your guys too! If they have been in office for 12 years or more, vote for any ‘yellow dog’ that runs against them, even if you don’t know who the heck that person is. Once Congress knows that voters will vote them out of office, then they will start paying attention and working together to move this country forward. Until then, the fat cats will control everything with their lucrative donations. Hell, if I was a billionaire, do you think I would lose any sleep in pumping 15-25 million into political campaigns? No! That’s just a business investment. The rich do NOT have the votes. They simply buy the votes because voters are illiterate and will buy ‘Pepsi’ candidate or ‘Coke’ candidate based on what TV, radio, newspaper, magazine, direct mail and online networking marketing convinces you with bullet point sound bites without divulging the underlying context as well as the real intentions of what they are doing. The Congressional Record is public records but very few people read them. I know I don’t read as many as I should. I fear we are headed to a future that I once saw in a movie call ‘Idiocracy’. We just need less idiots in this country.

          • Brian

            I’ve been fighting the fight you describe for 10 years. I’m far from ignorant. It’s others whom I speak of.

            FYI, I supported, donated and voted for Ryan’s challenger Nehlen.

          • lukedouglas

            Brian, it wasn’t a comment directed personally to you, just the majority of voters. 🙂

          • Eliminating the electoral college system would shift the power in our country to the big cities and states, all governed by liberals. The small population states mostly in the midwest and south would be disenfrancised completely. Liberals would never lose another election. That’s one good reason a strict democracy is dangerous and a genuine republic is much more fair.

          • lukedouglas

            An absolutely horrible suggestion. Who would make up the test? How would you keep it from being some type of indoctrination? Also, what has the electoral college system go to do with students? Do you really think it is a college? LOL On balance, the electoral college system has worked very well.

          • lukedouglas

            It sounds good but it’s unworkable mainly because it is unconstitutional. Citizenship is well laid out in the Constitution. I do like the idea that every voter must have some type of civics lessons, which those seeking naturalization must pass, but that is left up to our education system which, in a word, fails miserably at this task. Hell, two-thirds of all Americans can’t correctly identify the three branches of government, and that three out of four people don’t know that the
            Bill of Rights protects religious freedom. Is it any wonder voters can be so easily manipulated by savvy political campaigns? Sound bites and no substance. So sad!

          • BH

            Wrong. A better solution would be to require the “Representatives” and Senators to LIVE in the districts they represent. With the technology we have today, there absolutely no reason they should all congregate and live in DC, away from the people. During the founding of this once great country, those leaders lived amongst their constituents, making it very difficult to face them on a daily basis, if one were not truly representing the WILL OF THE PEOPLE. Imagine the small fortune the country would save by not having to reimburse for travel and lodging/second homes!

          • MeanOldMan

            Having worked in high tech for 30 years the thought of having all the governments business done remotely would make me very nervous. There has never been and probably never will be an electronic system like that which cannot be hacked and manipulated. Same goes for allowing voting over the net and electronic voting machines.

          • lukedouglas

            Agreed! Been involved with the computer industry for over 40+ years and MeanOldMan hits the nail on the head big time! Anything electronic that is even temporarily connected to the internet (ARPANet in the early days) is prone to hacking. I have always been a proponent of paper ballots that while they can be scanned, the immediate electronic tabulations can be confirmed through manual counts. With all parties having their own people watching as the votes are manually counted, it will help keep the system honest. As far as the technology, the paper ballots should have NO TABS OR PUNCHES but simply connecting two marks to make a solid line for your choice which is easily scanned and easy to determine manually. Our local balloting is done this way in Alabama. This is serious stuff but with ‘each’ state having their own method, it creates mass confusion which, in reality, the politicians want! There should be a standardized method used nationwide. Just my two cents.

    • the human condition

      you and karsh skore need to carry signs when in public to alert the rest of us.

  • John Owens

    Actually, PLEASE REREAD ADAMS AND WASHINGTON’s ACTUAL WORDS. Don’t read the person who NARRATED and authored the article. It is the evil of parties in general that Adams is actually denigrating. Adams’ comment is confusing because he says “2 party system”, but the evil he decries is in reference to people rallying under a party leader. He doesn’t say more parties will make it better. Washington is more clear. He is talking about the inherent evils in political parties themselves. But, nowhere does he prescribe that there should be MORE parties. He uses words like “spirit of revenge”, “men seek…the absolute power of an individual”, “duty of wise people to discourage and restrain it (parties)”, and regarding parties he says, “it is a spirit not to be encouraged.” You see, Washington complained that parties were dangerous. Adams said 2-party systems were bad, but neither said the answer was to have MORE parties! The name of the article is misleading at best.

    • Ian

      True, but it still has some accuracy. They warned us of parties in general.

    • Robinson Nation

      Im not sure why you’d defend our current system to begin with. #Disgusting

      • whatzzhername

        For sure. Why hold on to this stupity of democrats and republicans! What a horse show!

    • The title is NOT misleading… You were mislead by your own accord when you read the first line of the article about a poll Into the title.. You are the misleading one my dear sir…


      How do you absorb that from John Adams quote above? Is it out of context or something?

    • DanJR

      I would say that in all my renderings of the Fathers, we are to continually seek wisdom and advice from their works, especially the Federalist Papers which shine light in a lot of the dark areas of politics today.

      I think what the Founders would most want for us Americans today would be for us to return to our roots.

      We should promote the good of the country ahead of our party politics and really try to put forth legislation that will give us security in finances and stabilize our way of life…. hopefully in a peaceful spirited way.

      • xprocowboy

        the federalists papers are full of good advice for what should be and once was, the perversion that has become the govt of the USA is contrary to most of the sentiments expressed in the papers

        • pgiando

          The Federalist papers were mainly written by Alexander Hamilton, a Federalist (in that he believed in a strong federal government was the best way to ensure the union between the states) as a sales pitch to convince the southern states to ratify the Constitution.

    • whatzzhername

      He meant for us to be ONE PEOPLE, ONE NATION! NOT 2. NOT 3.

      • Brilliand

        A 1-party system would be worse than a 2-party system (see modern dictatorships). A proper democratic republic would be more like a million-party system.

        • Tom

          “Ein volk, ein reich, ein fuhrer!” Unfortunately dictators know this parlor trick well. But your vision of a million-party system has never been closer to being possible with the internet. Missing from this article and all others on the subject is that proxy democracy (electing representatives to vote on issues for us) has been obsolete for at least twenty years. The question now is how much longer will it take people to realize that they no longer need a corrupt, bought-off psychopath pretending to represent our interests when we can better do it ourselves.

          • Kelly Mullins

            Right… and then we can have the tyranny of the majority… much better option.

          • Tom

            That’s why in theory we are a republic, where the Constitution is supposed to protect us from the tyranny of the majority. Unfortunately, we now have neither a democracy nor a republic: the Constitution has been shredded and the vote is rigged. But if you believe that something resembling an honest democracy is worse than the “corrupt, bought-off psychopaths pretending to represent our interests” that we have now, you must have a very dark and hopeless opinion of your fellow citizens. I would rather believe that with a real education in history, political theory, and monetary systems with a strong emphasis on critical thinking in all areas, we could eventually end up with an electorate that would never tolerate what we have now.

          • Mad_MikeII

            Well said Tom! Vote third party everyone! Send a message to the duopoly that we are tired of their crookedness and ineptitude. For 50 years they have hosed the American public, while enriching themselves – it’s time to kick the bums out and let someone else give it a go. Don’t waste your vote on Hillary OR Trump, Democrats OR Republicans! It’s time for a revolution – at the polls!

          • Tom

            In most elections I would be inclined to agree with you. Indeed, I’ve voted for third party candidates for most offices in most elections for most of my life. However, the possibility that the most corrupt, evil, deceitful, and gleefully homicidal presidential candidate in US history could actually win (or successfully steal, take your pick) this election is forcing my hand this November, and I will reluctantly vote for Trump. In a way, this is voting third party anyway, since Trump really is an outsider who the Republican Party elites did everything in their power to keep out. The Trump phenomenon is more like a hostile takeover of a fake political organization by real American voters so they can finally get in a candidate who is listening to our problems and might do something to fix them.

            Yes, for people who are jaded and cynical enough, this could all be a charade by the ruling elites to trick us into voting for the candidate they wanted all along. If it is, it’s a damn good show they’re putting on. Were that the case, I think even the ruling elites would be surprised that Hitlery could be polling as well as she is, that they can trot out a physically decrepit psychopath with a lifetime of corruption and treason behind her, and STILL find enough American voters who are ignorant and brainwashed enough to give her frighteningly high poll numbers. If she was just polling 5% maybe we could dismiss her supporters as a few fringe cranks and hopelessly deluded libtards. That she is (possibly) polling in the 40’s is the most shocking exposure of American ignorance I’ve ever seen.

          • Big D

            I think it is working 🙂

          • ThomasinaPaine

            Majority rule? Compared to what we have now? Well…yes.

      • john pierre smith


        • LOL

          It’s time for your nap Grandpa.

          • LikeRodneySaid

            You with no respect for your elders. Guess what? Someday you will be “old”! The way things are going in this country, when you reach a certain age, “they” will probably put you to sleep! Shame on you!

          • Mike

            Solient Green.

        • Terry Lee Osborne

          OK. right now most presidents it’s around $200,000 a year like many politicians some of the taxpayers money Obama makes twice as much as $200,000 a year book deals etc. your type of person bitching about paying for Obama’s vacations aren’t and for everything he eats is paid by the taxpayers money.

          well the fact that you’re informed. any has to pay for his out of his own pocket with his own money Air Force Ones jet fuel cost when he goes on vacation. all these complaints squandering your tax payers money from him for ever every vacation are true that means almost every single president President Clinton to both bush’s to your precious Reagan squandered taxpayer money too you never going to complain about going on vacation even during times of emergency happened
          BTW I bet you didn’t complain when the last Bush was in office. did you no. you complain about Benghazi were the hell complaining about the Bush Administration deleting emails and all the embassies that were attacked in the last Administration you those guys that fell for weapons of mass destruction were you. and where the hell were you doing the Contra controversy no. you would think it to yourself it was the greatest president in the world right? how many people were Crooks Reagan Administration and they were indicted? how many scandals were there under Reagan? lets see Ronald Reagan knew nothing about it he was the least corrupt president ever he was the best president ever! you’re just like every other person you’re just sheep falling whatever side you’re on. it’s okay for Republicans to lie it’s okay for Republicans to be crooks because Democrats are worse. you are a perfect example of what’s wrong dualistic two party system (Good vs Evil) us-against-them mentality. two party brainwashed you to believe. Probably claim that you love the founding fathers but you don’t even listen to what they say or this article says. if you have real proof non unbiased proof not some conservative blog or a conservative think-tank website owned that pretends to be journalistic news or foxnews give me real evidence of proof stealing from the tax taxpayers money.

          • Duhhhhhhhh

            “Non unbiased”? Double negative. Unbiased proof would be sufficient, not “real proof non unbiased proof.” Not an intelligent response at all. Rambling on in sputtered emotional outbursts with minimal logic. Your very first sentence in the response is three or four separate thoughts. Thoughts which are all incomplete and unrelated to one another. Where did you go to elementary school? Lmfao.

        • Lori Dawn

          With all due respect John, I feel that today more than ever we need to come together in this country, divided we fall. I am fearful for the future of our great nation if we don’t. There are problems with both parties and the main problem is the fighting against each other and the desire for control. We all need to humble ourselves and try to come together for the sake of America.

    • Joe Blow

      Non of them took into account the television and the massive amounts of propaganda and brainwashing that is about to befall the American people to hang onto the ‘duty of wise’ people theory. Those people have all been purchased by the wealthy.

      • Mike

        …”about to befall”…?

        • Joe Blow

          (of something bad) happen to someone.
          “a tragedy befell his daughter”

          • Mike

            It was the “about to” part I meant to emphasize.

      • nerkaorr

        Don’t forget today’s substandard education. The “Fathers” were far better educated in real thinking, history, civics and governmental theory than most of us today.

        • nnamelet

          Absolutely on target. What was bad before morphed into a monstrosity because of the abysmal knowledge and interest of a majority of the population in history, politics, and the responsibility of citizens.

    • useyourhead22

      This is one of the most incorrectly used quotes by pro third-party advocates. Adams is not promoting third parties,but instead speaking out against partisanship. “A senator might belong to a party, but he need not be a party man.” He’s calling for reaching out across the aisle if the other side has a good plan, as opposed to being a partisan, opposition party and voting against your own interests in sake of winning for your party. Let’s do a little more research and reading comprehension before claiming quotes by founding fathers.

      • ThomasinaPaine

        Specificity of nomenclature is indisputable: “There is nothing which I dread so much as a DIVISION OF THE REPUBLIC INTO TWO GREAT PARTIES, each arranged under its leader, and concerting
        measures in OPPOSITION TO EACH OTHER. This, in my humble apprehension,
        is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”
        [caps mine. end of quote]

        President Adams couldn’t really BE any clearer. What you say is even threadier speculation as to his intention NOT being in favor of third or fourth or fifth parties. The reality of [read: “corporate control of” ] THE 2-PARTY finance system is a built-in deterrent to reaching across the aisle. Voting in favor of the people’s wishes would be considered ‘going rogue’ and would immediately shut down the flow of money to future campaign coffers. In our professed 2-party system, both parties are beholden to one oligarchy –a corporate cabal — whose total focus is PROFIT, regardless of impact on the world at large.

        The general welfare of the PEOPLE is raped repeatedly and tossed by the side of the road while multi-million dollar corporate campaigns unleash a barrage of carefully nuanced and misleading propaganda regarding laws passed or executive actions taken that benefit the oligarchy exclusively. The transition of MSM into a tentacle of corporatized America
        confuse even the keenest of minds as to what is actually occurring. Orwellian Doublespeak abounds.

        James Madison expresses it well:
        “It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men
        of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be
        read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.”
        Much less avail if the men or women whom we vote for are ‘elected’ as a
        result of brainwashing (or blatant rigging) or that those incoherent laws made are crafted
        behind closed –and guarded–doors, as is more and more often occurring.
        Cases in point: Homeland Security, NAFTA, TPP, TISA, TPIP.

        Our alleged two party system has long since morphed into a unified extension of a singular governing entity: an oligarchy. Our only way out is to divide and conquer IT by using our Constitution and a fierce determination to educate the public.

        The only one who needs to do more research as to the stark realities of our ALLEGED 2-party system…appears to be you. I end with a few more quotes from Madison to be contemplated and a suggestion he obviously would approve.

        “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be
        their own governors must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives.
        A popular government without popular information or the means of
        acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy or perhaps both.”

        “All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree.”

        “You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.”

        James Madison,

        The Federalist Papers

        “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

        FIGHT THE PASSAGE OF TPP, TPIP, TISA and every other complex, convoluted bill that is
        crafted in secrecy and is not made available for dissemination,
        discussion and debate by every American citizen BEFORE Congress ever
        gets it out on the floor.

        • afraidtospeakout

          Here here

      • pgiando

        Correct. The parties, or as they called them, “factions” were seen as detrimental to the country. I suppose they were somewhat naïve as parties formed (Democratic Republicans and the Federalists) immediately.

    • ThomasinaPaine

      Think again. . Adams clearly mentions TWO PARTIES, and Washington uses the term “alternate” which implies TWO. More choices, in compliance with the federal election laws and the current system of financial support, of necessity will have to result in more PARTY platforms, groups of people in consensus. Singular candidates would be pissing in the wind…

    • David Monche I think the answer is not a whole bunch of additional party, but a step in the right direction would be to ask, are you Republican, Democrat, or other? Not more parties, no parties. For purposes of running you could call it independent if you want, but it would merge all the other parties into one.

  • Washington76

    Who’s Afraid of an Open Debate? The Truth About the Commission on Presidential Debates

    The 2012 Debates – Memorandum of Understanding Between the Obama and Romney Campaigns By MARK HALPERIN | October 15, 2012

  • Washington76

    An informative lecture series!

    “Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression” by Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr., a senior fellow in history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents this fifteen-lecture course covering the material in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Lecture 11

    • lukedouglas

      This video is private so it’s not viewable by the public. 🙁

    • Ian

      Ya, can’t see it :/

  • karsh skore

    the answer is simple a one party super system


      The answer to 1984 is 1776.

  • matt34552

    The issue the founding fathers were affraid of was the parties becoming more important than the people and the United States as a whole. Which is what has happened.

  • Hitched

    The forces of good and evil are just as real as the forces of gravity and electricity.

    • headline4edu

      It’s pretty interesting they’re entirely human created forces.

  • Michael Borg

    what you need to ask yourself is, will a new party really make any difference. If these two parties have already been corrupted by power whats to say that the new party wont be corrupted as well. Lets not lie to ourselves money runs this world and any idiot will know that there is something behind the government something could be the corporations or some group of very wealthy individuals. Haven’t you noticed that the parties only care about how good they are doing, about getting votes and all these party fun raisers. They would rather go to a political fun raiser than stay over night and work out a plan to save america, we are in depth, our economy is going down, our education has fallen so low that we are the laughing stock of the world. The cost of education is higher than ever before the student debt is around 1.2trillion. America keeps interfering with foreign wars and supplying resources to foreign countries that could be used to help our people. We bring foreign workers to america every year through visas and we keep shipping more and more jobs to other countries when we have millions of americans with no jobs and who are in unemployment. The only way to change is to take over the government and we all know americans have lost what little patriotism they ever had.

    • KH

      That’s like saying “Why shower? You’re just gonna get dirty again.”

      Shower often, my friend. Revolution often.

      • DNA(splicer)

        Im aware of the refreshing liberty with the blood of traitors and patriots every so often.

        I never said in there to not change anything or to give up. It was a question, one that would force people to create obstacles to prevent future corruptions.

        My plan which I have thought about was to eliminate private investors e.i. corporations, other politicians, and private wealthy people from donating to any and all candidates running for any and all offices. The government would run these electoral races with tax money. Money they would find by reducing many other military and humanitarian help to hostile countries. 400billion I’m and f-35 that doesn’t work and isn’t ready for combat and it’s still not ready.

        I would take a page from Japan’s immigration policies and make it impossible for anyone to come to America unless they have something to contribute to us, intelligence, technology, or have at least 50,000 dollars saved up and have absolutely no criminal records in their country. Also all immigrants must pledge and oath on video to absolute loyalty to the American republic, it’s constitution and it’s way of life, and forsake all other countries and religion that prevent tell them not to or be banned from ever filing for visas or returning to America. If you fail the first time to get a visas then I will be permanently banned from ever filing again.

        I would make a national raffle that the runs would be used for healthcare and veterans and homeless. I’m yhe blast day of every month there will be a 5 dollar raffle that will give away prizes to the first 10 winners of 100k, the next 10 winners will get 50k and the last 10 winners will get 20k all tax free to the individual of course whatever they get the raffle will pay the tax for the prize amount and the remaining money will be used for maintaining thw and the rest for healthcare, veterans and homeless ONLY.

        Remove as many bases as possible from as many countries as I can. It shouldn’t be America’s job to police the world.

        Create create a council and small police force/military to investigate, and persecute all police and politicians of the united states all the way from the smallest political positions to the president of the united states. The first law and regulation of this council will be that anyone found to take bribery, and consort with any police or politician , corporation or wealthy private patron will be executed after going to trial, if they are not executed(by being oersecuted under this law everyone will recieve the minimum sentence of 30 days in prison)then they will be barred from ever working for any and all government Position, political Position and police position, for life.

        Under this council the head of this council will called the people president, his sole agenda is to fight and protect all citizens of America. His role will be to provide for those that are in need, children veterans homeless, healthcare, the national raffle will be one of his duties to over are and protect from corruption.

        I have many more this is just the most, I’m planning on running in 2024.

  • Zone43

    How could a Democracy only have 2 parties? That’s because it isn’t, try starting a third party and see how far you get.

  • Occam’s Razor

    It’s a 3 party system. While they’re having a party, so am I. And, I don’t vote. So, what they did…that guilt is on their head.

    I tried voting back in the day but after the electronic voting machines came into play and paper trail elections ended, it became crystal clear to me the elections are fully rigged.

  • Pravda01

    The founding fathers were slave holders. Real democracy need the fourth power the people and that means the permanent referendum has to be integrated in our daily lives, otherwise a bunch of crooks and corrupt creatures will maintain us.

  • john pierre smith


  • If this evil SICK LYING epilepsy bitch (Killary) wins she can be BLACKMAILED for all her PAST CORRUPTION … YES A U.S. PRESIDENT BLACKMAILED !!! TRUMP IS THE ONLY HOPE WE HAVE OF BREAKING THIS SHIT UP IN WASHINGTON !!! If Trump loses … this country and the world is screwed FOREVER !!! “OBAMA/CLINTON ARE #1 SPONSOR AND FINANCIER OF TERRORISM” … THAT WAS JUST FINALLY PROVEN !!! Obama/Clinton ARE ISIS/ISIL LEADERS AND FOUNDERS always has been !!! They have been giving weapons, money, times, places and how many Americans will be where !!! They have a very long blood trail and it can all be proven … it’s not even a conspiracy !!! We are finding out who the RINO’s and Progressivism Socialism fools are FINALLY !!! They’re all part of the web of corruption in washington. Comey discover a WEB OF CORRUPTION SO VAST it would take down the WHOLE obama DemoRatic administration establishment !!! ( Some Republicans too to be fair) all the way to the TOP and would’ve created a constitutional crisis !!! As for the clinton foundation … well that might be another story … it’s also a VAST WEB OF CORRUPTION !!! If these fools continue to take over our government AND Clinton win’s … this country and world is screwed FOREVER !!! TRUMP MUST WIN to bring this country back from corruption !!! This is OUR only chance people … WAKE THE HELL UP !!!

    • lukedouglas

      If you think the solution to stopping Clinton by voting for Trump, you are delusional. Neither one is fit to serve. Clinton has the skillset but I don’t trust her. Trump is a narcissistic fascists neo-nazi oligarch who doesn’t have the skillset nor the temperament for the job. Think like an employer, which you are. Would you hire either one of them? I know I wouldn’t. That’s why I am voting for Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party, the only ‘sane’ choice. If you are so ‘sick’ of the two party system, then why keep supporting them.

    • Gilwrite

      Your comment illustrates perfectly what Adams and Washington warned against happening with a two’party system. You have built up an individual – “Trump” – as your savior, and seek revenge and to denigrate the opponent.

  • Gilwrite

    John Adams and George Washington have described the 2016 election process…. This sounds like a page from Trump’s playbook: “…agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption (e.g., Russia hacking)…”

  • Stephen Settimi

    This discussion is worth revitalizing.

    I’m wondering what post-election contingency plans have either candidate incorporated into their 1st 100 day plan in office. There seems to be sufficient bravado and sense of absolute liberty among a small factions within both parties if results are not in their favor. Is there a new spirit of revenge – eluded to by George Washington, of which we should be weary?

  • Lori Dawn

    We are there America, we need to wake up and demand this to end. We need to unite! I’m sure like most of my fellow Americans, we have issues on both sides that we are for or against. And some issues should be out of the government’s hands all together such as the marriage license. It was created in America in the 1920’s to control the masses against intermarrying. To marry another race in that day was punishable by 10 years in prison. Marriage licensing should be abolished, it’s not needed. Our vows are what marry us anyway, not the piece of paper. Can’t we all just get along? We need a one party system!!! Thank you George Washington for your intelligent insight into the policies of our country. I only wish we would have heeded your advice.

  • Brian Clark

    There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the REPUBLIC into two great parties,

    Note – emphasized “REPUBLIC” .. Democrats are not were not and will never be Republican – They want a democracy. This article was obviously written by one that has an extremely distorted view on what the founding fathers actually thought of or felt of a democracy or those with that agenda.

    • The Fertilizer King

      You’re dumb as a frickin sack of dirt, Comrade. A right wing extremist tool.

  • J. Steinberg

    So, as a practical matter, are we better off with our current monecracy, a government driven by money, or a system designed to ‘….promote the general welfare….’, as stated in the Preamble to the Constitution. So far, we’ve had the ‘best government money can buy’, per Will Rogers.

  • afraidtospeakout

    I would encourage everyone to take advantage of the online classes on the Constitution and other subjects given by Hillsdale College. The classes are free and even though you can’t get credit for them you can get a certificate showing you completed a course and passed an exam on the subject. 80% . I’m taking a course on the Constitution right now.

  • Dr Mindbender

    What Good is a Constitution if the people never use it?

    You ( we) all have the rights to Protest, Free speech and expression, Assembly, Militia, Bear Arms, and even, Citizens Arrest! However, the American people have allowed themselves to be enslaved by Corporate Pirates who Hijacked Government and sold the soul of America for their Profit.

    All you had to do was show up on Wall Street and Demand it all Back, America! Sad. And, do not give me any of that Peace “BS,” because You will fight for your government and kill for their illegal wars of Aggression without any hesitation, whatsoever! Thing is, America, if you cannot fool me, How do you intend to fool Almighty God?

    Time is Short, Someone is going to End this Experiment, and there is nothing your leaders will do, except Follow Orders.

  • No more political parties! They all have an agenda for the demise of our country!
    I am going independent!

  • David Monche

    Tomas Jefferson seemed to like having two parties however, and I respect him a lot.

    “Both of our political parties, at least the honest portion of them, agree conscientiously in the same object: the public good; but they differ essentially in what they deem the means of promoting that good. One side believes it best done by one composition of the governing powers, the other by a different one. One fears most the ignorance of the people; the other the selfishness of rulers independent of them. Which is right, time and experience will prove. We think that one side of this experiment has been long enough tried and proved not to promote the good of the many, and that the other has not been fairly and sufficiently tried. Our opponents think the reverse. With whichever opinion the body of the nation concurs, that must prevail.” –Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1804. ME 11:52

    So I say it doesn’t matter what party you are in. These are all men, so let them stand on their merrits as men, and vote for whomever you like. That is what I did this last time, but it would have been nice to have another strong canadate like the republican and democrats, that had a chance. I voted for McMillian, but I know I had more of a chance of falling up than for him to win. But it seems like all the other parties get people in them that are too extreme, catering to one small party or another, also without any real chance to win. So I think it would be cool to make a change. Republican , Democrat, or OTHER!!!?

  • David Monche

    I think the answer is not a whole bunch of additional party, but a step in the right direction would be to ask, are you Republican, Democrat, or other? Not more parties, no parties. For purposes of running you could call it independent if you want, but it would merge all the other parties into one.

  • David Monche

    John Adams didn’t want a two party system either. He wrote very strongly that he thought it was a political evil.

  • veritas tua semper

    “The system is rigged folks, its all rigged.”
    Donald J. Trump
    A member of the Republican National Committee’s Rules Committee said Wednesday that the party will decide who the GOP nominee will be, not the voters.

    “The media has created the perception that the voters will decide the nomination,” Curly Haugland said in an interview with CNBC. “That’s the conflict here.”

    “The political parties choose their nominees, not the general public, contrary to popular belief,” he added.

    Haugland was then asked what the point of holding primaries is if the party can disregard the will of the voters.
    “That’s a very good question,” he responded.

    Some Republicans have floated the idea of a contested convention in order to prevent front-runner Donald Trump from securing the party’s nomination. Trump, however, appears on track to win enough delegates to clinch the nomination on the first ballot.

    Haugland, one of the party’s few unbound delegates that can decide who they want to vote for, argued that the party can block Trump even if he wins 1,237 delegates through the primaries.

    “The primary votes are not considered [at the convention], it’s the delegates’ votes,” he said