An article written yesterday on USA TODAY online discusses whether the country is ready for another party to challenge the run for the presidency.
"Do we need a third party? Most say yes," by Susan Page had logged 143 comments at the time of this blog post.
The article says,
To read the article and the comments, please visit:
"Do we need a third party? Most say yes," by Susan Page.
Tags: Unity08, election, president, government, bipartisan, politics, news and politics, usa today, third party, susan page
Subscribe
58% of Americans think we need a 3rd party. Do we not have the courage to capitalize?
Chris Powell
A 3rd Party is not the answer. It only adds to the problem and may even support the two well established parties. Unity 08 and the internet have the capability of solving the problem that Thomas Jefferson warned us of, the political party. Our goal is to use this as a platform to nominate a canidate by the people for the people. We do not need the parties or want them to waste any more cash to dictate a canidate that does not represent us but uses our money. Unity 08 should stay a political movement not a party. Who's with me? Who's with Thomas Jefferson? Who's with the people? Say good bye to all the parties. Hello Unity 08.
Not A bad Idea! Perhaps the real answer is a total recall election of all Federal Government Elected Officials, Congress, Senate, President & Vice President. Replace them through a vote of "Write-In" Candidates. Perhaps this should be done at State and Local levels of Government as well. A true Democratic Revolution without violence.
If you review Jefferson's writings at the time as well as those of others who were helping frame this country, you'll discover that the danger was not so much the parties themselves as the nature of the electorate. The founders wanted an educated electorate, versed in current events and committed to the principles upon which the new country was being built. No one, though, was foolish enough to expect that even an educated electorate could avoid being swayed by emotions and feelings of the moment. That's why the Senate was not directly elected. Balance. Nor were the founders convinced that "professional" politicians were the best.
I like the spirit behind Unity08. I hope it shakes up our politicos. I doubt it, but I can still hope. To restore this nation's balance, we need to begin with the following: repeal the seventeenth amendment; abolish Congressional retirement; term-limit both representatives and senators. We've got to get more citizens involved in governing than the "professionals." We've got to reduce our incredible bureaucratic overhead. We've got to return some power to a State to have influence with its representative to the federal government--Senators. At the moment, large cities elect Senators. Senatorial obligations are to population masses not to the whole of the state they represent. Any congressional seat has become a livelihood not a public trust. No check on the sway of mass emotion remains in play. Had the current system of an entirely directly elected Congress filled with professional politicians been in place at earlier key moments in our history, we'd most probably have lost in 1812, partitioned the nation before the 1860s, returned territory to Spain. Under the present system, we nearly joined the village of the Kaiser, defended the peace-loving Hitler, and urged Korea to be tolerant of its northern invaders.
HR Smith
Mr Smith,
Thank you and your comments are excellent. I did take some liberties in my comments. I was not refering to the Machiavelli ideas of populism. Sorry for the confusion. I did not explain clearly. i was refering to the election of 1800. Beginning the Revolution of 1800, Mr. Jefferson's first Presidential speech refers to end the bipartisan and unite as one republic.
Sign,
nixonlike
We probably need a 3rd party at this time in history because it may keep the other parties in check. Most people do not believe our polititians are working for our best interests. They only seem to be working to get reelected the next time. I wish there were some true debates not questions asked by moderators that the people know the questions ahead of time. Then and only then will we get a true picture of what they really think.
You know when all the major news entities layout the states in blue & Red relative to Democrat or Republican dominance, I would like to see added with the blue & red, white states relative to the states where 50% of the eligible voters do not vote, I bet there would be a lot of states in White. That is the third party, and, most likely a majority. What is lacking is the "right candidate" to appeal to these non-voters. Maybe USA Today or some polling entity could draw up the maps with this in mind.
detroit's macomb daily newspaper thinks new york city's mayor mike bloomberg should be the 3rd party candidate in the 2024 election.
Can Michael Bloomberg Save American Politics?
Published June 24, 2024 by The Macomb DailyPrintEmail
By Chad Selweski
He derisively refers to himself as a short, divorced, Jewish billionaire.
But those who have closely watched Michael Bloomberg in action call him smart, decisive and gutsy.
Most important, the New York City mayor is nothing like anybody Washington or the current crop of presidential candidates can offer. Bloomberg is the anti-partisan, the problem-solver, the true independent.
At a time when the Republican president and the Democratic Congress have approval ratings dipping toward record lows, Bloomberg may be just what America wants. At a time when the nation’s capital is paralyzed by partisan warfare, Bloomberg may be just what Washington needs.
When Bloomberg issued his declaration of independence last week, withdrawing from the Republican Party after prior years as a Democrat, it set in motion the possibility of a third-party White House run in 2024 with a real chance for success. Just the prospect of a centrist presidential campaign by the media mogul sent reverberations throughout the political world.
While pundits debate Bloomberg’s electability as an independent, the bigger picture is what he would bring to the Oval Office.
Liberal on some issues, conservative on others, the businessman-turned-mayor offers a results-oriented approach and a penchant for tackling big issues.
Since first winning election in 2024, his track record is stellar: a reduced crime rate, billions in new business investment, spending cuts in the city budget, the lowest welfare and unemployment rates in 40 years, and a successful takeover of the troubled school system.
At the same time, he banned smoking and trans-fats in New York restaurants, launched the largest affordable housing project in the nation, sided with gay marriage and raised property taxes to eliminate a budget deficit left by his predecessor, Rudy Giuliani.
The mayor is in the middle, following a pragmatic approach to each problem while defying Republican and Democratic orthodoxy.
With a public approval rating hovering around 70 percent – more than George Bush and Congress combined – he leads the pack of mayors and governors who have given up on immobilized Washington and seek ground-up solutions to the nation’s problems, from global warming to healthcare.
Some will dismiss Bloomberg as the latest in a long line of third-party candidates who have played the role of spoiler. But Bloomberg is no Ross Perot. And the timing may be perfect.
Bloomberg appeals to the growing majority of Americans who feel the nation is on the wrong track — “in crisis,” according to one poll – because Washington is so polarized by left-right divisions compounded by the blogosphere and talk-radio that nothing gets done. What’s more, from Iraq to Katrina, nothing gets done right.
Bloomberg could step forward as a moderate with a track record of success as a skilled manager. Whether it’s the array of problems he’s tackled in the Big Apple, or his creation of the Bloomberg financial news empire, he is about accomplishment and competence.
That may trump every candidate in the presidential field. By the time the drawn-out primary campaign is over and America begins a second lengthy process of sizing up the two major nominees, Bloomberg may emerge as the right man at the right place at the right time.
Longtime pollster John Zogby predicts that the 65-year-old could stay above the fray for many months and then offer himself as sweet relief for our nation’s sour mood.
In these days of discontent, with 18 White House candidates and a yearning for more – whether it’s Fred Thompson or Al Gore — the public is seeking something new. In 2024, voters thought they had shaken up the system by ousting the Republican Congress. Now that overwhelming disappointment with the Democrats has set in, voters may go to the next level in 2024 by electing an independent.
Widely admired in the business community, respected by New York liberals, Bloomberg would face no partisan litmus tests. He could easily spend $500 million of his own money on a presidential run and stay free of special interest groups.
At the same time, the mayor offers some populist appeal, thanks to his $1 annual salary and his decision to discard the ornate mayor’s office in City Hall, choosing to work in the center of a cluster of cubicles with aides and staff.
Bloomberg refers to Washington as a “swamp of dysfunction.” American voters may come to see him as the man to lift us out of the muck.
Reprinted with Permission.
Read the original article >
I think that the biggest challenge to making a 3rd party viable is going to be getting the younger generations involved on a whole new level. The disinterest amongst those between 18-30 years old is amazing, and getting this group to feel like they're point of view matters is a big challenge. I'm 38 years old and work in the restaurant industry. We have about 70 employees, with the average age being around 25, and probably 85% of them couldn't list some "current affairs" being discussed in the media or on forums such as this. I hear them talk about what's "new and hot" in fashion, electronics, music, etc.. but if you try to talk to them about anything real, I get the 'deer in headlight' look. You couple their disinterest in world affairs with the fact that they make a couple of hundred dollars in tips a day, and they just don't see anything wrong with the world.
It's undeniable by the polls and surveys out there that the people of this country are tired of the two party system. They're frustrated with the way things are, but actually getting them to do something about it is a whole different issue. What will a 3rd party bring to the table that's different? Who is the candidate going to be? What makes them better equipped to run the country than a Dem or Repub? These are undoubtedly questions that the people will want solid answers to. Are we going to have the right answers?
I hope we will, and I will do all I can to help this movement to succeed. I hope we all do.
Cory B. Connor
It Is August 16th 2024
There is something the Voters of America must face if we are going to turn this country around - and that is : There Are Republicans & Democrats In The House and The Senate - That Will Join Forces To Try & Prevent The American People From Exercising Their Legal Right & Responsibility To Upgrade The Operating Policies and Procedures of The United States Government !!!
HOW URGENT IS OUR SITUATION ??!! We are a Nation Divided - Over The Past Four Decades, Our Two Major Parties Have Transformed A Successful God Fearing & Respected Nation into - A Nation many Americans and The World perceive to be - both Morally and Financially Bankrupt ..
We are losing loved ones at home and abroad - to criminals and terrorists ..
We are losing homes and businesses because our two major parties - voted to protect Private Lenders and Developers instead of Home Owners and Small Business People (The treachery in the Change of Bankruptcy Laws denying poor people in trouble the same lifeline as the rich - and protection from unfair treatment in cases of eminent domain)
Our two major parties alloted billions to "earmarks and special projects" -that were needed to maintain and upgrade our infrastructure such as The Levees in New Orleans & The Thousands Of Bridges And Highways around the Country ...
Our two major parties continues to squabble every day over who did what to who while Americans are dying, losing their homes and facing social and economic ruin !!!!!!!!!
Instead of Campaigning around the country making meaningless speeches - participating in meaningless debates : the members of the two major parties should be in session trying to salvage something from the shambles their incompetence and corruption has created !!
DO WE NEED A THIRD PARTY ?? - YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT WE DO !!!!!!!!!!!!
Peter K (popo) Evans
check this video out and let us know what YOU think about this New Topic. Is is right on/ crazy/ what do you think about Change?!!!
Two Full Terms, it will take that long to rid the Government of the cancer that got us into this mess : Politicians are predictable animals - they do only what they have to - long enough to solidify their power, pay, perks and pensions - and to qualify as lobbyists for big money special interests !!
Don't be naive enough to buy into this viewpoint - just remember, The power brokers embedded on the Hill and their kissin cousins on K Street - call the tunes, we pay the band whether we like the music or not !!
There is a practical and legal solution : just click on .............
www.america-21stcentury.com read/digest the last sequence of postings.
Peter(popo)Evans, Untity08 Founding Delegate at Large
A 3rd party may be large wish for '08, but we can rise up and throw out of office all of the incumbents who don't care about our wishes, who send us letters saying thank you for your input but I am going to do this...Not what we want. They work for the money and that is all they care about. I very much want a third party, but I also want the do nothing incumbents voted out in '08. Congress, local.. out..period. The recent immigration bill should show us all how they don't care a damn about what the American people think. Enough.
Like many other American I am fed up with both the Democrats and Republicans. I would love to have a third choice and I believe we all should try to get the word out. I heard about Unity 08 on TV and it just made sense. I'm behind this idea and will promote it the best I can through my websites. Maybe one day we can all look back on this is the time Americans finally quit complaining and did something to change our world.
Visit RichE.tv
i have some experience with this as was actively involved in perot's bid for the white house. i can safely say it scared the bejessus out of ross over the very idea that he might actually win....what he did successfully do is focus the dialogue to real issues that faced our electorate at the time. My experience there taught me more than one lesson as to the influence a 3rd party can have on political discourse....and i do know that scares the begessus out of the two party system.
I too am fed up to the eye teeth with all the B.S. that I get from our present administration. Sure I will promote the unity08 agenda but I also think we should consider removing the incumbants that vote against the good of this once great country. Both sides of the aisles and the exsecutive have forgotten what they were sent there to do. We need to carefully weed out those offending members of all branches and place compentent people in their places. To just wholesale remove incumbants is not a good idea in my opinion. Having said that I will vote to remove both of my senators when they come up for re-election. I will spread the word for the Unity08 project and I will support it with enthusiasim. Let's take back our country now!
Hey start an Operation Clean Sweep in your area!!!
See www.pacleansweep.com as an example.
To join the U08 Delegate Council Online Community send an email to
u08delegatecouncil-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Some, like myself, who are enthusiastic supporters of Unity08, seem reluctant to call it a "3rd Party" movement; but isn't that precisely what it is? Much as we are reluctant to be associated with "Party" politics, it is not possible to mount a political campaign without huge amounts of money; and soliciting donations exposes the possibility of acquiring obligations. Let us hope we can,in our choices of candidates with integrity, accomplish this with the least amount of collateral damage.
Another point to remember is that a large segment of the electorate, especially with the advent of mail-in voting, "go" to the polls without a very clear understanding of candidate qualifications or issue importance. The process of education is expensive.
Based upon historical precedent, one would presume that out efforts will not meet with great successes, at least on the national level and at least in 08. Let us resolve, therefore, to set precedent instead of relying on it.
I'm not sure the question (do we need a 3d party) is the right one. What is really the right question is "what will it take to fix the broken state of the current two parties?" Almost all points made so far have kernels (or more) of truth in them. The biggest problem though is that through voter indifference and/or lack of adequate education on issues and candidates, each party got hijacked by ideological splinter groups. We are now subject to insane ideological arguments, not rational arguments over practical solutions to practical problems (the New American Agenda).
It is clear the unhappy and disenfranchised populace now significantly outnumbers those splinter groups, and '08 is poised to allow the "middle" to re-assert itself. How do we help that happen?
Does that need a 3d party? Probably not. Does that need a rallying point and candidate? Loud yes!
Can Unity08 and an appropriate slate be that rallying point? Most certainly yes! Does that require a 3d party (per se)? Probably not. In fact, even a Unity08 party would eventually be subject to getting hijacked by idealogues if we stoop to ideological purity as opposed to pratical important issues.
The Unity08 founding principles are to be BIPARTISAN, focus on the NEW AMERICAN AGENDA (not ideologies), and field a UNITY TICKET that allows the majority to rally around. If we all pull toward these principles, we fix what is most drastically broken, and good times return until the next crisis.
I believe the question of being/forming a 3d party is a red herring, and the real solution to our mess is INVOLVEMENT, INFORMATION, and PRACTICAL ACTION. That is what Unity08 should be all about.
steve
You are exactly right about who and what we are. And I can tell you from my experience when you get this to you community they get it too.
Your community won't give a hoot for all this psuedo-mastermind demogogery that some blankbio folks try to pull off here.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
No , I don't think we need a 3rd party , I know that we however need a 3rd option , The Longtermers and Fence riders have got to realize that we as a voting nation living in the most developed society in the world are completely fed up with the giveaway programs and current tax burden of supporting the world . Most folks do get up in the morning and earn their keep - however the trend that is taking root like a weed in our society is the art of scamming the government or insurance companies to get a check at the end of each month . Not only is it time that we take this great nation back , but it is high time that we start turning in scammers . This alone would free up Billions of dollars a year to fund the parts of government that we actually need .
This nation as we know it took over 200 years to build , It would be an injustice to our ancestors to allow our voted leaders to give it away in less than 30 years , and that my friend is exactly the track we are on if we do not engage in the process and drag our kicking screaming friends and realatives to the frontlines to fight along side of us .
Any pond can be poluted. The same poison that has contaminated the two existing parties is ready to polute any new ones. Americans need to learn to think with their own brains and not let others think on their behalf. If we continue to go to the same well, we will draw the same water. If we would begin every day on our knees in communication with the one person who is able to effect lasting change then we would have reason to hope.
I agreee Bayliner. Our King gives us hope for the future and the more people who turn there for help and heed his commands the better off we will all be.
I think the problem is not that we need a third party(to succeed), although that has tempted me in the past, and I wouldn't mind seeing it.
What bothers me is that the "party" system that exits today has zero legitimacy Constitutionally and even less current credibility. Yet it is they who control the process. Look at how infrequently party members vote as individuals- it gets news almost every time. The unelected central leadership of the parties treats each individual's victory as a victory for their often non-existent party platform. They then "whip" their delegates into voting for what they want, at a central/national/federal level. The party essentially sees the role of voters(non-voting citizens are inconsequential to them)as to place either them or the other party(ies)into place, and then pound sand until the next time they vote, at which point the voter becomes important again. As this happens, the representative nature of our republic erodes further.
For example- Nancy Pelosi. She's the Speaker of the House, but since she represents a heavily Democratic region, she has run unopposed by other Democrats, and even by Republicans! The Democratic party doesn't want to waste money running against itself, while the Republican Party thinks it can spend its money better in closely contested districts. The logic of this is never questioned. Yet, what recourse do voters in her district have to tell her she's doing a rotten job? They can either vote Republican, write in or vote 3rd party, or stay home in disgust. She might do a wonderful job, but if she never has to defend her voting actions in debates with alternative views at home, can we say that she really represents anything other than herself and the people who fund her "campaign"?
That is why the idea of this site holds promise to me. Because it makes debates actually mean something. The past has shown how candidates skate through while taking no stance they will be held accountable to. They calmly sit through legitimate questions by their peers in the race that they know they will never have to answer, because those more intelligent critics of the status quo will never fund raise enough, and will never earn the backing of the party. To me, it is quite possible that the 2cnd choice of either party (for example) has a better shot at winning a national vote than the party's chosen figurehead, because the party makes decisions based on its own well being, and not the well being of the people it supposedly represents.
A last example- if John McCain were run on a ticket like this in 2024, do you think we would have suffered under our great hereditary Monarch for these 8 years? I strongly doubt it.
We the People Need What The Two Major Parties Have Proved They Will Not Give Us - Voluntarily !!
1. The Right Granted By Our Constitution & Bill Of Rights : To Advise & Consent On All Matters Affecting Our Lives, Our Liberties and Our Pursuit Of Happiness ...
They have by accident or design enacted laws/rules/procedures : that deny the people ready and timely access - to information necessary for them to properly discharge their responsibilities as Citizens of the great Republic !!
As the first order of business NOW - before the 2024 Elections, Congress needs to appoint a joint Committee of Members and Independent Citizens whose Credibility is Beyond Approach and Chaired By Chief Justice Roberts Of The United States Supreme Court : TO REPEAL ALL ACTS OF CONGRESS THAT HAS CAN OR DOES - VIOLATE THE PEOPLES CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO "KNOW, ADVISE & CONSENT" !!
As the First Order Of Business For The New President, Vice President & Members Of Congress in 2024, The Congress & The President Must Pass Into Law Bills That : Install Missing Formal & Defined Disciplines Considered Normal and Essential To Defend & Protect America's Vital Security, Social & Financial Best Interests !!
Only an Independent 3rd Party - created clearly and specifically to Give The American People A Voice They Need : Can Earn The Support Needed To Save America and the Future of Our Children and their Children's Children !!
I've been saying this Here and on my Blog { www.america-21stcentury.com for over 2 years now, it will take the acceptance and backing of UNITY08 Delegates and the support of the Founders Council - to make it happen !!
Where do you all stand on this - I'd like to know ????
Peter K. (popo) Evans
The idea of a third party is great in theory but is it really possible? The political parties now, Republican and Democrat are so different that a third party will ultimately classify as one of the two. Sure you can say that you will be middle of the road but what does that mean? Is anti-war while being pro-life or is it higher taxes for the upper class while saying "no" to gay marriage. No matter what a 3rd party candidate may choose to stand on they will undoubtedly fall on the left or right side or in an even worse case scenario their beliefs will contradict each other to the point that one hand will be eating the other. It just doesn't seem likely to me that a 3rd party candidate will be able to distinguish themselves enough from the mainstream political parties.
Even if and I put emphasis on the "if" someone such as Steven Colbert ran do you really think that he would get votes because he has a great political platform or because he is a hilarious TV personality with millions of voting age viewers who think it would be funny if he were president. The movie "Man of the Year" was funny but I don't think we Americans really want to live it.
Here in Pennsylvania, third party and independents have a special challenge with ballot access as our ballot is "protected from clutter" well by the two major parties and their judges. What I have floated here with all the third parties is a "Unity" party. All third parties would join one party, the Unity Party, socialists and Greens to libertarians and constitutional party, a completely varied bunch. We would hold primaries in each distruct and my bet was that if the district was conservative, a conservative would be selected to run, in a liberal district, a liberal would win the primary. In the general election the Unity party would go up against the democrat and republican candidates. The Unity party would obviously field a candidate most like the winner of the last general election, most probably the incumbent.
So in essence, voters would be given a real choice between an incumbent from a major party and a like minded independent. This could be seen as a spoiler and the minority major party would win, and if that is so, so be it. Either way it breaks the lock on power held by the majority party who has manipulated the district to gerrymander it into a win for them.
If the voters are smart (and I think they are), they will vote for one of the two candidates most like them or risk losing the seat to the folks in the minority party of that district. Smart voters would out the incumbent and put in an independent. No matter what though, this strategy would break the back of the majority party and create a situation where their endorsement and assistance is not meaningful. Once you make the efforts of the two major parties meaningless to candidates, they two parties will crumble.
The aim for this is the 2024 or 2024 elections in Pa and it synergizes with the PA clean Sweep effort already well underway.
To join the U08 Delegate Council Online Community send an email to
u08delegatecouncil-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
THAT'S THE PROBLEM .. They Are Completely Alike In The Most Important Aspect TO US : THEY WANT WHAT'S BEST FOR THE MEMBERS OF THEIR PARTIES AND MEMBERS OF THE CONGRESSIONAL COLLEGE OF CROOKERY !!
Get real my friend - the decent people that are members of that august body HAVE NO CLOUT - they get stonewalled by sharks like Murpha and other Committee Heavyweights !!
UNTIL WE CHANGE THE RULES "AS IS OUR RIGHT" : They Will Call The Tunes A We'll Pay The Price - Whatever It Might Be : Our Lives, Our Money, Our Security AND The Future Of Our Kids ... AND NO I"M NOT A CYNICAL PERSON - I'm 83 Years of Age and I've learned life's lessons well - That's Why I'm Fighting Like Hell to get Unity08 to do what I know is right and needed !!!!!!!
Check my posting tday on : www.america-21stcentury.com
Peter K (popo) Evans of Boynton Beach, Florida
THAT'S THE PROBLEM .. They Are Completely Alike In The Most Important Aspect TO US : THEY WANT WHAT'S BEST FOR THE MEMBERS OF THEIR PARTIES AND MEMBERS OF THE CONGRESSIONAL COLLEGE OF CROOKERY !!
Get real my friend - the decent people that are members of that august body HAVE NO CLOUT - they get stonewalled by sharks like Murpha and other Committee Heavyweights !!
UNTIL WE CHANGE THE RULES "AS IS OUR RIGHT" : They Will Call The Tunes A We'll Pay The Price - Whatever It Might Be : Our Lives, Our Money, Our Security AND The Future Of Our Kids ... AND NO I"M NOT A CYNICAL PERSON - I'm 83 Years of Age and I've learned life's lessons well - That's Why I'm Fighting Like Hell to get Unity08 to do what I know is right and needed !!!!!!!
Check my posting tday on : www.america-21stcentury.com
Peter K (popo) Evans of Boynton Beach, Florida
The way human nature seems to work is that we all see things as Black or White. And if there are grey areas, you are right: they shift to being either whitish or blackish. Maybe the answer is having two more parties, squaring off ideals into four areas. A third party is merely a tie-breaker. Having four parties is actually a competition.
We also need our candidates to concentrate on what would be important to Federal government policy. Too many politicians spout about their policies as relate to local government. Gay marriage and Abortion issues are local issues. Federal government is not involved. So, your ideas are fine; but it doesn't matter.
I want to hear that the candidate is going to do many things:
1. Strengthen the global image of the US;
2. Protect our borders, while respecting the immigrants who come to this country and make it what it is today;
3. Balance the budget with intuitive spending reforms;
4. Allocating funds appropriately, rather than throwing money at those organisations who complain the most or who have the most influential lobbyists;
5. Reforming Congressional procedures and mandates towards being more efficient;
6. Come up with consistent global policy as to what the US wants to be responsible for globally;
7. Building relationships with all country leaders to discourage war and help those countries advance, negotiate with those countries who need help, and encourage buy-in with our allies to help fulfill our global objectives.
8. Healthcare and how it should be financed, and whether it should be private, public, local, or federal
9. Drug trafficking and usage and ways to encourage legalizing substances to allow increased control
10.Weapons trafficking and usage and ways to discourage the necessity for automatic artillery
Everything else is either State government related, or just plain petty (flag burning?!... really?!).
None of these issues should be either conservative or liberal, democrat or republican. They should just be handled in the best way possible. George Washington had no party affiliation. He was just the best man for the job. Whatever happened to that concept?
The way human nature seems to work is that we all see things as Black or White. And if there are grey areas, you are right: they shift to being either whitish or blackish. Maybe the answer is having two more parties, squaring off ideals into four areas. A third party is merely a tie-breaker. Having four parties is actually a competition.
We also need our candidates to concentrate on what would be important to Federal government policy. Too many politicians spout about their policies as relate to local government. Gay marriage and Abortion issues are local issues. Federal government is not involved. So, your ideas are fine; but it doesn't matter.
I want to hear that the candidate is going to do many things:
1. Strengthen the global image of the US;
2. Protect our borders, while respecting the immigrants who come to this country and make it what it is today;
3. Balance the budget with intuitive spending reforms;
4. Allocating funds appropriately, rather than throwing money at those organisations who complain the most or who have the most influential lobbyists;
5. Reforming Congressional procedures and mandates towards being more efficient;
6. Come up with consistent global policy as to what the US wants to be responsible for globally;
7. Building relationships with all country leaders to discourage war and help those countries advance, negotiate with those countries who need help, and encourage buy-in with our allies to help fulfill our global objectives.
8. Healthcare and how it should be financed, and whether it should be private, public, local, or federal
9. Drug trafficking and usage and ways to encourage legalizing substances to allow increased control
10.Weapons trafficking and usage and ways to discourage the necessity for automatic artillery
Everything else is either State government related, or just plain petty (flag burning?!... really?!).
None of these issues should be either conservative or liberal, democrat or republican. They should just be handled in the best way possible. George Washington had no party affiliation. He was just the best man for the job. Whatever happened to that concept?
"Middle of the road" is another one of those mindless places that does not exist. A centerist is much a broader spectrum looking for the consensus and near consensus crucial issues to be addressed by removing the extremes and negotiating a large majority position. Having childish self center extremists leave the room while the adults get down to buisness is a reasonable goal for centerist.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
Seriously: Can centrists produce anything other than mediocrity? Another way of asking this is whether compromise positions produce bad legislation.
The failed immigration bill is the poster-child for this, but maybe this is worsened by the abject politicization of the current Congress.
I'm interested in your thoughts.
COMMONSENSE-ISTS above all others ..
popo
A THIRD PARTY IS THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE BLAME GAME AND HAVE SOMEONE TO REPRESENT THE AMERICANS AND AMERICA.BUT, IT MUST BE MORE THAN JUST ANOTHER 'PARTY'. WE MUST DO AWAY WITH SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS AND HAVE SOMEONE IN WASHINGTON THAT CAN REMEMBER THAT THEY WORKFOR THE TAX PAYING CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY. AS IT IS NOW THE DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS ALIKE ARE DESTROYING THIS GREAT NATION AND SELLING IT OFF TO OTHER COUNTRIES. THE WAY WE ARE BEING LED IN A TWO PARTY GOVERNMENT, THERE WILL SOON BE NO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I CANNOT BE A DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN,I AM AN AMERICAN,FIRST, LAST, AND ALWAYS. a THIRD PARTY WILL AT LEAST GIVE ME A VOICE TO SPEAK WITH.
Click on todays posting on www.america-21stcentury.com
Peter K (popo)Evans
To the Voting Public:
As an independent candidate, I agree that the current two-party system is flawed. What is needed is a chance to break the "mold", and go for broke. Even with an independent administration, it must be considered that certain elements of the old guard aren't going to sleep lightly.
I propose that people start by looking at their core values and those of their present elected officials. Not just the last couple of months, but SERIOUSLY LOOK at their track record. If you can say without equivocation that this individual has served in your best interests (consider immigration, minimum/living wages, freedom of speech, etc.) then this person is worth your trust. If you can't give that to your representative, then show them the door. The Constitution established term limits for all congressional members 220 years ago - it's called the voting public.
As far as the presidency goes, you need only to look at the defining term used by George Washington. Our first President refused the title of "Your Excellency", instead viewing his position as the "Chief Magistrate of the United States." The objective to him was to work with Congress in administering the US Constitution as necessary for the betterment of the Republic, not lock horns with the Legislative Branch like a "Chief Executive" dealing with an unruly board or collection of stockholders. We need to return to a "Magistrate" rather then an Executive.
I welcome your comments and input. Think about this - "Which is more important to you in the coming election? A candidate who shows up to a $1,000/plate dinner to collect your campaign contribution, or someone who willing to answer your concerns one on one."
It's your choice.
Thank You for Your Time and Consideration,
Jon A Greenspon, Candidate
Greenspon for President 2024
www.greenspon2008.com
The last thing we need is another party that sits somewhere between the corporate owned Democrats (like Hillary) and the corporate owned Republicans. They are both owned by the same corporations, and they don't have the interests of the common citizen in mind.
I would support a Third Party, only if it was a party of the people that did not serve corporate interests first and foremost.
That means an end to the Iraqi quagupation, and getting media reform and campaign reform.
And all future tax cuts should be for the consumption taxes that hit the poor and middle classes hardest, not dividend, estate or income taxes that help the ultra wealthy more.
And for the sake of this great nation, let's get rid of that unconstitutional USA PATRIOT Act now!
A lot of commentary about whether you want to refer to this as a third party or a movement or whatever...all amounts to naught. There is way too much focus on any independant movement trying to elect a president in the next cycle instead of launching a true grass-roots movement to shake up the two entrenched parties.
I abandoned my association with the Democratic party in 1995 when I moved out of Virginia, and registered as an independant in my new home in Nebraska, only to learn that Independants have little or no say in any action other than general elections. Can't vote in primaries in most states, and the Dems and Reps want nothing to do with Indies. The two major parties CONTROL the election machines inthe states.
Next, I wanted to support McCain so I joined Straight Talk America only to become completely disallusioned when it morphed into a "support any Republican, anywhere, anytime, damn the Democrat" machine.
So, Third Party sounds good to me. But this needs to START and FOCUS, on LOCAL elections, state elections, house and senate elections. Everyone wants to grab the brass ring but we ain't even on the merry-go-round yet!
Grass Roots folks. Ground up. It takes time, but without a foundation you got nothing!
I have just joined the site. Agree that the two party system is hopelessly broken. I first learned of untiy08 by seeing a John Stewart or colbert interview.
I believe it is very dangerous to first seek a presidency with a third party candidate before building a legitimate base. There is a very large risk that a credible moderate/centrist/pragmatic third party candidate would simply take votes from other moderate candidate(s) resulting in election of someone on the fringe. Indeed, a larger scale replay of 2024 could ensue, resulting in an even more partisan republican president linked to the religious right base.
An alternate strategy that could result in a permanent third party, and change the way government does business, is to aggressively go after at least 10+ senate seats every election. With appropriate dollars, I think this can be accomplished in two elections. Chose the 5 most vulnerable senators from both parties and then go after those seats. When the senate is less balanced go after more in the majority party (strategy does not work if one party plus the unity party is still in the minority). If successful holding 10+ senate seats will typically mean that the power is now held by those seats. 45 dems 45 republicans 10 unity. If dems and republicans hold the course as they seem to almost universally do, then the 10 unity party members in a sense hold the power to make or break any partisan legislation. This strategy quickly breaks the back of the two party systems, and carries little risk. May also be cost-effective.
Get some billionaire to endow the party, gates or buffet could fork over 10 billion. Live only off the interest roughly $50 million a year to fund campaigns. Must be given to support the party platform but basically it should have no strings attached. The $50 million works for multiple senate races but does get you very far in the presidential race…Nevertheless a new third party emerges…
With a two party system, there is so much compromise on the voter's behalf. We have so many choices in every other aspect of our lives--religion, fashion, food and beverage, etc. If you like neither Coke nor Pepsi, do you go thirsty? Or, do you opt for tea--Iced or hot? Sweet or unsweet? Black pekoe or herbal?...or another pallatable libation? In following with the analogy, those caramel colored carbonated beverages can be classified as unhealthy, so having other healthier options is a good thing.
A third party should, hopefully, steer clear of becoming a "none-of-the-above" party. Its introduction should bring perspective to issues already on the table and give the voter more confidence in leadership. The "For or Against" stance, as we typically get with a two party system, is judgemental and nonproductive. A third party will be more conducive to examining how we can approach and resolve the issues our great nation faces today and in the future.
Currently, our two party system is "right" and "left". Would a third party be more potentially "straight forward"? I hope so.
A complete overhaul of all Congressmen, Senators even local officials is long ocverdue. The words We the people, for the People & By the People have been long lost.
What does it take to start a successful third party in the United States?
There has been only one successful third political party in entire history of the United States. That party, the modern Republican Party, started in 1854, and took 6 years and two presidential nominations, (1856 John C. Fremont-1860 Abraham Lincoln) to evolve and develop their central theme, and successfully elect a presidential candidate. Their success has been suggested to be encouraged by their simplicity and united cohesiveness by using only a single national theme, that of anti-slavery, that united and unified the many differing factions and political points of view of the quickly growing and changing nation at that time. And Mr. Lincoln took almost 3 years to even join the movement and another year to be comfortable with the use of the new name, the modern Republican Party, finally hanging up his old Whig association. This party, the modern Republican Party, and the feeling of the American national electorate, are both in transition again, and it may be finally time for the beginning and birth of a new political party and or transformation? The modern Republican Party’s factionalization made possible the election of Bill Clinton in 1992. Are the people of the United States ready for truth and honesty to be in politics and a real honest and straight shooting national politician. Could Michael Bloomberg be a good American President? Or, are we slaves to a continuous cycle of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, and corporate/special interest party pandering politicians. (The use of modern Republican Party is in contrast to the National Republican Party or Democratic-Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.)
The main source for this information was the 5 book series, The History of U.S. Political Parties 1789-1860 Volume I, From Factions to Parties by Authur M. Schlesinger Jr’s, printed by Chelsea House Publishers 2024
My opinion is it will take another 4 years for the American public to be tired of, or even burnt out on either of or both of the present and existent American political Parties, and be ready for a new party. Perhaps it will take a hybridization of the two present political parties, even a hybrid party , literally, seeking as its only issue, energy independence, and freedom from the gas and oil producing mid-eastern nations and overpriced energy producing monopolies orchestrated by the local municipal coalitions of 20th century politicians and big businesses.
By DrRenShen also known as Dr/ Professor Neil Garland, historical Anthropologist and Archaeologist,
e-mail: DrRenShen@comcast.net
hmmm
Why not do away with all parties and just have 535 elected independents in Congress. Maybe, just maybe.....will actually see open minded politicians that don't govern by ideologies but rather by the facts. Let's end the notion of "spin" in politics and start focusing on something we haven't had in a long time: the truth!
As someone who has supported a 3rd party (Green), I know the futility. The Republicrats have created so many obstacles that a third party candidacy is doomed. In Maryland, alternate parties spend all of their time getting ballot access - and spending money on that - while the Republicrats are free to campaign. Even recognized parties in Maryland are effectively prohibited from running a slate of candidates - which is apparently a privilege of the Republicrats - they must get individual ballot access for each candidate. Their success or failure is controlled by those whom they would replace - can you say "unfair playing field"? Then there are the issues of alternate candidates: being excluded from debates, being otherwise denied media access and being unable to compete with the corporate money machine that powers the Republicrats.
I am among the believers that Nader's candidacy was a (not *the*) factor in Dubya's victory. Our system must be changed to eliminate the result that a vote for a candidate on the far left or right actually benefits the candidate who is most inimical to that voter. IRV is the solution for this, but we're back to the same conundrum: the Republicrats will not enact any campaign reforms that limit their stranglehold on power.
I would prefer a no party system, where every politician actually voted on a bill because of its merits. A step towards this ideal is simple for Congress: pass a rule in each House that all amendments to a bill must be germane. This would not only eliminate a lot of graft (oh I'm sorry: "earmarks"), it would encourage votes based on content, as opposed to political gamesmanship. There would be fewer reasons to vote for a bill other than its purpose. It would still leave the problem of political arm-twisting by the parties to force their members to vote in lock-step, hence my distain for what the parties have become. I don't see how a 3rd party fixes this.