Strategy For a Third Party Intervention

a reply to: breakingbs

I don't see anything wrong with it being a protest, I just don't realistically see anything permanent changing because of it.

And I don't like saying that. I wish we had multiple parties and they all had equal footing.

a reply to: eisegesis

I think we should focus on researching corruption in a way that is not defined by the narrative that is going precisely nowhere, while the debate still rages.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: schuyler

But the rules in place would have congress choose the next president. So I don't see any benefit from any of this.

The benefit would be Huuuuuge! just for the disruption factor. Congress might very well choose one of the mainstream candidates, but this would be the time to smother Congress with protests. It is at least a chance to go against the tide and could be the start of something big. It would certainly convey the widespread dissatisfaction of the electorate and has the possibility of a major disruption of the status quo.

And this is my 10,000th post!

What happened to the T party?

a reply to: DBCowboy


I can see your logic, but I've defined the strategy. The problem with agreeing to your view even though logical is that it makes the approach seem like nobody means it.

a reply to: schuyler


Exactly and..congratulations(???)

a reply to: breakingbs

The intent is there and it is good. I think most Americans would welcome multiple parties.

It's just that the established parties have gamed the system so well that it is impossible to promote real change.

I hope I'm wrong, though.

a reply to: DBCowboy

We'll see

a reply to: DBCowboy

I hope I'm wrong, though.

No offense, but I hope you are wrong too.

I would die one happy woman, if I could live to see this moment happens with us humans.