(02-12-2017, 11:57 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: Edit: The alternative might be for the government to get involved in the intricacies of party management to make sure parties aren't *requiring* voters to vote inline with the endorsement.

Now we face a problem that is akin to problems in real world democracy, specifically the US. Members of parties are inclined to vote for their party candidate, or the candidate that their party endorses, as a display of loyalty and a "pledge of allegiance" to their party. I'm not sure how you'd prohibit party members all voting for one person, unless you force someone to change their vote or vote for someone that they don't want to, which absolutely destroys democracy. I believe there is some sort of alternative out here but we are maybe overlooking it.

There are plenty of pros and cons to political parties, and frankly, not allowing them will only lead to circumvention because people will assemble regardless. Banning political parties does not create a betterment of democracy.

Instead of resorting to establishing policy, rules, and law, we should encourage legislators and party members to develop their own opinions on candidates, and not adapting to those that are *forced* on them by their party. We should encourage them to lead based on their own opinions and not those of others. Frankly, that's about all we can do, unless you want to absolutely skew their political freedoms.