|
17 Aug 11 - 05:55 PM (#3208553) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Bill D We don't need a '3rd' party... we need a dozen parties, like Israel has. They would HAVE to make alliances & compromises to get anything done. Of course, it would require an entirely new election system...and I'm all for that, too! Libertarians? Nawwww... they have slogans, not practical ideas. |
|
17 Aug 11 - 09:13 PM (#3208635) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Don Firth I'm still bucking for a preferential or instant run-off voting system. This would make third parties, or multiple parties viable. Your vote might end up going to someone you don't like all that much. But how would that differ from what we have now? Don Firth |
|
17 Aug 11 - 09:56 PM (#3208642) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Jack the Sailor POGG Party Peace Order Good Government. No lobbiests, no special interest money. Just go to Washington and do the will of the people. |
|
17 Aug 11 - 10:31 PM (#3208658) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Paul G. When you have a two party system the only possibility is for the two to move to the extremes in order to differentiate, which they have done. Most of us reside in the middle somewhere... I would propose a Unity Party, with no platform whatsoever. Eschew factionalism altogether. The enlightenment thinking of Thomas Jefferson supports the notion. |
|
18 Aug 11 - 12:25 AM (#3208296) Subject: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Mrrzy NPR had a thing the other day on what the platform of a potential third (not democrats or republicans) party should be. It was fascinating, as NPR usually is. Got me thinking. First I thought #3 should be the party of No Platform - everybody who doesn't want to be cubbyholed should go there. Then I thought it should be the Libertarians, I kind of like them. Or maybe the Greens. The Socialists or true liberals wouldn't get anywhere yet, I don't think... but I'd vote for them. How 'bout y'all? |
|
18 Aug 11 - 12:27 AM (#3208298) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Mrrzy Belated blicky. |
|
18 Aug 11 - 12:42 AM (#3208309) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity BRAVO MRRZY!!! It's more in line with what I've been talking about on here, but the close-minded, so-called 'liberals', who are not very liberal at all, usually get all pissy!!! Good Post, and THANK YOU!!! GfS |
|
18 Aug 11 - 01:37 PM (#3208353) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Bobert Normal response from the resident "No Nothing Party" (Google it up) but who sees boogie men "liberals" behind every tree and under every rock... BTW, GfinS, you are not 3rd party material... You have camped out in Tealand and unwilling to do much of anything but lob poo... But, yeah, a 3rd party, Mrrzy, is needed... Back in 1860 that party was the Constitutional Union Party which actually carried three states, including Virginia... They found themselves pissed with the Northern Republicans who were pushing hard to end slavery and the Southern Democrats who not only wanted to keep it but to expand it into western territories... They worked hard to get the soon-to-be--hot-waring factions together and instrumental in a last ditch effort in Baltimore to find compromise... The problem we have today is not completely dis-similar except, unlike 1860, we have only one party which is extreme and that is the Republican Party... The Democrats have signaled that they will sit down and discuss a spectrum of problems with everything "on the table"... The Republicans have signed pledges to the industrialists that in no way shape or form will they increase revenues... Some you have one party that is entrenched and one that is not but the Republican PR has done a masterful job of convincing the masses that both parties are equally entrenched... Hitler said that the masses would believe the BIG LIE (his words) and right now that's the problem... Okay, back to the idea of a 3rd party: I guess that if I were to start one I'd call it the "Sane Party" and it's "mission statement" would read: "We, members of the Sane Party, agree to take America's problems seriously and to build solutions based on the best available science, knowledge, wisdom and logic regardless of ideology." The only plank that the Sane Party would agree on and push for would be to have all America's voting districts be redrawn by a neutral international commission under the auspices of the United Nations and to publicly finance all future elections... BTW, had the Constitutional Union Party, who were trying to get the Repbs and Dems to ***compromise*** then the unCivil War would have been averted... B~ |
|
18 Aug 11 - 02:18 PM (#3208388) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Lobert: "Normal response from the resident "No Nothing Party" (Google it up) but who sees boogie men "liberals" behind every tree and under every rock... BTW, GfinS, you are not 3rd party material... You have camped out in Tealand and unwilling to do much of anything but lob poo..." I'm not a Tea party member, BUT YOU are the one lobbying poo!! The guilty tend to accuse others of their faults! GfS |
|
18 Aug 11 - 04:02 PM (#3208462) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Q (Frank Staplin) Third parties? Proven losers. Next thing someone will propose cupsink or other cloud niner. |
|
20 Aug 11 - 01:54 PM (#3209995) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Mrrzy Ooh, how about a no-party system, where you have to run on your own merits, not as a dem or a rep? I understand why no SINGLE party - but logistically, does there really have to be a small number? How is it actually phrased in the Constitution, does anybody know without looking it up? Oh, yeah, and sorry for forgetting about this thread, when I had started it! I also like the name Union for the party of everyone. |
|
20 Aug 11 - 01:54 PM (#3209996) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Mrrzy AND they could start their platform with returning to the original motto, e pluribus unum. I'd be all over being for that. |
|
20 Aug 11 - 02:31 PM (#3210007) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: akenaton I agree...and elect Miss Sarah as leader. |
|
20 Aug 11 - 06:09 PM (#3210107) Subject: RE: BS: USA 'Third party' political ideas From: Little Hawk A no-party system is what I've been recommending for a long time...not that I think my recommendations rank large in the scheme of things. They don't rank any larger than anyone else's here... ;-) And that ain't "large". It's very, very, very small. But you did ask, Mrzzy. So there's my answer. No political parties at all. No party war chest. No party power machine. Just individual candidates running against each other on the basis of their individual ideas and abilities. No division of Congress into "us and them" power blocs. No division of society into "us and them" opinion blocs. How refreshing it would be. And it could be done in a heartbeat. All that would be necessary would be for people in general to grasp a new idea instead of robotically treading down the established path of customary habit that has come out of the past 2 or 3 centuries. They could disband all their corrupt and self-serving political parties and instead vote for freethinking independents right across the board. But is it gonna happen? Nope! We will all die long before it gets around to happening, I expect. And I can accept that with equanimity, because far more capable men and women than I have died without seeing all the world's political problems solved as they had hoped, during their lifetimes...so why should I expect to be any different? |