Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've been an Independent for over 20 years and have often wondered what it would take to create a truly viable, electable third-party candidate. In other words something more than just a method for a "protest vote".
I suspect it would necessitate a complete teardown/redesign of the political process in this country, since the two-party system is so firmly entrenched.
Is it all about money/financing? If so, would it take candidates with bottomless-pit pockets (like Mike Bloomberg) to start the ball rolling?
One can argue it's all about power, but then it becomes a chicken/egg argument: Does the battle for individual political power hold up the 2-party system, or does the 2-party system itself enable the ongoing battles for politcal power?
So, a two part question re: a TRULY VIABLE third party
* Will it ever be possible?
* If so, how? If not, why not?
All it would take is approval voting versus plurality voting to choose the electors. But why would the two parties choose to create their own demise by implementing a voting system which does not favor those already in power?
A viable third party candidate is any third party candidate. All are viable. What keeps them from being viable is the two major parties. I liken both major parties to opposite sides of the same coin. They give us the illusion of choice when in fact the color of the money funding them both is the same shade of green.
The best election I took part in was the special gubernatorial election in California after Pete Wilson resigned. The ballot read like a playbill with over 40 candidates. The winner was Ah-nahld. That was an election.
It is not the responsibility of government to determine the candidates, it is the responsibility of the citizens to discern the diamonds from the dust. To let entrenched corruption and tradition (that's what I think of the two major parties) limit the choice of the people is undemocratic and needs to be dismissed once and for all.
If enough moderate Congressional reps get fed up with their respective parties and register as Independents, they would have the clout to fund-raise and start a third party, with folks at the state level coming on board, as well.
Depends on what you would like the ideology of that third party to be. If you wanted a bigger social and military spending type government which passes legislation authorizing all kinds of spending, regardless of what "you the people" would like, then you might want to consider a third party that mirrors the democrat party. That might be allowed, After all it's a free country.
Then again, if you wanted a bigger social and military spending type government which passes legislation authorizing all kinds of spending, regardless of what "you the people" would like, then you might want to consider a third party that mirrors the republican party. That might be allowed too, after all it's a free country.
But heaven help you if you are one of those rare Americans, you know the type that is interested in those old fashioned things like government adhering to the Constitution, and defending our individual freedoms, reducing troop/military levels to where we could defend our Country from invaders etc rather than spending a trillion dollars a year sticking our business in other countries business , thereby freeing up maybe up to a large percentage of what's being spent. Defending and safeguarding our rights to be free and not be taxed to a point where our level of taxation is HIGHER than many countries around the word at this point .
Now that might not fly. Americans have grown quite fond of thinking of nobody but themselves. That we can go thruout the world and TRY to impose on changes they do not want, and do what they are told. And it seems that Americans, although not having many pots to pee in anymore like to borrow from foreign dictators just so we can hurt other people in lands that most of us will never even see. Some pretty fantastic places with good people living in them too .And Americans sure seem to like that socialism. A program for this and a program for that. Virtually cradle to grave and growing. Trying to borrow more and more. Not that much equity left in the middle class. Just what that ideology is all about.........rich class, poor class, no in-between. Jogging into Communism. Nah, you'd be laughed at, then ignored really for having such "kooky" thoughts.
Yup the democrats and republicans both subscribe to that ideology, so unless you mirror those parties, I don't think Americans are going to buy it and besides, it really wouldn't be allowed anymore. After all it's a free country.
I didn't read all the posts in this thread (disclaimer).
I think you would need to do what the Conservatives have done to the Republican party.
First, you need to establish that all third party candidates are going to run under "some other" party. Then you need to work from the ground up. Start getting elected in little elections: School board, tax collector, city council.
Eventually, when you have a lot of representation in smaller offices, you start having candidates for bigger offices (Congress). After you get a bunch of those, you move up to Senate -- then you get to go for the big one: President!!
I think it's really a "ground up" thing -- unless you could get someone huge who could win to run for President -- someone like Brad Pitt or Warren Buffett. I believe it would be really really hard to go "top down" unless you had someone who was an undeniable leader to run for Preznit.
I've been an Independent for over 20 years and have often wondered what it would take to create a truly viable, electable third-party candidate. In other words something more than just a method for a "protest vote".
I suspect it would necessitate a complete teardown/redesign of the political process in this country, since the two-party system is so firmly entrenched.
Is it all about money/financing? If so, would it take candidates with bottomless-pit pockets (like Mike Bloomberg) to start the ball rolling?
One can argue it's all about power, but then it becomes a chicken/egg argument: Does the battle for individual political power hold up the 2-party system, or does the 2-party system itself enable the ongoing battles for politcal power?
So, a two part question re: a TRULY VIABLE third party
* Will it ever be possible?
* If so, how? If not, why not?
Anything is possible. Likely, probably not.
The power is in the peoples hands, but most people are ignorant of the issues. They are so purposely and deliberately. They are "personally" motivated more than they are "logically" motivated. They care about irrelevant things and believe only that which supports their personal belief.
Basically the people are sheep, easily swayed by pop stars and media casts. As long as people continue to act like the mob they are, the two parties will likely stay in control.
That is not to say that many would not like to see a third party win, but those who do enough research into the issues also know that since people are sheep, voting for the third party will only insure one side wins over the other which has already happened in the past. So people stick with the "lesser evil" thing.
A government such as ours is a reflection of its people. We see corruption, lying, stealing, cheating, etc... in the government more often these days because our people exhibit those traits. You can't expect to pull a good apple out of a barrel of rotten apples. If things are going to change, the people need to change. Since the people are too busy blaming everyone else for their own faults, things will continue to stay the same and slowly progress to worse.
The power is in the peoples hands, but most people are ignorant of the issues. They are so purposely and deliberately. They are "personally" motivated more than they are "logically" motivated. They care about irrelevant things and believe only that which supports their personal belief.
Basically the people are sheep, easily swayed by pop stars and media casts. As long as people continue to act like the mob they are, the two parties will likely stay in control.
That is not to say that many would not like to see a third party win, but those who do enough research into the issues also know that since people are sheep, voting for the third party will only insure one side wins over the other which has already happened in the past. So people stick with the "lesser evil" thing.
A government such as ours is a reflection of its people. We see corruption, lying, stealing, cheating, etc... in the government more often these days because our people exhibit those traits. You can't expect to pull a good apple out of a barrel of rotten apples. If things are going to change, the people need to change. Since the people are too busy blaming everyone else for their own faults, things will continue to stay the same and slowly progress to worse.
Well after taking a step back at any given moment and reading the thread headlines in this very forum, I will go along with your assessment of people in a most general of sense.
I have asked a related question in the past concerning media, is it a top down or a bottom up situation that gives us the state of media today? Considering we are a representative democratic Republic I would also ask, is our current state of politics a reflection of its base or are the people a reflection of our politics?
I have pondered this a great deal and have often wondered if it isn't an unconscious mutual agreement or mutually beneficial symbiosis between the two. Like a conspiracy that is never agreed upon because two parties are mutually exclusive yet work towards a common goal, even one that is never defined or with form.
Given these three scenarios, the first being a corrupt and rotten government that is emulated by its people, this is obviously not a good thing but the most easily cured. After all, we encourage protest each election cycle at the polls and if the people so desired, they could utterly change the face of politics in a single election cycle. (odd that it never actually happens really)
The second scenario is that the people are rotten and corrupted and the government is a reflection of this. In this case it is much harder to change due to the sheer numbers of people. Since they can't simply be voted out of office, then change must occur either via a "shock type doctrine" or in a long term manner in which our entire way of looking at issues critically is fundamentally altered. Obviously this would be extremely difficult without an event of culture changing magnitude.
Last being is that both are corrupt and feed off of one another in a constant cycle of blame externalization. The people often voting against their own self interest in favor of party politics that ultimately ensure a continuation of the establishment. The government (or political parties) placating their own party base again by the use of externalized blame of the opposition ensuring a political dichotomy in perpetuation. In this case one can either pray for an asteroid to hit the earth and give us all a "do over", work within the system to fleece our fellow countrymen of everything we can squeeze out of them and die with the most toys, move to either Montana or Vermont and join the cessation movement, or pray for a miracle.
This aside, does anyone ever ask why is it that Americans will demand 10 different kinds of pizza, 8 different brands of shoes, 30 different brands of car, a million choices for a doctor or attorney, yet when it comes to something as fundamentally important as politics which effect each and every one of us, every day... Why do we not only settle for a choice of just this or that, but we would fight to the death to ensure it?
This aside, does anyone ever ask why is it that Americans will demand 10 different kinds of pizza, 8 different brands of shoes, 30 different brands of car, a million choices for a doctor or attorney, yet when it comes to something as fundamentally important as politics which effect each and every one of us, every day... Why do we not only settle for a choice of just this or that, but we would fight to the death to ensure it?
Some really great responses here! Among others, the above definitely resonates with me; I've often thought that myself. Americans are so in love with and proud of having the world's largest buffet of "choices" and yet regarding politics most people (not ALL, but definitely the overall majority) end up shrugging their shoulders and muttering something about "voting for the lesser of two evils" --- that's if they vote at all, rather than throw up their hands in disgust at the absence of a candidate they can "in good conscience" vote for. Totally illogical. I also agree with a 3rd party movement having to start from the bottom, or at least the midrange (a la the California gubernatorial election mentioned), and build upwards. I don't know about other states' local politics -- and I mean very local, as in town and county and local judicial levels -- but in mine unless you have either party's backing (i.e., $$$$) behind you or else deep personal pockets, you can't afford the advertising needed to get any name recognition at all. That said.... I do see both Republican and Democrat local candidates running under a second or even third party affiliation in the voting booth. Whenever I do see that a candidate I'd already chosen to vote for is also on the Independent "line", that's the lever I flip; but before that point, 99% of voters would never know that Joe Schmoe was running as an Independent as well as a Republican candidate, for instance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
