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.

 

Tired of left vs. right? The Populist Party revival may just be for you.

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I feel as though there needs to be a real organized THIRD PARTY. One with a set goal and a platform. One that takes into mind the real issues in politics. This party is one of ideals and decorum. Set aside your vitriol of left and right. engage in real debate over how to fix issues without personal attacks and slander. A party that views everyone the same and equally responsible. Sex, race, religion and orientations do not define you and will not define this movement. All are equally respected and all are equally tolerated. This is the party of the people. The Populist Party

The Populist Party on Facebook.


Founded:1891

About: The Populist Party, often referred to as the People's Party, was founded in 1891 and was a player in national politics until 1908. A People's Party grew out of agrarian unrest in response to falling cotton and wheat prices in the South.

Description: The new Populist Party is one of Moderate lean. We believe in a stream-lined and efficient Federal Government as well as a healthy free market. We believe that taxes are a necessary evil, one that all must endure. We believe in the rights of all men no matter their religion, color, creed or orientation. We believe in respect for religious tradition without interference from governmental influence. We believe in equality for all without adhering to religious principles. We believe in the constitution and the bill of rights.



Our platform is as follows:

• The removal of the national debt. To accomplish this we need to both cut spending and increase taxes. Spending cuts should come in the form of cutting defense budgets as well as entitlement spending. Reforming programs that are ineffectual or redundant. The increase in taxes could come as either a removal of the Bush tax cuts or enacting a national sales tax.

• Lower the cost of higher education. This can be accomplished by a cap on tuition for public schools as well as better funding for teachers and school programs. An education should not put you in debt for 20 years following graduation.

• Health care reform. Health care is a right not a privilege. For those who cannot afford private health insurance there should be an option provided by the government.

• Protect the press. Freedom of speech is vastly important. This is to include public prayer. The basis of all freedoms is free and open speech.

• Reforming the Tax Code. Debt wouldn’t be so easy for the country to incur if everyone were paying their taxes, this includes corporations.

• Regulated Campaign contributions. A corporation or public group should not be able to donate to candidates. All contributions must be disclosed publically and the expenses of each candidate should be of public record.

• Gay marriage or the removal of government acknowledgement of marriage. Simply put if marriage is defined by the religious standards of marriage then it should not be a governmentally recognized institution.

• Repeal the Patriot Act. This is unconstitutional legislation. The violation of civil liberties cannot be allowed.

• Protect the second amendment. If I wish to bear arms it is my right as an American.

• De-criminalize drugs. The cost of jailing and prosecuting for drug related crimes causes more debt. You cannot protect people from themselves.


This is not a definite and end all description of the ideals and goals. This is simply the starting point. It will take far more open and real conversation from within to develop a more definitive role and stance on the issues. View this as a work in progress with the interest of the american people.




posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


This is a third party I would definately vote for as I don't see myself supporting either of the main parties for 2012. However as far as I am aware, the populist party died out decades ago. You just linked us to a facebook group. Does the party have an official website? Are they planning to make a come back? Or are you just speaking hypothetically.

It will be good if some strong third parties could come out in 2012, the people deserve more choices.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
A-freakin-men. I'll join.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


You are correct this is a Political Party that was relevant from 1891 to 1908 with a brief reappearance during the 1970's. However this most recent revival is one that I am hoping to create with the help of the ATS'ers and other like minded individuals. We see the failings of the current two party system. we see the inaction and attempts to usurp a real democratic process. We know how to fix it. We must fix it. I created the Facebook page today whilst having a conversation with some friends. We figured it has to start somewhere; So why not today on Facebook? The first step it to drum up followers and organizing via Facebook. Right now this is as grass-roots as it gets. If you want any personal information about me to verify that I am nothing more than I say (as some will likely attempt to discredit me as some form of shill or another I am sure) you can PM me. We can affect change in a way that the Tea Party did without being co-opted. With a real set of ideals based on real solutions and real people.

Please if you wish to help you may contact me via PM or on Facebook. I am readily available and willing to have civil debates with anyone who wish.
edit on 8-6-2011 by LexiconRiot because: grammar fail



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
then what, become the People's Republic of America? LOL.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   


Our platform is as follows: • The removal of the national debt. To accomplish this we need to both cut spending and increase taxes. Spending cuts should come in the form of cutting defense budgets as well as entitlement spending. Reforming programs that are ineffectual or redundant. The increase in taxes could come as either a removal of the Bush tax cuts or enacting a national sales tax.


i pass for the simple fact if you cut and reform entitlements and defense there is no need to increase taxes.




• Lower the cost of higher education. This can be accomplished by a cap on tuition for public schools as well as better funding for teachers and school programs. An education should not put you in debt for 20 years following graduation.


i pass again education in this country and are local and state issues and really mess with unions such as teachers and all you will get is the one finger salute.





• Health care reform. Health care is a right not a privilege. For those who cannot afford private health insurance there should be an option provided by the government.


i pass again if people want healthcare they should pay for it themselves getting government the hell out of it and create the conditions for competition that will allow them to compete thus lowering the cost of those goods and services.




• Protect the press. Freedom of speech is vastly important. This is to include public prayer. The basis of all freedoms is free and open speech.


the only thing i can say here is the constitution already does this




• Reforming the Tax Code. Debt wouldn’t be so easy for the country to incur if everyone were paying their taxes, this includes corporations.


i can only add a fair tax that everyone pays equally no individuals right exceed the rights of any other group or individual which already is state in the us constitution time and time agian.




• Regulated Campaign contributions. A corporation or public group should not be able to donate to candidates. All contributions must be disclosed publically and the expenses of each candidate should be of public record.


i pass a constitution ammendment banning all special interest corporate and union the only people allowed to donate is the individual living in this country .




• Gay marriage or the removal of government acknowledgement of marriage. Simply put if marriage is defined by the religious standards of marriage then it should not be a governmentally recognized institution.


i pass again "marriage" is government defined for tax purposes its all about the money. gay or straight does not matter.




• Repeal the Patriot Act. This is unconstitutional legislation. The violation of civil liberties cannot be allowed.


i do agree with this and add the elimination of the tsa gestapo tactics and federal laws making shampoo illegal to take on airline flights

to put it simply go back to pre bush pre alqueda government stupidity.




• Protect the second amendment. If I wish to bear arms it is my right as an American.


agreed with one step further repeal every unconstitutional bans on what a gun can look like to how many rounds it can hold and how many rounds it can fire.

in essence a restoration of the second ammendment to honor the writers original intent.




De-criminalize drugs. The cost of jailing and prosecuting for drug related crimes causes more debt. You cannot protect people from themselves.


i pass agian because most people do not even think about the healthcare costs of drug addicts and the implication to society and its economic effects.





This is not a definite and end all description of the ideals and goals. This is simply the starting point. It will take far more open and real conversation from within to develop a more definitive role and stance on the issues. View this as a work in progress with the interest of the american people.


neither is this but the addition of ending the corrupt and massive federal reserve and the addition of the elimination of the consumer protection agency fanny and freddy and every single government subsidy from agriculture to unions to corporate to welfare.



come now who wants to join my party?



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
My only real problem with this party is the vague manner in which solutions to the national debt are discussed. Repeal of the Bush tax cuts I could get behind, but a "national sales" tax is regressive and always slanted to unevenly tax the poor, who must spend a larger portion of income on consumables.

Also, the pie is already so unevenly divided when it comes to defense spending, that I feel splitting the "pain" between cutting military expenditure and "entitlement" spending is really more a part of a left/right compromise in order to achieve either, than a legitimate "populist" stance. In other words, we have had our "entitlements" cut quite enough, already, thank you. Over 75% of the population are working class or poor. Any truly populist party would NOT expect them, as they are already on the edge of survival, to "share the pain." They LIVE the pain, day in day out.

Also, while I like what a lot of this says, Ron Paul's platform is more concise, focused upon principle, and visible, so for now, that's where my energies will be focused.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I'll get on board if you replace "raising taxes" to "ending the Federal Reserve, a return to sound money and repealing the 16th amendment. "

Otherwise, you aren't addressing the core problems.

 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 

edit on 6/8/2011 by Finalized because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Originally posted by neo96


i pass for the simple fact if you cut and reform entitlements and defense there is no need to increase taxes.


This would be the case if you only viewed it for the short term. However, according to the 2010 census we could be looking at almost 40 million more people reaching retirement age in the next ten years. This will put a sever burden on SS and Medicare. Taking care of the elderly is not something that should be optional.


i pass again education in this country and are local and state issues and really mess with unions such as teachers and all you will get is the one finger salute.


I find it amusing (while this may not refer to you specifically) how some ATS'ers complain about the "dumbing down" of America; Then complain that we shouldn't put more of an emphasis on education. My stance: Pay the ones who influence the future of our country what they are worth. Pay based on merit. Make teaching worth it and we will get better teachers. Personally I would rather work for McDonald's than be a teacher in the inner city as it is.


i pass again if people want healthcare they should pay for it themselves getting government the hell out of it and create the conditions for competition that will allow them to compete thus lowering the cost of those goods and services.


Well as we have seen, prior to "Obamacare", health care was increasingly more expensive yearly due to oligarchy control on the market. To be fair I would assume with a government option it would force the Insurance companies to lower their prices to compete for middle class money.


the only thing i can say here is the constitution already does this


Yet it comes under attack all the time. Please explain why?


i can only add a fair tax that everyone pays equally no individuals right exceed the rights of any other group or individual which already is state in the us constitution time and time agian.


A fair tax would make sense if it were paired with a national sale tax, I think. However, this is merely speculation and something I would prefer we test after we are out of the red as a country.


i pass a constitution ammendment banning all special interest corporate and union the only people allowed to donate is the individual living in this country .


Seems like you got the gist of it on this one. Individuals are the ones who they are supposed to represent. Governmental representation of the people by the people, not corporate interest.


i pass again "marriage" is government defined for tax purposes its all about the money. gay or straight does not matter.


Well, that define the issue then doesn't it. If it is defined by the government and not religious principal than there should be no restriction on homosexual marriage. Unless of course it is predetermined by religious precept, in which case it must then no longer be recognized by the government. We can't have it both ways as it discriminates and oppresses as it stands.





• Repeal the Patriot Act. This is unconstitutional legislation. The violation of civil liberties cannot be allowed.


i do agree with this and add the elimination of the tsa gestapo tactics and federal laws making shampoo illegal to take on airline flights

to put it simply go back to pre bush pre alqueda government stupidity.


/agree




• Protect the second amendment. If I wish to bear arms it is my right as an American.


agreed with one step further repeal every unconstitutional bans on what a gun can look like to how many rounds it can hold and how many rounds it can fire.

in essence a restoration of the second ammendment to honor the writers original intent


/agree


i pass agian because most people do not even think about the healthcare costs of drug addicts and the implication to society and its economic effects.


While I agree in essence with what you say, I tend to believe that the costs would be less than current prison costs. I also think the societal effect would be far less profound than some tend to think. Education and parenting would need to be a mainstay to ward off these effects.



neither is this but the addition of ending the corrupt and massive federal reserve and the addition of the elimination of the consumer protection agency fanny and freddy and every single government subsidy from agriculture to unions to corporate to welfare.



come now who wants to join my party?


Personally, not I, as I tend to disagree with the idea that poor people should be treated poorly. It seems the tea party people and I disagree on this topic, IMO.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by joechip
My only real problem with this party is the vague manner in which solutions to the national debt are discussed. Repeal of the Bush tax cuts I could get behind, but a "national sales" tax is regressive and always slanted to unevenly tax the poor, who must spend a larger portion of income on consumables.

Also, the pie is already so unevenly divided when it comes to defense spending, that I feel splitting the "pain" between cutting military expenditure and "entitlement" spending is really more a part of a left/right compromise in order to achieve either, than a legitimate "populist" stance. In other words, we have had our "entitlements" cut quite enough, already, thank you. Over 75% of the population are working class or poor. Any truly populist party would NOT expect them, as they are already on the edge of survival, to "share the pain." They LIVE the pain, day in day out.

Also, while I like what a lot of this says, Ron Paul's platform is more concise, focused upon principle, and visible, so for now, that's where my energies will be focused.




Well again I want to reiterate that this is not the "end game" and only mission ideals. Secondly some entitlement programs simply waste money. These issues are often caused by redundancy. The issue with being clear and concise is, as i posted already, I very literary posted the ideas today. I would also like to admit I am no expert. I would like to form a collective of ideas which would allow the best to surface. As far as entitlement vs defense, I would say that the obvious answer is that there is much more meat to cut in defense. As far as a national sales tax goes, I can see your point and the topic warrants further discussion. Off the top of my head I would say taxing only certain products could provide some relief on the burden of the poor.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 





This would be the case if you only viewed it for the short term. However, according to the 2010 census we could be looking at almost 40 million more people reaching retirement age in the next ten years. This will put a sever burden on SS and Medicare. Taking care of the elderly is not something that should be optional.


but we the people should not be depending on the federal government for our golden years as the people of this country we have options that we have and can control on our own instead of relying on a ponzi scheme of first in and first out.

that government decides who gets paid and who doesnt and when they dont have it they borrow from other people pensions etc.

now if the government kept its grubby hands off that money thats a different story and it is also a fact that when someone invests in their own future and who will not screw them are themselves the cash that is paid in there earns no interest you get paid on some stupid government formula and another fact of the matter is people get far more out of the system than they pay into it.




find it amusing (while this may not refer to you specifically) how some ATS'ers complain about the "dumbing down" of America; Then complain that we shouldn't put more of an emphasis on education. My stance: Pay the ones who influence the future of our country what they are worth. Pay based on merit. Make teaching worth it and we will get better teachers. Personally I would rather work for McDonald's than be a teacher in the inner city as it is.


throwing money at education and government interference hasnt worked out since carters introduction of the department of education.

before the doe americans put a man on the moon and what do this countrys teachers produce these days?

nothing but morons.




Well as we have seen, prior to "Obamacare", health care was increasingly more expensive yearly due to oligarchy control on the market. To be fair I would assume with a government option it would force the Insurance companies to lower their prices to compete for middle class money.


healthcare increased because of stupid government dictating to those providers what they can and cant do what services and how much they can charge.

they have destroyed competition in this country that drives lower costs back in the day we americans could drive to anypart of the country and get the same care.

back in the day most people didnt have to drive 5 miles to get quality healthcare as opposed to driving hundreds of miles for so called "specialized " care.

the government created the mess and we are dealing with it only when we get government out of the way can we begin to fix things.




Yet it comes under attack all the time. Please explain why?


that speaks to social programming free speech denotes free thought hence they can not control you they want everyone to think and speak the same things.

they do indeed attempt to but they will never succeed.





A fair tax would make sense if it were paired with a national sale tax, I think. However, this is merely speculation and something I would prefer we test after we are out of the red as a country.


i want a fair tax and if everyone paid into the system no more taxes are needed the more tax they put onto us takes money out of the economy and ultimate ends up as government waste.

if we the people can "regulate" government cash flow we control government.




Well, that define the issue then doesn't it. If it is defined by the government and not religious principal than there should be no restriction on homosexual marriage. Unless of course it is predetermined by religious precept, in which case it must then no longer be recognized by the government. We can't have it both ways as it discriminates and oppresses as it stands.


acutally i agree with pauls stance on this one state issues but the government should remain out of it however

marriage has become only about money thesedays.






Personally, not I, as I tend to disagree with the idea that poor people should be treated poorly. It seems the tea party people and I disagree on this topic, IMO.



free country man and its not treating them poorly its about treating everyone equally

people rise and fall on their own and if its a question of "charity" or "entitlement" that is the persons call

not having their money taken at gunpoint.

and charity is a choice and americans have help americans for decades by their own choice.

and for decades americans have been held at gunpoint by government taking from them without a choice.

because "entitlements" cant work any other way.

throwing money at issues do not solve them nor does stealing it from others.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Finalized
I'll get on board if you replace "raising taxes" to "ending the Federal Reserve, a return to sound money and repealing the 16th amendment. "

Otherwise, you aren't addressing the core problems.

 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 

edit on 6/8/2011 by Finalized because: (no reason given)


Raising taxes sucks. Simply put there is no other word for it. However I feel it is a unnecessary evil. see my previous posts for my stance. As far as the federal reserve goes, it is a matter of reform and regulation that is needed. Abolishing it will only exacerbate the issues. We can not return to a gold standard as there is no gold to return to.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Good luck then, I agree with Ron Paul's platform and will be voting for him or no one.

You should really read his books and the Creature from Jekyll Island. Abolishing the Federal Reserve WILL fix the majority of the issues in this country. You can return to a gold standard regardless of the amount of gold you have, he outlines it in his book.

Oh, and you can't reform something that is evil in its very inception, it was created to enslave.
 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 


edit on 6/8/2011 by Finalized because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96



De-criminalize drugs. The cost of jailing and prosecuting for drug related crimes causes more debt. You cannot protect people from themselves.


i pass agian because most people do not even think about the healthcare costs of drug addicts and the implication to society and its economic effects.


You are assuming drug addiction would increase because of decriminalization.

History shows this to be false.

The "War on Drugs" actually amplifies the problems associated with drugs like violence, addiction, and abuse.

Since the "War on Drugs" usage has remained the same while price has gone down.

We have imprisoned millions of people though...



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


abuse and addiction and other healthcare costs are a fact

legalize it and the medicaid and medicare would end up paying for them

footed by the non users

now is that exactly fair to make someone else pay for their habit?



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


We already pay for addicts with no coverage.

But we also pay billions of dollars to fight "The War on Drugs" as well as violence caused by it.

And of course imprisoning people...



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


Kudos for your response. It is literally the 2nd time I've ever seen anyone on these forums admit that their ideas weren't foolproof and perfect, and defensible with their very lives!

If it is indeed an open-source kind of party, then I have a few suggestions. I would recommend being somewhat less expansive in the platform...keep it simpler, based around a few common interests and principles, and avoid specific approaches (such as a national sales tax). You can have a platform with a stated goal without spelling out exactly how you get there...it is a progression after all, and democracy is involved.

Keep it focused on what the majority of us want...usually we get some sort of watered down compromise which in great measure is influenced by corporate money and lobbyists. Let's leave their ideas off the table completely in your populist movement. For example, show me how redundancy is ample reason to even discuss cutting "entitlement" programs....(how I hate the term "entitlement!") how much waste, fraud, and abuse is there REALLY? (figures and evidence is required here, but don't waste your time, it's a gov/corporate talking point)

Lastly, if you're going to pander to anyone, make it the working class poor...this is the population in your populist movement. I would slam the fact of their struggle to survive, home a bit more. And focus on how to raise their standard of living.

Good luck and Godspeed!
edit on 8-6-2011 by joechip because: spelling



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


so the solution is to create more?

you wanna decriminalize it fine

i dont.

and thats that.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


www.lao.ca.gov...

The cost per year per inmate averages nearly $50K in California.
I am sure we can save money there.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


californias own problem because they made the problem to begin with

california has run business out of their state and when there are no jobs there is no income and when there are neither of those crime happens.

and that brings drugs into the equation adversity creates the market place for drugs

a happy people and successful people do not turn to drugs as escapism from there realities.


and california is releasing prisoners so they will all end up back there because most will return to their lives of crime.




we agree on somethings and we are going to disagree on other things

which i do not have a problem with hope you dont either.

peace.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join