> getting representatives which represents the great variety of voter opinions
The parties in the US don't control the opinions and seats of their elected members, which means you get a greater variety of political positions under the same label than you do in a lot of parliamentary systems. Republicans in California can easily be left of Democrats in Georgia.[0]
There are opinions held by small interest groups that are not reflected in the democratic process, to be sure.
On the other hand, performing artists have their own line in the tax code, so sometimes these groups do get their way.
> US elections are so dominated by advertisement, expensive campaigns and donations that there is no way a politician can actually do what they tell voters because at the end of the day they have to satisfy donors
A lot of studies have debunked the influence of money on campaigns.[1]
Jeb's massive war chest didn't keep him in the race.
Here are the richest individuals to ever launch a bid for the presidency[2]:
1) Ross Perot
2) Steve Forbes
3) John Kerry
4) Mitt Romney
5) Al Gore
The Clintons are next, but most of their money was made after Bill's Presidency.
Giuliani, Edwards, and Huntsman round out the list (before this election, I'm not sure if anyone really knows how much Trump is worth).
A lot of losers on that list for a system so influenced by money.
The parties in the US don't control the opinions and seats of their elected members, which means you get a greater variety of political positions under the same label than you do in a lot of parliamentary systems. Republicans in California can easily be left of Democrats in Georgia.[0]
There are opinions held by small interest groups that are not reflected in the democratic process, to be sure.
On the other hand, performing artists have their own line in the tax code, so sometimes these groups do get their way.
> US elections are so dominated by advertisement, expensive campaigns and donations that there is no way a politician can actually do what they tell voters because at the end of the day they have to satisfy donors
A lot of studies have debunked the influence of money on campaigns.[1]
Jeb's massive war chest didn't keep him in the race.
Here are the richest individuals to ever launch a bid for the presidency[2]:
1) Ross Perot
2) Steve Forbes
3) John Kerry
4) Mitt Romney
5) Al Gore
The Clintons are next, but most of their money was made after Bill's Presidency.
Giuliani, Edwards, and Huntsman round out the list (before this election, I'm not sure if anyone really knows how much Trump is worth).
A lot of losers on that list for a system so influenced by money.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zell_Miller
[1] http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/17/how-much-does-campaign-sp...
[2] http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ross-perot-tops-lis...