What new parties does the US need?

[Saigon]

Rabbi -

And how many Liberatarian Congresmen and Senator are there?

Do try and keep up.

 

[dblack]

The two party system works fine. There are many different types of views individuals in each party represent, take a Ron Paul and a Lindsay graham for instance..The OP makes it seem like we have only two competing ideologies, which is not the case.

Yeah... like the way Ron Paul was "represented" at the RNC? Which point are you trying to make?

Exactly!

The range of opinion and ideologies exist - but the parties aren't reprsenting them.

Nope. They distract them, make false promises, baffle them with bullshit... But in the end, both parties kneel at the same authoritarian altar. They actively oppose anyone who represents a real threat to the status quo.

 

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi -

And how many Liberatarian Congresmen and Senator are there?

Do try and keep up.

Moron. None. Because they lose in the marketplace of ideas. There are no communist party senators either. Or Worker's Party members. Or National Socialist Party members either. They are losing ideologies in this country. You might want to visit sometime and cure your ignorance about what America is.

 

[AmyNation]

I don't think an over abundance of parties or candidates is helpful or likely. However if the democrats and republicans continue to become more and more extreme I can and do see an independent/center party being viable and worthwhile. I think having a thrid party would prevent the deadlock we have and keep the extremes from tilting too much in either direction.

 

[Saigon]

Rabbi -

Ah, I see, so you are saying that there are not enough Libertarians in the US to vote in a Senator or Congressman?

Somehow I think a few Libertarians on this board might be more confidant.

I think any decent Libertarian Party in the use would gain 15% of the vote without any problems.


With communists I agree with you. They aren't in our parliament either.

 

[dblack]

I don't think an over abundance of parties or candidates is helpful or likely. However if the democrats and republicans continue to become more and more extreme I can and do see an independent/center party being viable and worthwhile. I think having a thrid party would prevent the deadlock we have and keep the extremes from tilting too much in either direction.

OK, this is something I really don't get. In what ways are they "extreme"? I'm not talking about campaign rhetoric, but in the way they actually govern, how are they different really?

 

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi -

Ah, I see, so you are saying that there are not enough Libertarians in the US to vote in a Senator or Congressman?

Somehow I think a few Libertarians on this board might be more confidant.

I think any decent Libertarian Party in the use would gain 15% of the vote without any problems.


With communists I agree with you. They aren't in our parliament either.

Given that Ron Paul, the closest thing to a Libertarian there is on the national stage, has basically failed to get 15% in any election outside his district (which he wins based on pork, not ideology) there is no basis for your claim. A bunch of losers on a discussion board is not representative of American voters.

 

[dblack]

Rabbi -

Ah, I see, so you are saying that there are not enough Libertarians in the US to vote in a Senator or Congressman?

Somehow I think a few Libertarians on this board might be more confidant.

I think any decent Libertarian Party in the use would gain 15% of the vote without any problems.


With communists I agree with you. They aren't in our parliament either.

The Libertarian party fails to gain traction and the fault lies squarely with libertarian voters. They repeately allow themselves to be fooled by the Republicans and Democrats. They fall for the sucker's game of "lesser-of-two-evils" and convince themselves that somehow one party is better than the awfulness of the other.

 

[kaz]

My opinion? I think we need the Democratic and Republican Party to hold down the Center and branch off from there. Tea Party to the right, Socialists to the left.

Of course that still leaves Libertarians out in limbo...they are so far right on aime issues and so far left on others that it’s hard to classify them.

We're far right on fiscal issues, we want government out of it. We're far left on social issues, we want government out of it. We want to limit government to only those functions that only government can do. Military, police, roads, courts, that sort of thing. Why is that hard to classify? We're the minimum government party.

 

[Unkotare]

The two party system works fine. There are many different types of views individuals in each party represent, take a Ron Paul and a Lindsay graham for instance..The OP makes it seem like we have only two competing ideologies, which is not the case.

No, not at all!

I'm not saying you have only 2 competing ideologies - I am saying you only have a choice of 2 candidates to represent the dozen ideologies you have.

That is the core of the problem.

Why should a Libertarian 'have to' vote for a GOP candidate when they want to vote for a Liberatarian?

Who said he has to?


So, there are no politics at all in Finland?

 

[Shelzin]

The two party system works fine. There are many different types of views individuals in each party represent, take a Ron Paul and a Lindsay graham for instance..The OP makes it seem like we have only two competing ideologies, which is not the case.

Yeah... like the way Ron Paul was "represented" at the RNC? Which point are you trying to make?

There is already a diversity of views within the parties.

Um... Yeah... But they aren't all represented. That as the point. I mean hell they made damn sure delegates didn't get to vote because it wasn't what the party leaders wanted.

Damn Rocko...

 

[Saigon]

We're far right on fiscal issues, we want government out of it. We're far left on social issues, we want government out of it. We want to limit government to only those functions that only government can do. Military, police, roads, courts, that sort of thing. Why is that hard to classify? We're the minimum government party.

Kaz -

I'm curious.

If there was a Libertarian Party and a Proportional Reprsentation system - what % of the total US vote do you think the party would get?

 

[kaz]

II think both major parties would split - GOP into Tea Party and a more business-focused urban party; the Dems into a genuine Social Democrat Party and a centrist party focusing on small businesses and urban professionals

Why would the Democratic party split? They are a collectivist party where every Democrat has the exact same position for the same reason on every issue.

Your GOP split made no sense. The Tea Party ... think about the name ... is an anti-tax, anti spending movement. How does it make sense the GOP would spit into two economic focused groups? Republicans would split into a socon and fiscal group. What's happening though is that rather then splitting off, the fiscal consertative tea party is co-opting the Republican party. It's a better plan considering they are facing the monolithic left.

The only splits are the ones that exist now. Libertarians come from the Republican party, we're the extreme anti-socon agenda element. The Greens are Democrats who don't mind being called communists. Both poll 1 percent or less and we're not going to change that anytime soon.

 

[AmyNation]

I don't think an over abundance of parties or candidates is helpful or likely. However if the democrats and republicans continue to become more and more extreme I can and do see an independent/center party being viable and worthwhile. I think having a thrid party would prevent the deadlock we have and keep the extremes from tilting too much in either direction.

OK, this is something I really don't get. In what ways are they "extreme"? I'm not talking about campaign rhetoric, but in the way they actually govern, how are they different really?

They pander to the extreme wings of their party. They have become so concerned with reelection and scoring points they have lost the idea of representing the people who actually elected them.

Look at the 1st credit downgrade, that was caused by our congressmen being childish and stubborn. Look up how many abortion bills have been purposed in the last 4 years. We are in economic crisis and our representives are talking abortion and contraception instead of jobs and deficit.

 

[dblack]

The only splits are the ones that exist now. Libertarians come from the Republican party, we're the extreme anti-socon agenda element. The Greens are Democrats who don't mind being called communists. Both poll 1 percent or less and we're not going to change that anytime soon.

Most of the libertarians I know don't "come from" the Republican party. I certainly don't. Some of them have been beguiled into a false hope of turning the Republican party into a force for freedom. And most of them now realize they've been misled.

 

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi -

Ah, I see, so you are saying that there are not enough Libertarians in the US to vote in a Senator or Congressman?

Somehow I think a few Libertarians on this board might be more confidant.

I think any decent Libertarian Party in the use would gain 15% of the vote without any problems.


With communists I agree with you. They aren't in our parliament either.

The Libertarian party fails to gain traction and the fault lies squarely with libertarian voters. They repeately allow themselves to be fooled by the Republicans and Democrats. They fall for the sucker's game of "lesser-of-two-evils" and convince themselves that somehow one party is better than the awfulness of the other.

So you're saying Libertarian voters are stupid? I agree!

 

[dblack]

I don't think an over abundance of parties or candidates is helpful or likely. However if the democrats and republicans continue to become more and more extreme I can and do see an independent/center party being viable and worthwhile. I think having a thrid party would prevent the deadlock we have and keep the extremes from tilting too much in either direction.

OK, this is something I really don't get. In what ways are they "extreme"? I'm not talking about campaign rhetoric, but in the way they actually govern, how are they different really?

They pander to the extreme wings of their party. They have become so concerned with reelection and scoring points they have lost the idea of representing the people who actually elected them.

Look at the 1st credit downgrade, that was caused by our congressmen being childish and stubborn. Look up how many abortion bills have been purposed in the last 4 years. We are in economic crisis and our representives are talking abortion and contraception instead of jobs and deficit.

Sure they are, they're 'talking'. And that's it. Look closer, at the real policies they pursue. Look at the wars. Look at domestic policy. Look at 2008. Out of disgust for the excesses of the Bush neo-cons, with their disdain for the constitution, with their Patriot act, their corporate bailouts, their corporatist government, we voted for "hope and change" in the form of Obama and the Democrats.

But what happened? They double down on the Patriot act - extending and adding NDAA. They continue the meddling in the middle east. They continue the expansion of the Homeland Surveillance State. They pass even more corporate bailouts. They pass health care "reform" straight out of the Republican playbook. Where's the "hope and change"? DADT?? Big. Fucking. Deal. With apologies to my gay friends, that just isn't a drop in the bucket to the real change in direction we need.

 

[dblack]

Rabbi -

Ah, I see, so you are saying that there are not enough Libertarians in the US to vote in a Senator or Congressman?

Somehow I think a few Libertarians on this board might be more confidant.

I think any decent Libertarian Party in the use would gain 15% of the vote without any problems.


With communists I agree with you. They aren't in our parliament either.

The Libertarian party fails to gain traction and the fault lies squarely with libertarian voters. They repeately allow themselves to be fooled by the Republicans and Democrats. They fall for the sucker's game of "lesser-of-two-evils" and convince themselves that somehow one party is better than the awfulness of the other.

So you're saying Libertarian voters are stupid? I agree!

Yep. The one's who vote Republican or Democrat hoping anything good will come of it.

 

[kaz]

The only splits are the ones that exist now. Libertarians come from the Republican party, we're the extreme anti-socon agenda element. The Greens are Democrats who don't mind being called communists. Both poll 1 percent or less and we're not going to change that anytime soon.

Most of the libertarians I know don't "come from" the Republican party

I'm using small "l", which you couldn't tell since I started the sentence with the word, oops. I was referring to the ideology, not the people, but when you look at the libertarians then yeah, we overwhelmingly come from the Republican party. There are also a lot of libertarian leaning Republicans, but they haven't split and I doubt they will, so I wasn't counting them.

As for the Libertarian party, while they are more libertarian than the other two parties, I consider them to not be much of a standard for minimum philosophy government, they are snobs and elitists and they are more party then libertarian.

I certainly don't

And I don't consider you libertarian.

Some of them have been beguiled into a false hope of turning the Republican party into a force for freedom. And most of them now realize they've been misled.

Exactly why we are split from the party, no? The Tea Party isn't "libertarian," but since they specifically focus on fiscal policy over social policy, they are the closest actual movement in a long time that moves us in the right direction.

 

[Sactowndog]

Maybe the way the US will go is no parties. CA recently voted itself open primaries through its initiative system.

If there were no parties, perhaps instead of going on ideology, candidates would simply have to state their platforms and let people decide.

That still won't happen in CA unfortunately because their political party is still listed under their name, just everyone gets to vote for whoever they want in the primary and the top two vote getters go on to the General.

I'm waiting for the first election where the top two are in the same party.

Already happening. We have a number of general elections where the general election is 2 from the same party. Considering how much they have gerrymandered the districts this will keep happening.