Why we need a truly independent third party

[Ugnmoose]

So here we are in Mid February with some 75% of the delegates yet to be chosen and it all comes down to this: Kerry or Edwards. Why is this not surprising to anyone here? While the DNC and the insiders would love to have Kerry as the nominee they would easily settle for Edwards. Either way they can't lose. Because either way they will have a candidate beholden to them and willing to play the game with their ball and by their rules.

Face it folks the deck was stacked, as it usually is. And that is what politics in this country is all about.

I hate to take issue with Governor Dean, for whom I have the utmost admiration, but he needs to take off his rosy colored glasses. No matter how much he trys to build a grassroots organization it will take many generations to change the way politics are run here. And we just don't have that much time to make it happen. IMHO the only way is to marshall the resources of the the grassroots and activists community and launch full steam ahead to start building a truly viable third major national party. It will take a while, but it will surely be quicker than try to move mountains inside the beltway.

Only when we have a truly independent third party along with an independent media will we be able to give the electorate the unbiased information and choices to vote for candidates that truly represent the best interests of the people.

I for one am sick and tired of being fed bullshit and told it is a bed of roses. Granted the RNC is despicable, but the DNC ain't a whole lot better.

[onebigbadwulf]

1. We should have all the primaries on the same day

that might make things better

[JoePizz]

10. That would certainly go a long way to equalizing the states

IMHO, Iowa and NH weild way to much power. My state (AL) votes so late that we pretty much don't even matter.

[Hippo_Tron]

29. States get to choose when to hold their primaries I believe...

Iowa and NH have decided that they want early primary/caucus so that they get lots of national attention

[sweetcee]

2. That's right.

1. It DOES make a difference: get Bush out!

2. As soon as Edwards becomes president, all who care must begin immediately and continuously to put together an alternative to the dem/rep party!

[MadHound]

3. Hear, Hear

And that is exactly why a lot of us are going Green. They take no corporate cash, and are truly beholden to their constituents.

The other plan that will help us take back our government from the clutches of big business is by pushing hard and passing publicly financed election campaigns.

[JoePizz]

5. Kucinich takes no corporate cash

Rather than jump ship, why not try to fix our own party first?

[arwalden]

8. Yawn!

And they are becoming a characature of themselves. Impotent, selfish, and politically naive.

Some call it principled... I call it reckless.

-- Allen

[jmaier]

4. I think we need a 3rd party

alternative to the Republican party but not one that splits votes away from Democrats.

[Options Remain]

6. I disagree

We need to reclaim our own party and bring the greens home.

allowing the right to divide us further will allow them to win not give us greater strength.

my apologies. Would we gain anything from dividing the conservative base or would we gain more by drawing the conservative base to us? Democrats can OWN economic consrvatism if we play our cards right.

TearForger

[jmaier]

18. I'm having a hard time

seeing how you're going to bring the greens home AND draw economic conservatives to us at the same time. Economic conservatives aren't necessarily wildly progressive on non-finance issues: 1) they favor tax reductions; 2) they favor reduced regulation on business activities; 3) they favor free or mostly free trade.

How do you reconcile these folks with greens?

[jhfenton]

20. You're right...

and that's an accurate description. I'm an economic conservative Democrat and find the Green Party appalling on economic matters. I've been a Democrat because the religious conservatives control the Republican Party.

[einniv]

7. I think that network you describe will be grown after a Dem

takes the Whitehouse in Jan of '05 .

It will be up to the Democratic Party if they take us in and listen. And that decision will determine the future as a viable party.

Look to the east for an example of the future.

Korea’s Internet Election
In South Korea, it’s the mouse that roars
http://www.backspace.com/notes/2003/01/10/x.html

[Qutzupalotl]

9. Any 3rd party would have to be principled & conscientious,

and so would split the Democratic vote, while leaving the Republican vote intact. So I have to dissent.

[mohc]

11. Without changing our electoral system first

This approach simply will not work. Third party viability is simply not possible in a plurality/First Past The Post electoral system. That is not to say that "new" parties can not work, but they can only replace an existing party, not be a third party. FPTP electoral systems require strategic voting, because one does not get the best result by simply voting their conscious.

Since the rise of the current major two parties, the most successful third party runs bookended the last political era before the current one. In 1912, T. Roosevelt broke from the Republicans because he believed they had become to moderate and ran as the Progressive party nominee. His candidacy had the exact opposite effect from what he wanted, as it split the liberal vote and allowed Wilson to be the only Democrat other than Cleveland to become President since 1860. In the end, the Republican party reacted by moving farther to the right, not left, and liberals left the party and joined the Democrats. This only worked because of the "Yellow Dogs" that would vote for liberal Democrats simply because they were Democrats. Some of these Dixiecrats realized what had happened, and tried third party runs, but none worked until 1968. Wallace took away enough Dixiecrat support to allow Nixon to win. And once again, instead of moving the party to the right like Wallace wanted, the Dixiecrats finally had to give up and join the Republicans.

If a third party were to form to the left of the Democrats, it would almost certainly send the Democrats further to the center. Based on the fact that the elements within the party that might want dramatic change have had very little success, I do not believe it is likely for the new party to prevail in its efforts, and it will be left with both of the major parties having moved to the right. Personally, I will do my best to pull the party as far to the left as it can go without losing the center. We must win elections before we can lead, and we must lead before the people will follow.

[jhfenton]

13. Election Methods

I'm all for giving the Condorcet voting method a go. It would allow since votes for third parties and would eliminate the problem you describe.

http://www.electionmethods.org/

Of course, both major parties have a vested interest in the status quo.

[mohc]

25. Exactly

The parties themselves will never push for this since they rely on it to maintain power.

Here's a third party I could get behind. A party completely dedicated to changing our electoral system, and that is their only prominent issue. If they can demonstrate to the major parties that they can hurt them by taking away enough votes to make them lose elections they should otherwise win, perhaps one of the parties, most likely the Dems, could be brought on board with this issue.

As to your particualr preference, Condorcet, I have supported this idea in concept. Its only weakness is the paper-rock-scissors effect, the article you linked to referred to them as "Cyclic Ambiguity". A lot of voters would not like the complexity of the resolution needed to handle this. Basic condorcet probably has the best "marketability", and though it still has strategic flaws, it is still better than IRV and FPTP.

[jhfenton]

12. I'm all for a third party.

I decided in the 1996 election cycle that I would never again vote for the lesser of 2 evils. (I had voted for Clinton in 1992.)

With the choice now likely between Kerry and Bush, I'll probably be voting Libertarian again.

[Hokie]

14. We need a right wing fundie third party

They can stand on principles and run a Robertson/Falwell ticket every time and we can thank them as we drub the republicans. I am all for it.

[jhfenton]

19. There already is one....

http://www.constitutionparty.org/

From their platform preamble:

We, the members of the Constitution Party, gratefully acknowledge the blessing of the Lord God as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of this Nation. We solemnly declare that the foundation of our political position and moving principle of our political activity is our full submission and unshakable faith in our Savior and Redeemer, our Lord Jesus Christ. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Divine Providence as we work to restore and preserve this Nation as a government of the People, by the People, and for the People.

Eek!

[PsN2Wind]

15. The best and maybe last chance of a viable

third party disappeared after the marginalization of Ross Perot in '92. I'll pause here for the obligatory, "He's nuts, etc." But I think those that are honest with themselves and others would have to admit that many of the things he forecast at that time have come about. And that many of his proposals would have made for a better America now.
I don't think we will ever have another chance because the media is beholden too and has their connections in the current two party system and they aren't going to give that up freely.

[einniv]

27. Ahhh but now there is the internet!

[Guava Jelly]

16. Third parties elect republicans

by dividing the vote.
Third party candidates Are George Bushs best friend.

All these sickning third party post are vile ignorant and unproductive.
Don't leave the party Repair it,change it
Make it better.
If you vote third party and do not cancel out a bush vote then you may as well just vote for bush.
You know i am right After all thanks to Nader we got Bush.
On the other hand thanks to Ross Perot we got Clinton
third partys i spit on thee :)

[Leilani]

17. I would also be in favor of a 3rd party

but what would be it's platform?

If it was a Reform-type party, giving gov back to the people, & away from special interests, you would get the Independents & many moderate Repugs who hate the system as much as we do.

If it is to be a left leaning, anti military, pro socialist movement, then I don't think you will have enough people to make a significant impact, except to take votes from Dems.

Quite frankly, I wish me had a few more parties to reflect people's interests.

[union_maid]

21. Simple mathmatic dictate the results

Third party on the left equals empowering the Republican right, the Republican agenda and impacts us for many years to come. What about that fact can any third party advocate take issue with? What about it don't you understand? We don't have a parliamentary system in which a third party can have influence and power. If you want third parties to have influence, first you'd have to change that and that's not going to be easy. In the meantime, third parties on the left will move the whole country even further to the right. It's dangerous, irresponsible and uncaring to do that.

[iamjoy]

22. Forget a Third Party Leading to Political Reform

If the Democrats don't win this election, the Conswervatives are going to stack the Supreme Court and Appellate Courts. The states with Repugnantcan legislatures will redistrict to formally marginalize the Democratic Party.

Now some Greens may think this would be a good thing, as they would be able to rise up and replace the Dems as a true alternate party. Not so fast. The Greens and many liberal Democrats are opposed to campaigns funded by the special interests. But, with all three branches controlled by the Conswervatives, there will be no chance of any change.

The best option is for the liberal Democrats to reclaim the party and enact slow change with long term reform goals in mind (many of which should be adopted from the Green platform.)

[NewYorkerfromMass]

23. Pay attention to these interests:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=374002

[West Coast Democrat]

24. Third parties don't work very well under our gov't system

like it or not.

But if a strong third party were formed, I doubt very much it wouldn't have the same problems and infighting as the other two.

[Upfront]

26. Must Start

You have to start the change sometime, and the Dean movement has a good base.

[orwell]

28. One Party

I would prefer no parties. But that being said, a third party constructed from disgruntled leftists/progressives would only insure dominance by the current patriarchs. It was the ability of the Cons to unite in the wake of the Goldwater defeat which laid the foundations for the ramparts that sit between us today. Progressives need to grok this before they render themselves politically irrelevant.

Wing politics is an enabler of the us/them mindset which is antithetical to progressive values.

There is only one party.

~O~