Is it time for a legitimate third party?

[dblack]

I think no amendment can pass. You have a disaster of a founding document.

That's fine. But the states all signed on to it, and if you want to change it you need their permission. And my point still stands. Minorities have less interest in majority rule. It's a losing game for them.

 

[cnm]

It wasn't

MAGAt education has riz agin'.

 

[Magnus]

This is not what I wanted from this thread, a bunch of you jumping in and doing exactly what we should be getting away from. But so many of you are so entrenched that your ideology, politically, is the only way, you can't stop, for one thread, and talk reasonably.

Nope. Just pointing out the idiocy of your suggestion. Next time if you don't want to hear us, don't post or ask us for our opinion.

 

[cnm]

Minorities have less interest in majority rule. It's a losing game for them.

Yes. A disaster of a document.

 

[dblack]

We know US conservatives hate democracy.

Okay, but do you get my point? At all? Do you see why it was necessary to offer some counterbalance to pure majority rule to get all the states to sign on?

 

[cnm]

Okay, but do you get my point? At all? Do you see why was necessary to offer some counterbalance to pure majority rule to get all the states to sign on?

Sure. Created the current disaster with that stupid compromise and document made to suppress freedom.

 

[Magnus]

They had a real working gallows and everything! Pence was lucky to get out alive!

Yeah, he thinks so. Poor Pence hasn't stopped running.

 

[dblack]

Sure. Created the current disaster with that stupid compromise and document.

And how would you go about changing it? How would you convince the minority interest states to go along with it?

 

[Independent thinker]

Is it time for a legitimate third party?

• Too much political divide on issues that could have a common middle ground?
• Our 2 current parties drive their own agenda, while the a unheard majorities voice is left unheard, seen, or advised.
• In today's political climate, how would a third party get a voice? We are not asking for a seat at the table, but rather, a voice that can be heard. Then let the dominoes fall.
• George Washington warned of political parties subverting the people and leading to despotism. This board that example where many on here, express desire to remove the other in totality.
• From Washington - "...The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.
  
  All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
  
  However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion".
  
  Farewell Address (1796) | Constitution Center

  National Constitution Center Historic Documents Library record for Farewell Address (1796)

  constitutioncenter.org
• The above is where we are today. Do you disagree?
• Recent Gallup Poll (take it for what it's worth says that support of a third viable party is up 63%
  • Support for Third U.S. Political Party Up to 63%
• And, maybe there is another option; no parties, purely a stance and position.
• Has the country outgrown our political party system?

How do you propose it to actually happen? I mean in reality and not in fantasy. The truth is, we have third parties now. If the voters wanted a third party then they would vote for a third party.

 

[LibertyKid]

How does 1 man standing on his own have the power to govern?

Overthinking. He meant stand up and present their own policies and suggestions without the need for party affiliation. That can't happen today without a huge backing from a party and the funds to do so. That in itself is wrong.

 

[cnm]

And how would you go about changing it? How would you convince the minority interest states to go along with it?

I keep saying it's a disaster. You're screwed. You'd need a national conversation about race to fix it, as that's what caused it.

You'll never have that conversation.

 

[Billiejeens]

We don't need a 3rd party, we need 2 less parties.

Explain how that would work.

 

[dblack]

I keep saying it's a disaster. You're screwed.

Yes. You do keep saying that. Thanks for playing!

 

[LibertyKid]

That is untrue, the reason there are no powerful third parties is because they sellout to the Democrats or Republicans for a smaller piece of the pie. Look at Bernie, he sold out millions for a book deal and a third house.

And was conspired against by the DNC. Don't forget that little bit.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What MAGAt rubbish. The whole electoral college bullshit was a dance to satisfy the slaver states' paranoia and economic self interest. It's why so many early presidents were Southerners.

The Electoral College was designed to prevent Virginia, the most populous state from winning every Presidential election, even though they did for 4 out of the first 5 of the Presidents being born there. I see your knowledge of history and the Constitution are at a racist elementary school level.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You've never heard of the 3/5 compromise?

After the new amendments after the Civil War, that is no longer applicable and can no longer impact elections.

 

[Skylar]

How do you propose it to actually happen? I mean in reality and not in fantasy. The truth is, we have third parties now. If the voters wanted a third party then they would vote for a third party.

Good luck. They can't even articulate the policy of this 'third party', let alone provide any solid reason why anyone would vote for it.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What would the third party's policies be? This is not a minor issue.

My question exactly. There are very few policies espoused by Cackles McKneepads that I could ever support. The third party to gain my vote would be more moderate but still more conservatives than anything liberals support.

 

[LibertyKid]

Sadly, no. While there are two sides to every argument, have you ever heard of one having 3 or 4?
Every fence has 2 sides--- ever see one that had 3 or 4?

What would happen if there were 3 or 4 parties, now you would likely have no more than any one person getting 30% of the vote, maybe only 25. Who would that represent?
Can you see Congress never passing anything with 3-4 different groups all arguing?

That is the problem. For every candidate pulling for going in one direction, every rope only has 2 ends, to pull in the other.
Voters can't keep up with the positions of two opposing candidates, how would they ever decide between 3 or 4?

And maybe, maybe, that's how it should be. Our gov't was never established to have 51% rule over the 49%. Perhaps there is TOO much being sent to the federal gov't. In fact, States were to have autonomy from the federal gov't, in as much, that what happens at the state and local level, should impact us more, than what happens at the Federal level. What we do know, the federal gov't has become TOO big, too much power, and now too much influence. We have traded State and local rights for a new DC Monarch.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That's because those polls are about the feelings of the entire country where as they run for reelection in their own counties. Moron. The approval among their constituents is a different metric.

But why is it different? It makes no sense at all that 90 plus percent of people think all members of congress suck but theirs.

It is a purely partisan thing, they are voting for their party and not the person.

We have seen it a 10000 times on this forum....I would vote for a rock/dog/Russian/etc before I would vote for Dem/Repub.