It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will we ever get a legit Third Party?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I know we have alternative candidates to choose from in every election. What I want to know is will we ever get to a point where a Third Part will actually be able to compete against the Republicans and Democrats? IMO, this is something that HAS to happen in order to save our country. We need a fresh alternative. A party (or parties) that hasn't been tainted with the scandals and the deceipt that our current two dominating powers are plagued with. We need another option (expecially in this election. but it's too late for that now)

If it can happen, why isn't it? Is it the money? That's all I can come up with. The powers that be have the financial backing to get their agenda out there and the alternate choices just get smothered. I can't make a vote for either Kerry or Bush with a clear conscience. I will feel like I made the wrong decision no matter which one I would vote for. I need another perspective.




posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:47 AM
link   
I think a better question is that this third party, which is greatly needed, would it be a existing party (constitulionalists, libertarians, liberalists, ect) or would we need a brand new one? restart from scratch?

Me, i can't vote for bush how he handled the economy and the war, and kerry, nooo way. but who else is out there? that can handle a presidency in the most powerful nation in the world?



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:47 AM
link   
As long as Americans blindly vote Dem or GOP simply because their parents did, we will only have a 2 party system. But I forsee one day that the two get so bad, that a 3rd party will be seen as the only route for most Americans.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:48 AM
link   
As long as 24 Hour News Media Giants rule the world third parties and America dosen't stand a chance. The problem is that if the only news you hear is TV its always about Republicans and Democrats. Our means of becoming "well informed citizens" is what keeps us from becoming just that. Ironic isn't it.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I feel the same way, I believe that both power parties actually steal ideas from
independents taking some of the steam from those choices. I would like a middle of the road party as I think that there are good ideas coming from the Left & Right but as a whole I cannot choose either. If there was a strong movement towards the middle and it becomes strong enough to put forward nationwide candidates on the ballot then you will see change. Right now it seems the centrists are having to choose left or right in order to be electible.

Money is also a major factor as both parties are heavily funded by BIG money.

While I don't believe anything can be done for this year, we have two years to work towards this goal, which may be enough time to make a difference, but any effort to change the two party system has to include representatives all the way down to the local level, focusing on just the national level will never work IMO.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Have any of you ever noticed how when the Republican and Democratic conventions start that all the chaos in the world seems to stop and things return to what us regular folk call normal? Did you ever wonder if all the chaos is caused by the idiots in D.C. that we voted into office? Ever wonder why when the president is in Crawford that the world seems to rest and things slow down and return to normal as the rest of the world seems to know the pres is more focused on cutting weeds than attacking some country. Is it all coincidence? Just curious what others think.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by JacKatMtnany effort to change the two party system has to include representatives all the way down to the local level, focusing on just the national level will never work IMO.


Exactly. The local and state levels would be the place to start. Work your way up to national.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 11:20 AM
link   
From what i have heard and read, the Libretarian party is the group that hits closest to my views. Less govt involvement in our lives seems to be their credo. They want to put more control back into the state, rather than have the federal govt run everything. I agree with that philosophy. Who would know better about how to run the schools that the state reps themselves. Quit letting the Fed gov't set up uniform standards across the board for the nation and let the sates themselves decide what's best. The only problem with the Libretarians is the candidate right now is Gary Nolan, an ex radio host. I've heard him speak and he is pretty intellegent, but in no way has the leadership skills to handle anything like this. Also, he is seriously scary looking.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Actually the libertarian candiate for president is Michael Badnarik. See, the thing is with third parties that their candidates don't seem like they'd be able to handle running the country. A lot of them haven't even held seats in national government, and don't have that much experience. I'd love for a third party to get big and compete with the major 2 (which is why I'm probably voting libertarian) but right now their candidates aren't really up to snuff.

As much as we might dislike Bush or Kerry we have to realize that they probably have more experience and would know how to run the country better than some guy who was president of his kid's PTA. I would like to have hope that a third party will get big one day, but you have to wonder about the candidates. And that's what sucks.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I truely hope that one day a three party (or more) system is normal. Parties have lived and died (sort of) over the ages like the Populist, Federalist, etc. Now, even the Democrat and Republican parties are not using their original historical values. What I mean by this is that historically speaking the Rebublican party was once known as the Democrat party, and the same for the new Democrats.

I will always vote for the third, fourth, etc. party candidate in any election just so that I know I did my best to contribute to their rise.

PS-



NADER 2004


Thats all I have to say!



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 11:33 AM
link   
That's why you start at lower levels. If you can run a state, why not a country? Clinton, Bush, Regan, they all did it.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
That's why you start at lower levels. If you can run a state, why not a country? Clinton, Bush, Regan, they all did it.


Yeah I definitely agree. But the candidates out there now don't have that kind of credentials, like being governers or senators. I hope that in the future they will, and that will be a good thing, and bring them more credibility. But for now it's a tough uphill battle.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Faisca
Actually the libertarian candiate for president is Michael Badnarik. See, the thing is with third parties that their candidates don't seem like they'd be able to handle running the country. A lot of them haven't even held seats in national government, and don't have that much experience. I'd love for a third party to get big and compete with the major 2 (which is why I'm probably voting libertarian) but right now their candidates aren't really up to snuff.

As much as we might dislike Bush or Kerry we have to realize that they probably have more experience and would know how to run the country better than some guy who was president of his kid's PTA. I would like to have hope that a third party will get big one day, but you have to wonder about the candidates. And that's what sucks.


You're right. Gary Nolan was just a nominee.

You're also right in that the 2 candidates right now have the most experience in such a large leadership role. I think that one way we can get a strong leader in a Third party role is to have someone already in a power position with one of the 2 parties break off, and either join an existing alternate party or create a new one. Someone who is sick of the political games being played by dems and reps and wants what we want. A new begining.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Good ideas, I totally agree! We need to focus on getting third party candidates that aren't crazy into offices like mayor and then representative and then governor, senator and eventually president!



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I am a strong advocate of a multi party system. My feeling is that the only way to break the bi-partisan deadlock in government, is to remove the term bi-partisan from government.

As long as we only have 2 view points to chose from, those of us in the middle are left out. And believe me, the middle is not just a thin strip between the 2 parties. We are a wide majority.

Jack was right in stating that if a third party is to rise, it will have to be composed of a "centerist position".

Problem is that the 2 main parties have finally agreed on something, and that is to ensure that they are the only 2 parties in government. Most of the election law that exists is slanted so that a fledgling party has a tough uphill battle to gain exceptence and funding. Why the hell was Nader not allowed to participate in the 2000 debates?? Didn't have a large enough share of the polls??? He was on the ballot in a majority of states. That should be enough to get you into a debate.

What I would LOVE to see is John McCain decide he has had enough of the republicans, and form a centerist party. John McCain is my man. I would have voted for him in 2000 if he had been the republican candidate and broken my long standing record of voting for the 3rd party. Hell I voted for Perot TWICE.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Many of the strong libertarians break off and join the republican party in order to actually have a chance at winning a major election. Ron Paul, who I believe is now in the house as a republican from Tex., actually ran for president under the libertarian banner before jumping ship.

What you must remember when voting the third party is that it so unlikely they will actually win the election, that you are really voting for the party itself, and the actual person dosnt matter right away. what you are doing is basicly telling the media that your party deserves equal coverage.

Part of the problem is the media coverage. The nationaly broadcasted debates on invite the big two. Why? Because the dems and repubs. refuse to participate if there is a third party involved. The reason given, when asked, is that it "would be too confusing to voters."

Another problem is funding, but not for the same reasons you may believe. I read somewhere that the libertarian party actually spends 12 million $ per election just to be on the ballot in all 50 states. It is the big two who pass these laws in order to maintain a political monopoly.



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 12:23 PM
link   


What I would LOVE to see is John McCain decide he has had enough of the republicans, and form a centerist party. John McCain is my man. I would have voted for him in 2000 if he had been the republican candidate and broken my long standing record of voting for the 3rd party. Hell I voted for Perot TWICE.


How great would that be? McCain breaking off would be a huge step inthe right direction. The middle would eat him up. He has passion and is a proven leader with morals and a great personality. That whole deal where the media kept running his speach where he screams was what did him in. ANd it was a shame too cause no one knew anything about him except that they thought he was crazy. I HATE THE MEDIA! They determine the election, which is just BS!



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Do you mean the Dean scream?
McCain is the senator from AZ. Ran against Bush in 2000. Did I miss some screaming he did back then? Course that doesn't change my opinion of him one bit.
He has a proven track record of being able to work with people from both sides. How about McCain/Lieberman '04? or '08?



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
How about McCain/Lieberman '04? or '08?


I might get flamed but I think this ticket is straight forward and would stick to their convictions............"drumroll please"...................


A Vote For Us, Is a Vote For You

McCain / O'Reilly '08

It's About Time



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Yeah, definitely McCain and anyone else, not Lieberman. Dude if Lieberman was VP we wouldn't have video games anymore, lol.

But seriously, McCain joining the Libertarians or something would be great.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join