In “Party No. 3,” NY Times columnist David Brooks says that there are “two major parties on the ballot, but there are three major parties in America. There is the Democratic Party, the Republican Party and the McCain-Lieberman Party.” In the wake of Lieberman’s primary loss and America’s growing dissatisfaction with politics, Brooks considers an emerging third choice. Read the article here (subscription needed).
Brooks explains why he believes there is a growing number of Americans dissatisfied with the two major political parties:
“The McCain-Lieberman Party begins with a rejection of the Sunni-Shiite style of politics itself. It rejects those whose emotional attachment to their party is so all-consuming it becomes a form of tribalism, and who believe the only way to get American voters to respond is through aggression and stridency.”
And describes why partisan politicking during elections generates and sustains perpetual partisanship.
“The flamers in the established parties tell themselves that their enemies are so vicious they have to be vicious too. They rationalize their behavior by insisting that circumstances have forced them to shelve their integrity for the good of the country. They imagine that once they have achieved victory through pulverizing rhetoric they will return to the moderate and nuanced sensibilities they think they still possess.”
But what does Brooks’ McCain-Lieberman Party stand for?:
On foreign policy: “...agrees with Tony Blair (who could not win a Democratic primary in the U.S. today): The civilized world faces an arc of Islamic extremism that was not caused by American overreaction, and that will only get stronger if America withdraws.”
On fiscal policy: “...sees a Republican Party that will not raise taxes and a Democratic Party that will not cut benefits, and understands that to avoid bankruptcy the country must do both.”
On globalization: “... believes that free trade reduces poverty but that government must invest in human capital so people can compete. It believes in comprehensive immigration reform.”
Collectively, Brooks says, “the McCain-Lieberman Party counters with constant reminders that country comes before party, that in politics a little passion energizes but unmarshaled passion corrupts, and that more people want to vote for civility than for venom.”
And to the idea that a third-party would simply be engulfed by the two major parties, Brooks claims this:
“...amid the hurly-burly of the next few years -- the continuing jihad, Speaker Pelosi, a possible economic slowdown -- the old parties could become even more inflamed. Both could reject McCain-Liebermanism. At that point things really get interesting.”
What do you think about Brooks’ McCain-Lieberman Party? Come Election Day, will both major parties adopt stances that are more moderate? Or will this third party continue to grow?
I am not sure if the R and D's can move to the center unless there is obvious support for this position. This is why Unity08 is so important. Moderates in both parties have to know we are out their, supporting them. Otherwise the vocal extremes in both parties will get the attention, and the candidates.
K Johnson
The 2024 and 2024 prez elections proved (in the minds of the extremists) that the middle can be made irrelevant if the parties can rally "the base." It will need a major shakeup (Unity08?) to make them see otherwise. If it's Frist vs. Clinton, 50% of America won't vote, and whoever can get an extra 1-2% of their base will win.
A timing issue for the rules committee: The winnable Unity tickets will not coalesce until after the moderate candidates (Lieberman, McCain, Romney, Bayh, etc.) have been rejected by the D&R primaries in February. Only wacko fringe candidates will sign up in January. If McCain has to choose in 2024 whether to try a longshot attempt at the Republican party or a maybe-sorta-Unity ticket; he'll go after the GOP money machine first every time (and hopefully, hedge his bets with Unity). Exactly what Lieberman is doing.
Brooks is right with the tongue-in-cheek name, however. Success will be about personalities, not principles (i.e., "Moderate Party") The most successful third party ever, the Republican Party in 1854 (took the House after only 4 years, and the Presidency in 6), was not a grassroots effort, but was organized by powerful sitting senators and congressmen bolting from the established parties (Democrats & Whigs). A successful alternative to Left and Right As Usual will require the brave defection of some very influential people, which is why I like the approach of unity08.
bp, very interesting point about the early Republican party. I'd love to hear more-maybe there are lessons for us. You are surely right that our success requires big name defections. I understand the sentiment behind the desire for an outsider with a clean slate, but don't think it is practical.
I'm not sure we have to wait until February for Lieberman. If Lieberman isn't ready now, he will never be. Republicans are a trickier matter. To my astonishment, the polls show that among Republican primary voters, Giuliani is first, McCain second, and the two together have a majority. Certainly they aren't going to bolt unless they lose. The big question is: Could one actually get the nomination? And if they don't, will they have been badly enough treated by the faithful to bolt? Individual right-wing Republicans (notably Rush) are venomous towards them, but Republicans as a party seem slightly less inclined than Democrats to exile their dissidents to Siberia.
Two Centrists, one from the Democratic Party and one from the Republican Party, will make the strongest ticket. My choice would be Giuliani-Lieberman but I would gladly vote for McCain-Lieberman.
Robert Ennis
Pittsburgh, PA
Since you are so compromising than I suppose you would be fine with a Lieberman-McCAin or Lieberman-Guiliani ticket also?
If what you mean by Unity is a McCain Lieberman ticket then you are even more out of it than the R and Ds. I wouldn't vote for either of them alone, why would I vote for [b]both[/b] of them.
How disappointing!
R-Ennis;
Though they wouldn't be my first choice if they emerge as the winner I would support the ticket.
I suspect that one issue that Unity08 will have to deal with is that we are not really unified.
However your proposed ticket is within the vision of Management if not some of us hyper-charged politicos.
You just need to help attract more of the moderate center to Unity08.
vry,
RET
NorthernJudy, what is it that you want? And who would provide that?
I agree with everything Brooks says, as I usually do. Like Unity08 he stresses the importance of restoring civility to our political life. But as I understand it (I'm a newbie)Unity08 has deliberately adopted a Biggest Possible Tent view and avoided any specific policy positions. As Brooks makes clear, the McCain Lieberman wing (in which I include myself) does have a few specific positions. We're Scoop Jackson Democrats, or maybe Rockefeller Republicans. Roughly speaking we are appalled by the antiAmericanism of so much of the Democratic party. We feel that the US has an active and sometimes military role to play in the defense of free countries against various threats. On the other hand, we dislike the social extremism of the Republican party and its lack of interest in helping the less fortunate.
Reading the comments on the blog, it's clear that there are a lot of people here who, though also frustrated by both parties, holding views deeply incompatible with the McCain-Lieberman wing, especially on foreigh policy. I respect their views but I am not sure a political movement can be built on civility alone. I'm in favor of a big tent, but a tent still has some people in and some people outside. I think any successful third party movement is going to have to have at least one substantive principle on which we all agree
WHAT I BELIEVE IN
By Kirk Polizzi
Too many of our national leaders draw a dividing line between a liberal point of view towards policy, to a conservative point of view into policy. Both sides claim they are right, and that the other is wrong. Each side demonizes the other, and leaves us, the American people in the middle of their ridicules political games. At the end of the day, nothing is gained, nothing is achieved, except continued gridlock in Washington, and a long list of national problems that never get addressed properly, or ever get a national hearing.
The American people deserve better then what they are presently getting, and they yearn for common sense in trying to solve lingering problems, and for new problems here at home and abroad. Pointing fingers, accusing blame on one side or the other, is not leadership; it is political cowardice. The entire federal government, from top to bottom is directly responsible for the conditions in our country. From the halls of Congress, from both political parties, to the West Wing of the White House, to every cabinet member, to every deputy they appoint. Accountability is not a popular word in Washington; normally it is passed on to someone else, to some lower level non-visible person. Usually that person loses his or her job because decisions that were made at a higher level were dead wrong. They become the “fall guy”, and we have seen it for years in Washington. It has become common knowledge that when terrible decisions are made, lower heads will roll.
As unfair and wrong as that seems to be, it is the rule of survival in Washington. Power has become more important then good results or successful policies for the American people. A politician’s reelection, wondering where his or her next vote is coming from, is more important, even in a time of war, then where our next terrorist attack could come from. Our present leadership puts their political parties first, their country second. That is not good for America, it is wrong for America.
We Americans all believe in this country and what it can do, and what it can be, because we have seen the good work and the successes of the past. The polices that worked, the ideas that showed real positive results, we know we can have all that again. We can have it again if we all start really deep in our souls start “believing” again. Believing in the power of our ideas, that they can become national and international policies that will assure that every American here at home has a chance for the American dream, and that every true ally of the United States overseas knows where we stand and trusts us, and that every enemy shows respect for us.
As an American who loves this country, and who always has, from the days I listened to my grandparents, as a small boy, tell me stories of their trials and tribulations during some of the most critical times in our nation’s history. I listened intently in what they had to say, and their stories were true, and most were bad personal struggling stories of basic survival. But I remember every one of their stories had a happy ending. In the end they triumphed. They triumphed over economic depression and economic recessions. They triumphed over world war, regional wars, and rumors of war. At the end of each sad personal story was a happy ending. That happy ending was how the United States of America, in the end, put its greatest asset to work; we the people, and that changed our world for the good, here at home and overseas.
This is the type of country I want to see again. The nation, which banded together, and sacrificed, all races, all religious faiths, across political party lines, and took a handle on our nation’s problems here at home and abroad. It was all done by ideas first, then by using the power given to us all by our constitution, in holding national elections. By placing into office people who really cared about, and loved their country. Those people wanted a better America; they were not content with the status quo, of just getting by, and running in place. They saw real national problems, and they went after them, to solve them, with good ideas. Government alone cannot solve our problems, but government cannot ignore that difficulties exist, and that national decisions and policies do directly affect the American people. Many of those decisions can make the difference in whether or not an American keeps his or her $16 an hour job, or is thrown out of work, to be forced to accept any job, which would pay them $8 an hour. Yes, bad policies hurt good hardworking Americans. For what I believe in does count, it does matter, because by first believing, it can be the first step towards reality.
Kirk Polizzi
Chillicothe, IL
(NEXT TIME, A STEP BY STEP WHAT I BELIEVE IN, AND WHAT WE ALL SHOULD BELIEVE IN IF WE WANT TO WIN WITH UNITY 08)
The only thing that can defeat this movement is the same thing that makes us different... the enemy must infultrate this communications and get us in the same liberal/conservative argument they have each day... as it is the argument we avoid for a solution... this party will only find its platform through heavy polling of party members... for this is what makes us the party of the people UNITY UNITY UNITY -Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
The winds are beginning to blow toward deception... I see no polls, I see not that thing that must be for this to be real... for we are a rag tag party of all sides and must poll for our center or disband... as we have no facist idiology so we must poll? No? - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
On the issue of icons... I would accept any position at this point from anyone... as clearly the people ask this of us and now judge the true motivations of this movement? I say this as I must answer for this lack of policy and leadership through polling... the people say this is an artificial "ghost" reform movement... I argue and say this will be led by policy and not the two heads? I wonder? - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
Somehow I don't think another authoritarian, pro-war, anti-liberty party led by the likes of Lieberman and McCain is what the American people really want.