Discussion 5
1. In Fiorina’s essay he mentions that his hope is that the next political parties are better at dealing with social issues than the current ones. Fiorina’s meaning of “responsible parties” are parties that make decisions based on what is morally right instead of what the best for the success of the individual party. The responsible party theory holds parties accountable for their actions. Whether that means to make sure they follow through with promises made when campaigning, or speaking out for opposition within their own party. To me, a responsible party puts values over their party. This means that whether or not an issue aligns with their party’s history, citizens will prioritize their values.
2. Fiorina believes that with majority status being highly valued, while minority status are “intolerable”, both parties are unable to take a break between elections. Fiorina states that campaigning can sometimes get in the way of governing effectively. In my opinion, parties are unable to govern effectively because politicians are becoming selfish and having their own interests in mind rather than finding a solution that would appease most. Part of me wants to say that having political parties is all trouble. However, having two dominant parties is essential. When election time rolls in, we associate a name with a political party, rather than values.
3. Masket states that plurality and “winner take all” votes for Congress makes more a successful two-party system. Parties have been able to adapt to campaign finance reforms that took a great amount of funding. They have survived after being banned from state legislatures, which is pretty impressive. Citizens in the U.S. associate not voting for either party, voting third party, is a wasted vote. I also think that the two -party system have lasted so long is because when more opinions are involved in debating, it can quickly become overwhelming.