Presidential Power-Tripping

How is that connected to my original question: If we need them, why don’t we have them?

There are no third parties who can mount a serious challenge for the Presidency, and hardly any that can muster a single member of Congress. Why is that?

If they could, would you say we would then need them?

If they could. But they can’t.

If your town can support a Wal-Mart, there’ll be a Wal-Mart.

If your town can support a shoe store, there’ll be a shoe store.

If your town doesn’t have a shoe store or a Wal-Mart, it’s because for some reason shoe stores or Wal-Marts can’t make a profit in your town.

And by the same token, if the country can support a real third party, there would be a real third party.

But there isn’t one.

Ok, ok, maybe I was playing a bit fast and loose with saying “needs.” I guess for that matter, we don’t need political parties, nor do we even need the government.

They do pose usefulness. In that same vein, we have third parties, not because of their rate of getting people into office, but due to people participating in third parties.

But also logically a third party can have someone hold office. I do not see anywhere where third parties are not allowed, is there some law against it? So you cannot logically say that they **can’t **hold office, they can; they just tended to not pose much of a significant number of offices.

As far as Wal-Mart, a town may not have a Wal-Mart – let’s say the main reason is due to profit. Wal-Mart could still have a store in town, if those in the corperation decided they wanted it regardless of lose or profit. If for instance there is a statute that restricts Wal-Mart from coming into the town, then you could say the town can’t have a Wal-Mart.

But we do need political parties, and we do need government. And the proof of that is that we have political parites and government.

But not enough people to make a profitable Wal-Mart or shoe store.

I didn’t say they can’t hold office. I said they don’t hold office. I think there are one or two third party members of congress, out of 535 – and they have no power at all, unless they join one of the two major party caucuses.

Well I just ate a hot dog, does that mean I needed to eat that hot dog? Nah, there was other food available, I suppose I just wanted to eat it.

Well I just ate a hot dog, does that mean I needed to eat that hot dog? Nah, there was other food available, I suppose I just wanted to eat it.

We may one day have universal health care in the US, does that mean we need it?

You’ve fallen into a fallacy there – you’ve mistaken the general (food, medical care, political parties) for the specific (hot dog, universal health care, Democratic and Republican Parties.)

We do need food and medical care – and political parties – but the form may vary widely.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit