This has to be one of the most illogical posts in awhile. The less competition the better? The country is radically different than when it was founded. By that logic only property owners should be allowed to vote as it was before. A parliamentary system is much more democratic, not automatically better, but power is more equally distributed. We need at minimum a no confidence vote. Electoral college, talk about an outdated idea. Hey on a lighter note. I really like Jesse Ventura's look on Larry King about a week ago. Look like one of the founding forefathers will the horseshoe head.
Alexander Tyler-- A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.