I'm writing my essay about the corruption the two-party system causes in our country. The whole system is completely outdated; we can do a lot better. How can we allow ourselves basically a one or the other choice when talking about all the issues we face as a country? Why do we accept the fact that candidates change their stances on so many issues just to fit into the mold of one of the two main parties? And why can't everyone just run as an independent, thus freeing us from the corruption of politicians going against their beliefs catering to their respective parties? In my essay I plan to answer these questions and many more. I guess the main question that it all comes down to though is why don't we do away with the two-party system in the United States? 

The reason I am interested in my research question is because I see myself as an independent. I don't want to have to vote for a Republican or a Democrat. The question affects me and my values in the fact that I am very moderate in my beliefs, having some opinions that are more liberal and some that are more conservative. The way our political system is set up right now doesn't allow people who share my set of beliefs to have a shot at the presidency. An example from personal experience would be the current election. I'm a supporter of Bernie Sanders, but do I agree with everything he wants to do? No way. I consider myself to be socially liberal but fiscally conservative so I am torn between the two parties without a candidate I can stand behind one hundred percent or even eighty percent. I believe I am qualified to write about this just by being a well-informed, voting, citizen of the United States. 

Charles Wheelan, a professor of public policy at Dartmouth College and author of "The Centerist Manifesto," says the centrist party takes the best principals from each of the dominating parties, therefore being very moderate. The central claim of this article is that we can start making a difference in the two-party system stranglehold by voting more centrist party members into the senate. The major values in the article revolve around having a more centrist and moderate government.  Weelan is saying we need to start shifting away from the two-party system so we can get the extremists out of power and actually start getting things done. Being a college professor and someone who has run for office makes Weelan very credible. I'd say of course he has a bias towards getting rid of the two-party system as he identifies himself as a centrist.  

I am using part of George Washington's farewell address as a source for my essay, particularly the part where he talks about the two-party system being the death of America. He claims that a two-party system wouldn't really work for the benefit of the country with the way he and the rest of the founding fathers set up the government. The major value included in the part of the farewell address that I'm focusing on is liberty. The two-party system really takes away a lot of our liberties as citizens of the United States just as Washington warned us so many years ago. George Washington is probably the most credible man who has ever lived on this particular subject.   Of course he was biased against the two-party system. 

This reading from a Boundless political science textbook discuses some of the generalities and history of the two-party system in the United States as well as the advantages and disadvantages. The only interest in this reading is to inform the audience. Seeing as this reading comes from a textbook I'd say this can be taken as a credible source. Also, there is no bias since it is purely educational.

My research question, why can't we do away with the two-party system in the United States, is very arguable. You could argue that we couldn't do away with it and list the ways it does or country good. Or we could say we could, and we should get rid of it and have someone as president that doesn't belong to one of the two main parties since George Washington. I have noticed that most of the sources I have found are attacking the two-party system rather than defending it. Most of my sources agree that something has got to give, but most disagree on how we should go about taking the two-party system down. Seeing all of these ideas on bringing the system down makes me believe more and more that it is possible and that it will happen eventually. Maybe instead of focusing on why can't we do away with the two party system, maybe I should focus on how. 

