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.
First off, if an independent ran for the presidency, how would that work with the electoral college?
Second, and assuming the I won. Would that actually work? If he (she) doesn't belong to either of the other parties, can we actually get more done in this country? Or would literally nothing get done?
Thoughts?
Trump was an independent president and proved to be too much of a threat to the establishment on both sides of the aisle.
The establishment is supported by a propaganda machine, big business and big tech. Not a chance for an independent president!!!!!! other than Trump who was a force of nature.
the free press is critical to a free country, that free press has long since gone and with it, our country.
In USA? No. Aside of two main candidates others don't even get invitation for the final debates. Everyone who gathered enough signatures (if that is how that works in USA) and can candidate should be able to be present himself or herself at the final debate. Even a joke candidature like this rapper last time. It is undemocratic that only two candidates from main parties get a chance to present themselves to the bigger audience.
In terms of the mechanics of it all, each independent would need to qualify to be on a State's ballot. So the independent would need to develop infrastructure across the country. Some States do allow for write-in votes, but it's going to go much better if they are on the ballot in all 50 States. That takes a lot of organization. Each State is different. Each State in theory gets to decide how they run their own ballots which guide the choosing of their electors.
Assuming an Independent cleared this massive hurdle and won the majority of the nation's vote, there would be some mandate there, but not much. An Independent would likely not be unable to pass any sweeping regulation, but could use the executive function to begin ferreting out corruption in what already exists. This could still produce a powerful leader, but for staying power, eventually a party would need to be formed in order to allow for support in Congress.
As others noted, this may not be a bad situation....or really even a changed situation. Most of the programs touted by leaders year after year are actually the exact same grant type from the year before, just with different advertising. The President really doesn't control what Congress budgets or passes, merely the execution of things and foreign affairs. Congress won't do nothing as they still have supply chains to feed. If the President were to become veto heavy, the supply chains would attack from both sides. If they were all fed, the country likely goes bust.
It would be an extremely difficult job, but it's possible. The Independent would also have to bring in a lot of talent with them in order to effectively take control of the organization. A rolodex of literally thousands of people who are capable and willing.
I don’t see this happening but if it did, there are worse things in life than a Tulsi Gabbert. I don’t agree with all of her thoughts but I could tolerate her.
Might just in fact be the best thing for this country. My goodness, Fox and MSNBC would be quiet!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer
Trump was an independent president and proved to be too much of a threat to the establishment on both sides of the aisle.
The establishment is supported by a propaganda machine, big business and big tech. Not a chance for an independent president!!!!!! other than Trump who was a force of nature.
the free press is critical to a free country, that free press has long since gone and with it, our country.
Exactly! Can’t wait to see the establishment’s reaction once DeSantis wins!
Last edited by Mike from back east; 10-26-2022 at 04:53 PM..
Trump was an independent president and proved to be too much of a threat to the establishment on both sides of the aisle.
The establishment is supported by a propaganda machine, big business and big tech. Not a chance for an independent president!!!!!! other than Trump who was a force of nature.
the free press is critical to a free country, that free press has long since gone and with it, our country.
Trump was nominated by the Republican Party and ran on the Republican ticket. Prior to his switching to the Republican Party, he was a member of the Democratic Party.
Many years ago, we had one guy... can barely remember his name. He owned a software company that build software for the VA. He ran during the election between Clinton and Bush Sr. I can't remember his name, and too lazy to look it up. ....
You spent more time typing that than it took to find his name.
Using "Clinton and Bush Sr. independent candidate" as my search terms brought up " independent businessman Ross Perot of Texas," in the first returned result.
So it took less than 2 seconds to get his name. (And more than that for me to type my response. )
Trump was nominated by the Republican Party and ran on the Republican ticket. Prior to his switching to the Republican Party, he was a member of the Democratic Party.
Adding this again, the point of the original poster was whether there could be an "independent" president. No one is talking about the actual "Independent" party, but on the ability for the president to be anything other than establishment Democrat or establishment Republican.
And "as such" Trump is considered by many to be an independent president. The majority of Trump's views are directly in-line with President Clinton... whether it's illegal immigration, the use of tariffs, etc. There are a lot of views that Trump has that are totally at-odds with traditional Republican viewpoints.
Please do not misrepresent what was being said in that post by Kracer, or the OP.
Adding this again, the point of the original poster was whether there could be an "independent" president. No one is talking about the actual "Independent" party, but on the ability for the president to be anything other than establishment Democrat or establishment Republican.
And "as such" Trump is considered by many to be an independent president. The majority of Trump's views are directly in-line with President Clinton... whether it's illegal immigration, the use of tariffs, etc. There are a lot of views that Trump has that are totally at-odds with traditional Republican viewpoints.
Please do not misrepresent what was being said in that post by Kracer, or the OP.
It doesn't matter that "many consider" Trump to have been independent. "Many consider" a lot of erroneous things, such as the belief that the election was "stolen" and that the Jan. 6 insurrection was conducted by "patriots."
The fact is that Trump was nominated by the Republican Party, fully supported by the Republican Party, and elected as a Republican President. Trump would never have been able to be elected without the backing of one of the two main established parties. Trump knew this, which is why he switched from his previous affiliation with the Democratic Party to the Republican Party when he saw an advantage to doing so.
Trump duly served the purposes of the Republican Party, which was to get a majority of conservative judges on the Supreme Court. The Republican Party deigned to put up with Trump's shenanigans while looking towards their end game. Trump was a tool for the Republican Party. Now they apparently no longer have further use for Trump. Nor does the majority of the rest of the country.
Last edited by Rachel NewYork; 11-15-2022 at 10:59 AM..
It doesn't matter that "many consider" Trump to have been independent. "Many consider" a lot of erroneous things, such as the belief that the election was "stolen" and that the Jan. 6 insurrection was conducted by "patriots."
I mean, it does matter. You've stated your opinions, that doesn't change the fact that Trump won a large portion of the Clinton Democrats in the 2016 election... people who had voted Democrat their entire lives, and switched to Republican.
Trump is, as far as his policy goes, the most liberal Republican president we've ever had.
Adding this again, the point of the original poster was whether there could be an "independent" president. No one is talking about the actual "Independent" party, but on the ability for the president to be anything other than establishment Democrat or establishment Republican.
And "as such" Trump is considered by many to be an independent president. The majority of Trump's views are directly in-line with President Clinton... whether it's illegal immigration, the use of tariffs, etc. There are a lot of views that Trump has that are totally at-odds with traditional Republican viewpoints.
Please do not misrepresent what was being said in that post by Kracer, or the OP.
I never saw Trump as anything more than an unabashed opportunist who was grasping at straws in his bid for the presidency. In the New York business world, in general, and specifically that space occupied by real estate developers, Trump learned early on that being conniving was a very real strategy. Subterfuge, and perfecting one's two faced public persona was the "skillset," the "tools of the trade" so to speak. And, like the old Buck Owens song went, "All I had to do was--act naturally.."
In that view of Trump, one can easily understand the necessity to align himself with a greater form, a stage, and on that stage he could act with the help of a script. His entire public face is and always was an act, the script was and will remain the GOP agenda, cutting taxes for the wealthy, cutting services for the poor, building the wall, just a stunt, but all part of the script. He went on to pursuing the more extreme factions of the GOP faithful, stumbling along with the help of discreet aides, he was enraging some policy wonks, but at days end, he was never an independent, and, never will be.
If anything, he is a terrible narcissist who was more than willing to do whatever he needed to do in order to placate the GOP, and, in turn, the GOP leadership allowed Trump to wear the crown, to spew his bellicose meanderings, to incite the worst of our citizenry to unite under his flag of hatred and division---All for the votes he could garner. A tool for the party, period..
As to the OP, NO, no one will ever get beyond the barricades of party control in America. And that is what most of us should be concerned about, a truly representative government can't exist alongside a plutocracy protected by loyal party servants.
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.
)