Why I Feel Bad Voting For President

=====The American electoral process, as well as many aspects of the senatorial process, is typically divided into two opposing factions. On one side, there is the Republican Party; its members tend to believe in a more conservative approach to government, rarely wanting to make changes to preexisting governmental policies that may benefit minority groups or improve foreign relations or do not meet the standards of a Judeo-Christian ethic. One the other side, there is the Democratic Party; its members tend to adhere to a more liberal belief structure wherein the traditional governments policies are ignored and new ideas and ways of approaching government--within the confines of the preexisting mold of government--are favored. Both sides have their pros and cons, and while the Democratic Party has been in existence almost as long as the government itself and the Republican Party, having spun off of a now defunct Whig party, has been its opponent since the middle of the nineteenth century, it is my belief that they are now both obsolete.
=====Through out the years, newer, less powerful parties have come and gone, finding it almost impossible to get a stable foothold in the electoral process. One of the reasons for this is the seeming demise of the original idea for political parties to begin with. Today, the Democratic and Republican parties, while they exist in name, have given way to liberal and conservative interest groups. It is almost unheard of to have a liberal Republican or a conservative Democrat without a party change taking place. Any new parties that might be formed end up being an amalgam of the two ideologies and are quickly overlooked by the more steadfast members in either preexisting interest group.
=====Without varying opponents to keep the process fresh and evolving with an aging world, the two groups, conservatives and liberals, have come to a stalemate. As is the case with any long-lasting, dual-sided conflict of interest, both sides have begun defining themselves by everything the other side is not. If one is a liberal, one is a steadfast, fanatical liberal and takes the moniker of Democrat as their own. If one is a conservative, one is a steadfast, fanatical conservative and takes the moniker of Republican as their own. In choosing either side, a person is suggesting that they agree with either the entire liberal ideology or the entire conservative ideology, and will often bitterly oppose any and all policies, programs, and suggestions made with the opposing ideology in mind. Because the two parties are locked in such a stalemate of ideas, belief, and power, the system cannot evolve and the system does not grow.
=====The gridlock of the system is further reinforced by the way leaders are selected. In a two-party system, a single leader should never have complete control of the governmental body. It is true that there is a legislative government, but its power is still inferior to that of the elected President. The gridlock of the system is manifested in a more literal way when the President is of one party and the Senate is largely of another as they can perpetually overturn and veto each others every move; however, ultimately the President has the final word. So, even if the Senate represents the party that did not win the election, when a single leader is elected in this system, the losing side of the population--which is typically almost half--cannot have its interests taken into consideration for a period of four years. Those people are essentially voiceless since the balance of power is tilted toward the side of the opposition. Also, when that elected President has completed the four year term, if the opposing side manages to win the next election, the next President has the power--and often the desire--to rollback and overturn any and all of the policies of the previous administration. By overlooking large portions of the population and their interests, dividing the belief systems of the society they live in into two factions, and constantly undoing and redoing functions of the reigning government, the single leader, two-party electoral process has completely destroyed any and all possibility for an evolving or improving government or society.
=====By removing the evolution of government and society, the two-party, single leader system strengthens itself over time. The longer the system exists, the more powerful and irreversible it becomes. As is becoming the case now, the people will eventually only know to choose from the two preexisting ideologies, conservative or liberal, and will have no need, desire or knowledge as to how to create a new belief structure; and as both sides continue to elect single leaders into the Presidential seat and rollback each others ideal governmental bodies, animosity between the two sides will grow, further reinforcing the concept of defining oneself as the polar opposite of the enemy--and they have truly become enemies. Where once there was a nation of people with many different ideologies and proposals for governmental structure, there is now a nation of people that riot, protest, and fight in the streets over political ideology--much like they were doing during the time of the Civil War. It is the passionate opposition between factions that will eventually be too powerful to reverse, and the two-party, single leader system will be the only means of government possible.
=====Taking into consideration the complete stalemate--or perhaps even reverse--of the growth and evolution of the political and social sciences, I believe that a new model for government should be considered, and the old model discarded. Because of the dynamic that exists within the parties, the best way to approach the problem would not be to eliminate parties, but to eliminate a single leader. It is possible to create a new model of government wherein political parties can still exist without a single leader, and it is possible to create a model of government that can fairly represent all sides and citizens equally; however, as long as the two-party, single leader system is in place, the ability to consider such a concept is perpetually weakened. Eventually, it will be impossible for either side to recognize the possibility for an option; but, it may be such an option that can ultimately rescue the United States from its currently floundering state of political and social development.