America is in some big trouble. While crucial issues cry out for leadership, Washington’s parties and politicians are polarized and paralyzed.
But help is on the way if we the people do our thing again.
The founding fathers were great, but their descendents haven’t been too shabby either. In fact, the genius of America is that each generation has redefined freedom in its own terms for its own times.
Slavery was ended when the people acted. Women’s suffrage came when the people rose up. Civil rights laws were passed in the 1960s when the people demanded them.
Still another rebirth of freedom is needed now. It can happen right here at Unity08.com – where millions of Americans fed up with Washington’s pointless bickering will hold an online convention in the first half of 2024 to nominate a Unity Ticket for President and Vice President, then put it on the ballot in all 50 states, and elect it in November.
We’re not out to spoil anybody else’s campaign. We’re not trying to put either major party out of business. We’re not out to create a permanent third party. We are out to give Washington and both major parties a jolt of reality – so that they realize that most voters aren’t on the fringe, but in the middle – and that they want the problems solved.
Three things have made Unity08 needed and possible. First, elections which used to be about who could win the most votes in the middle are now about who does the best in turning out their base. But the issues that turn out the base turn off the middle. That polarization has slopped over to Congress where the parties are barely civil to each other. And the presidential nominees of both parties will be picked by the base voters at either end of the political spectrum. The rational middle (that’s most of us) will be left out again.
Second, America may never have faced so many issues crucial to its security and welfare at the same time: Worldwide terrorism, dependence on foreign oil, global climate change, the economic rise of India and China, a soaring national debt, the need for affordable health care, a crisis in education, and more. We can’t go much longer without Washington having the leadership and unity to act.
The third thing making Unity08 possible is the good news: The online technology now enables the people to use our democracy to take our country back. .
So Unity08.com, right here, will hold the first-ever virtual national convention in history, with you and millions of delegates just like you picking a Unity Ticket to run for President and Vice President.
We expect the Unity Ticket will be headed by a woman and/or man from each major party or by an Independent who presents a Unity Team from both parties.
Anybody qualified to vote in this country is qualified to be a delegate. And anybody constitutionally eligible to serve as President may run for the job. As millions of delegates sign up, major political figures in both parties may decide this is the way to get to the White House.
So may leaders from the business and non-profit worlds who can’t get there through the traditional parties. And some of you will want to try to draft still other leaders to run and bring Washington some leadership for a change.
Some things will be familiar: The nominees will have to win at least 50% of the delegate votes to win the nomination (so a number of ballots may be needed). And some things will be new: Nominees for President and Vice President will run and be voted on as a team, just as they are on the November ballot. Candidates meeting a minimum threshold of support will be able to use Unity08.com to campaign for the nomination. The recommendations of our Rules Committee will be debated right here at Unity08.com.
So come join us – and blog the issues, or take our polls, or recruit more delegates, or debate the rules, or contribute if you wish. Come pick the next President and Vice President, get that Unity Ticket on the ballot in your state, elect it to the White House in November 2024, and take your country back.
Come make history. Every generation provides its own rebirth of freedom. Now it’s our turn.
Get started now - tell your friends about Unity08.
Subscribe
Take another lifeline from the "pamphleteer" of earlier times (that try men's and women's souls) such as these today in America, Thomas Paine: "Now is the seed time of continental union, faith and honor" from COMMON SENSE. As Alter says, the revolutionary pamphlet has given way to the internet, but the goals are much the same: unity for the long term. I for one hope to see us move away from the era of special interests, inflated egotism, radical individualism, "what's in it for me...now?" short-sightedness, and toward the era of community, healthy diplomacy, integrity, and a sharp and steady eye on the return of all that is good and true about this great nation of ours...on into posterity. Ask it again: What can we do for our country?
Change starts here and now. With us.
I especially like that Unity08 will work to bring the debate in the 08 discussion back to "crucial issues" (as Unity08 calls them - see the issues section in the "What We Believe" page). Elections, and much news coverage of day-to-day politics, revolve around issues that, while important, seem small compared to the fact that our national debt is enormous and our health care system is failing . All issues ought to be discussed and debated, but elections should not be governed by the smaller issues. If elections are decided by those issues, then the national agenda becomes governed by them too. America can't help but stagnate, because those issues don't deal directly with the livelihood of Americans, or America's place in the global system. Even if the campaign does not succeed, it will force the other two parties to have platforms that are focused on these "crucial issues," and I will consider it a success.
I am really excited about the possibilities of Unity08.com and I look forward to hearing more about the party as it grows and grows.
I've been writing a series of articles called "the 80% solution", the platform eighty percent of the voters would go for.
http://doug.pbwiki.com/eightypercentsolution
Unity08 is a great idea but I am skeptical of the word "party". I would prefer to see a "non-party":
...an organization that does not seek to compete with the traditional parties by asking folks to give up their own beliefs in the interest of "party loyalty", this is the first step toward corruption!
...an organization that does not participate in our present two party "dollarcracy" in which only those with the most dollars really have voice and reap votes.
...an organization that permits each member to maintain their own credo and conscientious beliefs, whether based upon upbringing, religion or other factors.
...an organization that seeks out the best possible leaders and does not participate it, nor permit hatred, malice and negativism in its activities in pursuit of sound governance.
If Unity08 pursues the above, count me in.
One thing I'm very curious about is how we'll debate the substance of the issues. Its one thing to organize them into "crucial" and "important." Its quite another to agree on how to address them. This grassroots/bipartisian approach to the "crucial" issues is something we should be able to take away from this excercise and use not only on the national presidential level, but also as a way to judge candidates for local and state offices as well.
I look forward to this debate and have high hopes for its influence.
This entire concept is superb. As a people - we desperately need this in order to reclaim our political process.
I do want to take this opportunity to correct the previous poster & clarify the objective of this concept:
"Unity08 is a great idea but I am skeptical of the word "party". I would prefer to see a "non-party":"
- dear sir, you need to read closer (please refer to the FAQ or WHAT WE BELIEVE sections).
This website clearly states : "We are not looking to build a new and permanent party. "
It also states that the Unity Ticket would be comprised of "a woman and/or man from each major party or by an independent who presents a Unity Team from both parties."
This movement is aimed at creating a third TICKET option (as opposed to a straight Republican or Democratic ticket). One that combines both a Democrat and a Republican (or a viable Independent candidate who has a Democratic and Republican mixed unity team for a cabinet) in order to break an 08' Administration out of the vicious cycle of playing to it's base.
It would also bring us closer in line with other major world democracies which form coalition governments comprised of many parties.
Excellent! I will do what I can to help promote this concept.
I feel quite sure we will never agree on every issue, but agreeing on one is great start (a third party) and that is what we need, something different then the same old empty promises that are bought and sold by competing lobbyist. Make a commitment to leave special interest money out of Unity08 and you have another vote! Pundits say a third party will never work; I say they don’t know the real underling American Spirit.
Fiscal Conservative, Social Liberal, American Citizen!
The real problem I see with the two major parties is that they reflect the extreme views of their base and not the views of the majority. The primaries and caucuses are dominated by a small minority that are energized by divisive issues such as gay marriage and abortion. While these issues are emotional they tend to keep us from focusing on the real issues of government spending, U.S.imperialism and corporate welfare. The current deficit stands at around 8 trillion dollars. That money could have bought an average house for 32 million households in the U.S. Instead the U.S. military is stationed in over 120 different countries around the world and no bid contracts are given to corporations like Haliburton. As voters, we should be following the money and asking if the people are benefiting or the special interests.
To add a thought. They are only interested in WINNING and winning often causes them to forsake answering the tough questions.
Its a team sport, vote for our guys, they have nicer uniforms... rah, rah. Look, we can throw more mud faster and farther :)
nomad~
The ideals of Unity 08 arise as inspiring and refreshing, but will this system work and be infleuntial? Yes, Washginton politics have become overly polarized in our current system. The question remains, should we demand change inside the two party system that we have become accustomed to, or look for change in the form of a third party? Is our nation ready to hear from a third party, or will the votes for Unity 08 become nothing more than waisted votes that could have been used to push for the correct changes inside the system that we live under? Only time and the American public will tell.
This site is refreshing to say the least. With the onset of easy access internet, media blitzes of the 24 hour cycle- its not far fetched to see how a new message can at least get to the voters. Had this been done a year before the election, I might have pegged this to be a conservative think-tank puppet. But its all too viable. I think with some serious mainstream candidates, this could fly. Why not?? Why not a Chuck Hagel/Barak Obama ticket? Fiengold/Snow?
All the old guard machinery had, over the years, was its machinery. The old guard is all about interests and influence, but those interests do in fact pander to the general consensus of American opinion. Thats what the cloak of a 'values voter' is. Creating a unity ticket is in actuality, jumping over what the political machinery created over the years- and using their message. I mean, getting a GOP on the ticket means having their message with him, credibily, even if he leaves the party to run as a Unity candidate. He will be slandered, but its hard to throw dirt on so many folk- both democrat and unity candidate alike. Americans dont like people that are mud slingers. The GOP's tactic was to act like a victim, and throw mud in "self-defense". Its hard to be a victim to two parties at once.
The democrats on the other hand will treat the unity ticket like a rip-off group that will accomplish nothing. Again, getting a moderate big name ticket will prove that its not a junior-varsity player. Having that ticket with some 'conservative street cred' will make a huge difference for a religious righty to think twice.
Lets just hope for viability- and some presence on on-air debates. A solid debate or three will turn heads. The time is indeed ripe for it.
I am quite impressed with what you are trying to do here. I am reminded of what Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist Papers: "...All extremes are pernicious in various ways." May we always keep that in mind is my sincere hope!
Can we get a position in the platform that states a desire to LIMIT H1B Visas? Hire Americans for a change, quit giving us a song and dance about lack of workers, noone is buying it, not even the people writing the speaches. Corporate sludge forces us out of profesional careers and so we fall back to the trades which are now "jobs americans wont do" and then what. I ask the question. What are Americans for?
Can we hold them to their lies? Can we?
`nomad
We need to make sure we don't fall for false premises. There are indeed problems with many aspects of the status quo. The problem with that is not "polarization" of the two major parties but rather the fact that they are TOGETHER pushing the same agendas.
If we serious about respecting the rights of the American people then we must have truth as a starting point. We need to talk about the American people and not an abstract concept as "America." The very first thing mentioned which you think is "crucial to its security and welfare" is "worldwide terrorism"
How about we start with the truth about that? We were attacked because of specific foreign policies, NOT because of "our freedoms." We actually could end the terrorist thereat if we insisted on truth and justice! The bottom line? Dishonesty about 9/11 motives robs Americans of the freedom to decide for ourselves if we want to put our lives at risk over specific foreign policies.
It seems to me that this process would also appeal to most honorable politicians. I am sure that many of those would rather not be "beholdin'" to special interests that pay their way. It would hopefully allow them to speak their mind about issues rather than obfuscate when asked their opinion or position.
I am interested to see how this experiment plays out. The fear factor alone, for major political players, will be worth the effort. And please let us not forget that politics is the crucible of our democracy and doesn't have to be a dirty word.
I would take the concept of crucial vs. important issues one step further: as an advocate of small government I would propose that only the crucial issues should be on the national agenda; most items designated as merely "important" (or lower) should be relegated to the states. For example, take abortion: the population is quite evenly divided on this issue, it's about as 50/50 as it gets and no true resolution is in sight. I have no problem with the legality of abortion being a state issue rather than Federally allowed or disallowed. Let the states that wish to make abortion illegal do so, and vice versa. Those who wish to live in a non-abortion state then have the freedom to move if they so desire. There would be no fear of all 50 states legalizing or banning abortion, as there would always be at least one willing to take the stand the others don't. This approach would work for most other issues of non-critical importance, especially those of decidedly moral origin such as gay marriage/homosexual rights, drug and alcohol freedom, gun control, and so on. And inevitably there would be many combinations of supported issues (i.e. one state might legalize marijuana and abortion, and another might only legalize abortion.)
All I have to say is that I'm sick of voting for the "lesser of two evils" and the feeling that my vote really don't count, though I still vote every election. Just once I want a candidate to say what he think's and not have to apologize and back-off his statements because it's not "PC" or polite. I don't want polite I want a real person . Sorry, I tend to ramble.
Many kudos for a great idea -- and the correct use of "obfuscate" in a sentence! I would hope that the concept of "crucial vs important" issues could be implemented as well, delegating these decisions to state governments where they are more manageable according to the population. Before Rowe vs Wade, for instance, abortion was legal in Kentucky, but not in Ohio across the River. Our health care system is not broken, but rather overly expensive and technology-savvy; the problem lies in reimbursement for the expense. Do we want expensive, high-tech procedures and medications? Should this system, like education, belong to the public or private sector?
Of course, the new "ticket" will need a vocal radio front-man (or woman?), and more importantly, a sense of humor . . .
The system is built on having multiple parties, which gives balance, and options to the system and the people. I am glad to see a true solution to our current problem: An independently created bipartisan group that might actually speak for the majority of this country, rather than simply speaking for half of the country!
However, as a self-proclaimed “realist” I think we, as Americans need to keep things in perspective. We are a capitalist nation, and without financial support there can be no real movement. I feel that the key is to get financial support through ideas that appeal to the masses, and thus obtain financial support from large numbers of individuals. Currently, it seems like politics is funded by a small number of large special interests. I hope this becomes a powerful force financially and thus politically.
The last post by Anonymous is the problem that this type of action may have. Leaving decisions to the states is fine except when, for better or worse, it has already been decided on a federal level (i.e. Abortion currently). I like the thought, but what the country needs is not a mix party ticket but a true third party of moderates from both parties. Unfortunately this is not going to happen because with winning comes power and money. And with money comes re-election. I will back the Unity 08 because I think our country needs it. But to be honest, our country needs a true third party so that the other two would compromise. Compromise is what our government should be about; kind of like a divorce. You know it is a good job when neither party is truly happy but both can live with the outcome. Let's put our might behind this and use it as a stepping stone to something bigger. Who knows what that is but this is a step in the right direction.
Not a bad idea to get the discussion going, however, it worth noting that there is as disagreement in the center as there is at the extremes. I don't think it's as personal, but the difference between liberal to moderate Republicans and say Reagan Democrats is still significant.
For instance, what is fiscal conservativism? Does it mean opposing tax cuts to ease spending cuts? Or does it mean pushing spending cuts in order to provide for tax cuts without incurring a deficit?
I think it is important to assess where the balance of power lies within the Center.
You have to stand for something in addition to getting along.
ONe other issue to consider is what happens fi this ticket actually wins. The President while winning on the UNity party, is still a specific party. Does he or she then run on their original party line? Do they nominate a Vice President from their own party? Things to think about should they actually win. Although unlikely, you never know.
Another tidbit here. Electronic voting. I will love to see how they pull that one off (to everyones satisfaction). I have heard two sides that differ wildly on if it can be done securly. If it actualy can be done, can you imagine the potential for turnout? Like what do the other half, the ones that never participate actualy think?
In fact, if such a third party were to win, I would think they'd run for re-election together again, have the veep rise to the top choosing a new member of the other party to be veep, or simpl decline to run, instead choosing to swing the nomination of one of the existing parties and tip the balance to that part in the general election.
In fact, it might be better that a third party does NOT win but gains 25% of the vote, because if they win the White House without a single supporter in Congress to sustain a veto you'll have Congress making this President irrelevant.
We all know the truth of the saying that there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come.
I am a leading candidate for Governor of Maine as an Independent, (www.hammer2006.com, blog www.hammer2006.blogspot.com), a state with the nation's richest history of Independent Governors. Our campaign's growing success, I believe, can be traced directly to an in-depth vision of how to move beyond partisan efforts and the necessity and benefits of doing so, which has been articulated in great depth across 20 articles in Maine's top newspapers as well as leading media coverage statewide.
I congratulate all of the leaders of this incredibly exciting movement and look forward to following its groundbreaking progress through 2024 and beyond.
Thank you.
Alex Hammer
The question here is not can a third party act as a spoiler, but can a third party become a true agent of real change in the political process. America is at the mercy of extremists, both at home and abroad. Critical national and foreign policy is being made by those who have been emotionally tied to the conservative ideologies of the past. Our future as a noation cannot be roped to the lead balloons of failed ideologies.
The proper response to 9-11 would have been a crash program to divest ourselves of our dependence to foreign energy sources. Unity should see that a plank in the party platform is devoted to a real energy policy, not the president's "intelligent" reply to the post Katrina gas crisis - just to drive less.
A party that could focus on real solutions to real problems, and not just the same transactional politics, quid pro quo, back scratching...how refreshing would that be.
If a third party is to succeed, focusing on issues where the two major parties have opposed, "polarized" stances is not the way to do it. If the 'R's have their position, and the 'D's have theirs, then voters have a choice.
The real problem is when the major parties AGREE - then voters have no alternatives. One of the biggest issues where the major party duopoly is stifling real debate is illegal immigration. Polls show that 30% of voters would support a third-party candidate who would secure our borders.
If the Unity08 movement can put forth a candidate who will defy the big-business masters of the GOP and the Democrats' "Leave No Mexican Behind" fixation, then we might have a real chance.
Unity08 just launched. Apparently this group seeks to fix the political system through an online primary, and wants to get beyond the partisan polarizing deadlock. I have to say, seeing this type of energy dedicated to such a cause is really irritating. These are progressive Democrats afraid to call themselves progressive Democrats and do the real work necessary to build a sane political party. They don't want to assign 'blame' for our current predicament. Great. I'm glad we didn't assign blame after Iran-Contra, since putting those people in charge again this decade really worked so well.
In an age of political scandal, corporate greed, declining wages and politicans selling our representation, the time has come for a true voice of the middle ground to be heard. The middle ground is what America is made up of. Those that have turned thier backs on the system, resigned to the fact that no one speaks for them any longer. I have firmly held the belief that if there were to be a PAC of just the American Voters we would again become the voice that must be heard. We live in a time in this nation when more people turned out to vote in Iraq and Afganistan under threat of death and dismemberment then we, as the leading democracy in the world can produce for one election cycle. A very sad commentary in deed. I look forward to the success of this new venture and pledge my assistance in any way to see it succeed.
Splendid: yet another way in which and through which we might spin our wheels and change in no way at all. No change is no change: this inane proposition not only is void of workability, it is, more to the point, the ill-conceived strategy of a half-committed, apathetic, effete pseudo-intellectual.
Why not simply institute a monarchy, and dub Boy George king? Unity08 is a joke. It shames me to be a (unfortunate) citizen of a country wherein there exists a group of persons, however small, who believe that the "real solution" is no solution at all. If it is change you will, CHANGE YOU MUST.
What a sophomoric idea. Party politics in this country are increasingly robust. Polarization is a good thing in the current climate, forcing competition to produce the best ideas and attract support. Rather than mushy bull**** like you are purveying.
.
It looks like a great idea...but I suspect that the debate on choosing unity candidates will be very divisive indeed. Speaking for myself, I'd like to see someone who is a fiscal conservative and civil rights liberal. Isn't there anybody?
We need to focus on the cost of the recent insane deficit spending and the skyrocketing national debt. The founding generation knew that America had to be a country with a great future, but that won't be the case if we crush our children, their great-grand-children, and the seventeen generations after them with a debt as large as the one we'll have by January 20th 2024 if present trends continue.
I believe that only a third party or third-way ticket can speak honestly about the debt threat, so I am very excited to be present at Unity 08's birth.
If anyone actually thinks the Dems winning will change things, think again... the election process is reformed (for real) it will be a cash game... Bill was in for 8 years... ya he solved health care and the education issues... and Bush.. he has done a banner job! WAKE UP! The Dems will then the Reds win... then the Dems... where do you think it will all end up... oh wait, we are already there.. NO WHERE!
All my adult life, I have been registered independent and considered each candidate on their own merits. In the current polarized atmosphere, I am forced to choose a party, because any candidate I vote for will be forced to follow the party line. And it turns out that I don't like either of the parties - I don't like their platforms all that much, and their actual implementation is even worse. So, I thank Unity for giving me hope for today, that there will be a presidential candidate in '08 who I can vote for based on their merit.
Unity08 is an intriguing concept, and I will be curious to see which names start popping up -- "Gang of 14"-ers like Olympia Snowe? "Idea" candidates like Gary Hart? Pragmatists like Mike Bloomberg? How about Governor King himself? Folks from outside the elected realm entirely?
The founders of Unity08 go back to the 1976 campaign, but I hope and also fear that this effort could be more like '80, when a moderate Republican congressman and a moderate Democratic former governor ran a National Unity Campaign. I hope Unity08 finds a John Anderson, but I fear the effort may have the same result -- he topped 25% in some early polls and seemed to be on the cusp of creating a real three-way race, but as the campaign continued and "wasted vote" fears set in, he "fell, steadily, about 1 percentage point every week and a half, down to 22 percent, then 20 percent, then 18 percent, and progressively worse," according to one campaign book, finishing with less than seven percent on Election Day.
On another note, I'm curious about some of the other comments, unfortunately posted anonymously, so I cannot seek a direct reply. If you're the poster(s), I'm interested in knowing...
"These are progressive Democrats afraid to call themselves progressive Democrats..." To whom are you referring? Several of the founders are clearly Republicans.
"The ill-conceived strategy of a half-committed, apathetic, effete pseudo-intellectual..." Again, to what individual are you referring? This seems to be the brainchild of a group of people, not just one.
"If it is change you will, CHANGE YOU MUST." What do you mean?
It seems to me that the country is trending libertarian. The Democrats keep winning on social issues like gay marriage while the Republicans keep winning on fiscal issues like taxes. Basically, the winning combination is to live and let live. John Rawls' Harm Principle, in which nothing is prohibited except that which does harm to a fellow individual, has truly become the lodestone of American politics. I hope Unity08 has a vigorous debate that leads to a progressive libertarian platform. Rather than simply sending a jolt to the political establishment, I think U08 can help shape policy by making clear to the two parties the shape of things to come.
I sincerely wonder (laughably so) how you expect that getting members of 2 opposing but equally corrupt parties will yield anything better than we have at present.
At best you will have acheived a new level of institutionalized bickering. At worst you will have created a sort of uber-corruption, in which those involved feel they have a new right to screw us all over.
Can someone explain this to me?
There is nothing I'd like to see more than a political process that fosters actual debate, dialogue, and winning people over using sound argument, instead of everyone staking out their position and seeing who can scream the loudest. That said, I worry while that this Unity 08 attempt may have an impact on the rhetoric to a degree, at the end of the day it will likely split the presidential vote on one side of the aisle or another, in a lopsided fashion, depending on who ends up being selected. Such is the nature of our political process right now - first-past-the-post favors two parties, not three. Splitting the vote could have the opposite result from the desired outcome - to take one example, say the ticket ended up appealing to more moderate democrats than republicans, splitting the democratic vote, and in order to shore up support, the Republican candidates moved further to the right and won. We could end up with even worse extremists than we have now. Could happen the opposite way as well, with extremists on the left.
Why don't the organizers expend some of this energy in building up Unity members in the House and Senate? By doing so they will gain credibility for the cause and show that they have actual policy mettle. Then if they gain enough momentum and decide to run a presidential candidate, they might have enough credibility such that splitting the vote is less of a worry, as people would feel more free to vote their conscience and less worried about wasting votes.
Here's a slogan: We're the party of "The Radical Middle".
We're the white horse. Can we get there without the right rider?
Unity08 needs to be very clear on just one issue that is easy for people to understand and which easy to relate to. The one issue is The People having more say in government...however things work out.
Members of Congress should serve their terms in their home districts and home states. How are good men and women going to remain faithful to The People that elected them when they are surrounded by selfserving special interests who fills their ears with false flattery and their pockets with cash? How are they going to stay in touch with the values of the folks at home when D.C., the circle of corruption and incompetence, becomes their home?
What if members of Congress lived among The People and shopped in the same stores and drove the same streets? What if their kid married the kid across the street instead of marrying the kid of an other MOC? What if MOCs had to depend on the same health system, the same schools and same economy as The People, rather than getting special treatment?
Local Service means a better chance of Local Controll by The People.
Can't wait until '08. I've joined and, obviously, support the premise. However, consider the impact of the recent immigrant marches - and please, I'm not trying to start a debate about illegal immigration - but the newly arrived from some unsavory places in Mexico & Central America understood immediately what was at stake for them. Life here in freedom and prosperity, or a return to places they'd risked so much to leave. They have a leadership that organized protests that were so impressive that the nation was galvanized. What's wrong with us? I recall "People Power" in the Phillipines. Why are we all sitting here, at our screens, blithering at one another? We are suffering not just from a crisis in leadership when it comes to elected offices, but we don't have any firebrands to organize marches and get us out on the streets in numbers that intimidate the politicians in Washington. As I said before, I'll participate, but if anyone out knows of a group that is preparing demonstrations re the war/global warming/the Bush coup/ deteriortating labor enviornment, etc. I would appreciate hearing about it - Unity08 and protesting not being mutually exclusive.
Thanks for the rules. Many sites are descending into gratuitous, filthy cat calling. It is sad that we do not use this extraordinary technology to save ourselves and our country.
I've seen some very interesting examples of the First Amendment on this page. Whereas I do understand the concerns of some posters about the possibility of splitting the vote and winding up with further extremes in the White House, I must confess that I'd much rather try the Unity 08 strategy than continue to do the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. It is quite possible that a Unity 08 ticket may simply turn out to be a spoiler for one of the other parties, but this kind of effort has to be built on long term thinking. If the movement shows even a little promise, and people don't give up just because their ticket lost, then the possibility of generating more support another four years down the road becomes that much better. I, too, am an independent, and have been splitting tickets for years, but the polarization in this country has been forcing me to vote more toward one side, because there is no middle anymore. The '04 election was decided on issues that had nothing to do with the government's business. These are issues that are listed under the "Important Issues" section of the Unity 08 platform. The "Critical Issues", or more plainly, issues that are the government's business, have been lost under the arguments among the extremists on both sides.
I only have one very real concern about the Unity 08 plan, and it is in some way related to barabajagal's comment about the corruption that is rampant throughout both parties. Considering that Congress and the President appear to only address issues brought to them by their wealthy special interest supporters, how can we be assured that a Unity 08 ticket will not fall prey to the same corrupting influences?
This is a tremendous concept and I hope it fulfills only a portion of its intentions. Ditto to David Good above who IDs the central issue for our times - total dependence on cheap foreign oil and a total lack of a national energy policy to solve that problem. And neither party is even mentioning the situation because they're both corrupt.
Maybe this won't work but we're gonna find out - one thing's for sure - doing nothing except criticizing won't fix any problems.
Count me in!
We urgently need politicians who seek answers derived from all sides of an issue, not the demogogues we have today, who curry to a shrill minority.
The most important criteria I'll use in supporting any politician is his/her record of reasonable compromise. Compromise does not entail abandonment of core values, but constitutes a blending of those values with other, seemingly contradictory ones, that use the same incontrovertible, undistorted facts.
What a profoundly reinvigorating idea! During the 2024 election I had hoped that John McCain would join John Kerry in a unity ticket, but of course, that was never going to happen. I've long felt that representation in Washington has alienated the center, and I think that there would be broad support across the United States to find true, principled, consensus-building leadership. America hungers for Unity now. The obstacles in the way of success are enormous and perhaps insurmountable, but, as Eleanor Roosevelt said, "Surely it is more intelligent to hope rather than to fear, to try rather than not to try."
America must purge politicians of both parties to right its course!
GOP leaders are not well intentioned -- they are plundering the country on behalf of corporate interests and have more than looted the treasury, all with the over-riding principle of greed. By supporting continued massive illegal immigration, Dem Party leaders have abandoned low income workers, and corrupt us morally by pushing the gay agenda, which God has said is an abomination to Him.
Unity ticket in 2024: What's the platform? Who are the candidates? What's good about unity when both are corrupt? They must commit to and stand by a platform worthy of support for this idea to end in a good place.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. This is the big issue for middle class citizens. Ignore it at your peril or use it to succeed. IT jobs go overseas and service jobs go to any illegals who want them. Not much left for middle America. And neither party is listening.
Illegal immigration (as well as the proposed massive legal immigration and "guest" worker programs) is one of the most important issues facing the U.S. Why isn't that on the "critical issues" list?