It may help candidates that today would have to run in a 3rd party and have very little chance of winning.

I think doing away with the so-called parties would be great. Vote for what the candidate says, not party.

I think it might lessen the number of people that just show up and vote a party line without being infomed of the candidates actual positions.

Good idea because some people just vote on the basis for the party rather than people.

It would make things interesting. I don't think anyone is dumb enough to only vote based on what the ballot says, but it would be better just to have names and ignore the fact that parties exist.

Political parties are cool. they expose collectivism in all types. the very fact that people need to make political parties shows just how stupid most human beings are. It's so easy to avoid true political discussion when all you need to do is see who's the Democrat and who's the Republican. Most Democrats probably ignore the fact that Obama gave himself the ability to kill Americans without due process or started two new wars bombing more innocent people because that isn't what Democrats view themselves as. And I bet most Republicans ignore that Romney pretty much created Obamacare because he's a Republican, and Republicans are for small government.

Words like "anti-war" and "free markets" get thrown around by these two parties and people actually believe that these candidates support it. They don't even research what it means to be against the War on Terror or market regulation or the Drug War. I bet there are still some idiots out there who believe that Obama wants to legalize marijuana, despite the fact that he has shut down more legal dispensaries in one term than Bush did in two.

And then these fuckin' conspiracy dipshits who think that Obama is from Kenya and worship Allah. Any dumb excuse to hate someone just because they're a Democrat.

But this is collectivism. It turns so many complex ideals of thought and discussion into easy to read retard symbols. Human beings, in general, are too stupid to think too hard about the economy and the effects of drugs and war. They'd rather hide behind their political parties' beliefs because it makes them feel like they know something.

So fuck it. remove the shit from the ballot. It won't make a difference, but at least we could have some dignity during our elections.

In the city I live, over the last two elections, I show up at the polling place and there are anywhere from 30 to 50 people standing in line. I am the only caucasion. Maybe a coincidence, but based on demographic changes over the last ten years for my southern California area, I argue not. What surprised me in both elections was watching and observing the voters that were coming in as a family group. The older generations typically did not speak English. However, I speak enough Spanish to understand "Vote for the people with D behind their names". Where are we as a nation heading over the next 20-years, when the only reason a leader is elected is because the larger share of non-informed voters elected him or her, simply because of party affiliation designation behind their name? It is time to elect a true LEADER, not a political party. Let's elect someone that knows how to move this country forward by creating the opportunities for us typical people that at least offer us the opportunity to create our own wealth. Let's stop with the nonsense of redistribution of wealth from those that succeeded to the back-end of the financial food chain. We are feeding the wrong end. Our current political climate is in control simply because they have the D behind their names and the letter D equates to some type of free governmental handout. Their motto should be, "Vote for D, Get something for free! Will it keep them in power? Absolutely. The question remains though, how long can this country support this type of leadership and "legal vote buying" before this country is totally bankrupt? My guess Obama's 2nd term will answer this question. Because keep in mind, his socialist agenda has been kept in check over the last four years so as not to upset his chances for reelection. Now the gloves are coming off. Now he has nothing to loose. Now we are all about to pay a price none of us could have ever imagined. Thanks to all the voters that simply marked "D" on their ballot instead of studying the contenders for the most powerful position in the world. I think we would have been better served to spend a few hours studying and acting as if we were an employer interviewing a potential applicant for a job. Because in simple terms, that's exactly what we are doing with our election process. We are failing as an employer because we are picking an employee (the President) because they have a great smile, a good personality, his wife looks good and his children appear to be behaved. If you were in business and were making these type of employment reviews and decisions, you would all have to admit you probably not be in business very long. Good looks and a great personality doesn't make you money unless your in the entertainment business. Sorry to say, our US Government should not be in place based upon the employment criteria of the movie business. They should be in place based upon their business sense. After all, isn't running the organization that controls the largest economy in the world actually a business? Of course it is. But that doesn't seem to matter to anyone anymore. Let's just pick a letter to vote for. Instead of removing the affiliation after the name, let's make it simple. Let's just remove the name. What's the difference!!!! Good luck to us all. We are going to need it.

I must respond to those that think removing the party affiliation might lower voter turnout.

To this, I say we can only hope so. Think about this logically. The leader with the most votes will likely be elected (excluding the electoral college for a moment). But, if you owned your own business, would you rather have a few knowledgeable and informed people running your business, let's say 6, or would you rather have 1,000 uninformed non-knowledgeable people making decisions for you that will impact your livelihood and that of your families? I personally will take the 6 over the 1,000 anytime. Nothing substitutes for taking the time to make well informed decisions. And I think we can all agree a well informed and studied decision offers a better chance of success than a wild guess. Our current election system has given too much power and credence to the "wild guessers" of our society.

I have a suggestion. Each state randomly selects 1,000 people. It becomes a mandatory civic duty, much like jury duty. And these people must attend classes over the next two weeks for 8-hrs per day doing nothing but learning about the candidates being considered for President. On the last two days, each candidate spend the entire day with nothing but 8-hours of open questions and answers. The candidates don't get to rehearse. They don't get teleprompters. They don't get assistants. It's just them and the 50,000. Then on the Monday after the 2nd week, they all vote. Whoever wins the popular vote out of the 50,000 voters at the end of that day becomes our next leader.

Some of you will think this concept insanity. But you will have to at least admit, if our election process were conducted this way, those 50,000 people would pick the best leader each and every time. Again, we need the best leader. We don't need 6-months of advertising spinning stories of why they are what they really aren't.

Two weeks + 50,000 people + 1-day = A Well Studied and "QUALIFIED" Leader.

So where do we start?

Yes. I do not believe in political parties. They are a way for the government to track people. People should be judged on their position, not some retarded political party.

Political parties rally around their candidates and will defend them even when they act stupidly. Lessening political party influence may help reduce the insane incumbency rate.