> When you get to the federal-level, here in the US we only have two viable political parties to choose from. If we had more parties, we wouldn't have to pick from just Column A (Legal Abortion, Buckets of Money and Cheese For The Poor, No Guns For Anyone, Clean Water, and a Military Force consisting of a Stop Sign) or Column B (Anti-Abortionists, The Government Rounds Up Poor People and Shoots Them, Free Guns For Everyone, Glow-In-The-Dark Water, and All The Missles You Can Launch.)

But no candidate ever conforms universally to the official party platform. One of my political science professors is a libertarian. He, however, says he never votes that way, because he doesn't think any of them have a chance of getting elected. Instead, he says he's a registered Republican because that is the party (of the major two) that most closely reflects his views. His belief is that it's better to work within the established system, voting for libertarian-leaning Republicans with whom he doesn't agree completely rather than voting for people who probably won't have any political impact.

I realize this is a bit of a tangent from my original post, but FP raised a point I'm interested in: how willing are you to compromise with politicians for your votes? Obviously no politician can ever represent anyone 100% of the time, but what does it take for you to vote for somebody?

My personal beliefs on the issue are confused. I voted for the Greens in 2000 for pretty much the reasons Faux Pas gave, but I've greatly reconsidered that decision. While I dislike having to vote for a candidate that I don't particularly like, I'm not too sure that voting for the person who represents my views the closest is best if that person isn't in one of the two major parties. It seems to me that my prof. is right and that I'm more likely to be able to influence the political process by working within an established party than by trying to bring a new one into power.

Bonus question to U.S. voters: does the much-maligned two-party system seem broken to you? Do you think more parties would make things better, worse or have no real change at all?

Ste "Poli. Sci. major" phen