3

Does the two-party system create a political advantage for the rich regarding political representation?

  • 1
    There seems to be an assumption in your question that the reason the U.S. doesn't have a socialist party is because it has a two-party system. That is not necessarily accurate. Also, I have no idea what you are asking other than that. The main question, does the two-party system advantage the rich doesn't seem to have anything to do with academic qualification. Furthermore, I'm not sure what academic qualification means. – The Pompitous of Love May 10 '16 at 19:06
  • 1
    You are better acadamically qualified when you have a college degree, this seems pretty straightforward to me. If it is indeed so that the two-party system delivers more representation to the wealthier and since wealth correlates to better academic qualifications, we can expect more American politicians with a college degree, for example. – Yuri Borges May 10 '16 at 19:11
  • 2
    @ThePompitousofLove you read my point of view, now I've asked a question without saying it, precisely to know what others think about the possibility of the two-party system actually granting an advantage for the rich in political representation ;) – Yuri Borges May 10 '16 at 19:39
  • 2
    @yurihbss not the amount of money in the US, but rather the amount of money in the two major parties. The two major parties fund races at all levels of government. When the two major parties can outspend 3rd parties by factors of 10+, it's hard for said 3rd parties to make a lot of headway. – user1530 May 10 '16 at 20:13
  • 2
    @ThePompitousofLove the opinion doesn't show itself in the content presented, but in the choice of content presented. Actually on second thought also in the content. Historical facts are shown and then people make an assumption about how that historical fact has influenced the subject in question, based on opinion. – Yuri Borges May 10 '16 at 20:14

Browse other questions tagged .