Understanding Political "Marriages of Convenience"

[qwlauren35]

In my dreams, I had hoped that the Republican party would split, and that the big business advocates would go in one direction, the entrepreneurs and small business owners would go in another direction... and the religious conservatives would go in a third...

And then I realized that power/money must marry voters.

So then, I looked at the Democratic Party - the marriage of minorities, all with conflicting interests. The environmentalists, the GLBT supporters, the pro-choice supporters, the feminists, the born-again-Christian African-Americans, the Union workers, the ACLU advocates... it's not such a good fit either.

And the Republican party has a few other groups as well: the legal/social conservatives and capital punishment advocates, the 2nd Amendment champions and, of course, the majority of racists. (I put the homophobes in with the religious conservatives.)

Would it be so bad if we had small, separate parties?

Would it be possible to have official SUB-parties?

I don't think I'm alone in wanting to vote for the positions I care about without having to vote for things that are contrary to my beliefs at the same time.

Then again, maybe there just need to be more referenda & propositions, on every level. This was a strange year for me. I voted against every financial expenditure on the ballot, unless it looked like it would CREATE jobs. I still remember a ballot 4 years ago in which there was a huge series of bond options all grouped together, and they all seemed fairly benign... until someone pointed out that the Olympic sized swimming pool was not a necessity. And it wasn't passed.

Are these referenda and propositions the best way for people to break out of the "all encompassing platforms" and actually choose to accept or reject something that they've been "putting up with", without moving to multiple parties?

Say, for example, a position on the War in Iraq, or the Bush Doctrine. If it had been a referendum, wouldn't it have been clearer that the majority of the American People did not want this?

Or is it better for "special interests" to stay married, because there is no other way to protect minority viewpoints?