"The United States of America is in need of a strong third political party"

[LordBrownTrout]

Sure but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[flacaltenn]

That was Bernie Sanders in 1988, but it's still true today.
Sadly not much has changed in that respect.

Presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks with C-SPAN in 1988 while mayor of Burlington, Vermont. The interview reveals more of Sanders' man-of-the people worldview and political positions, and how little those positions have changed over his 30+ year political career.

1988


2019

Not sure there isn't a SIMPLER BETTER solution.. There's NOTHING about our govt or Constitution that DEPENDS on party.. 2 parties in opposition so long have WARPED our government to THEIR needs...

It's EASIER to get on ballots as Independents in most states than as a party supported candidate.. And if you take from the ample supply of well known, and qualified people that CAN do the job and who the public recognizes, you have an UNLIMITED field of better choices..

If you took a "retiring" Congress critter and they RAN as Independent, they would IMMEDIATELY appear smarter, more likeable and more capable than when they were "just a prop" for a party... The party bosses RUN Congress and they STIFLE free and open discussion.. So even just a DOZEN TRUE Independents would change the ENTIRE process in Washington and make the "media interface" much more fair...

Why would leaving our political system, make a candidate seem smarter, more likable and capable?

It's REALLY simple to answer.. Only FOUR "party bosses" run Congress. You toe the line, speak the talking points and don't make waves... If YOU DO -- you'll find yourself blackballed like Tulsi Gabbard or other examples that WORKED with DNC, but severely criticized them...

The other 531 members of Congress are bound and gagged and any INITIATIVE or problem solving abilities you have as a member of Congress are wasted...

Folks NOT toeing the party line in Congress get MORE than their share of press inquiries and converage.. Because they are offering "a different take on things" than their party is... Look at the immense coverage that Jeff Flake, Bob Corker got when they announced retirement.. They were the "go to" interview for a leftist press.. Same with McCain to some extent and now Mitt Romney...

531 members are IRRELEVANT and INCONSEQUENTIAL for ANYTHING other then their blind allegiance to party and "suppressing" what they REALLY believe or think...

 

[the other mike]

Bernie and Jill would have crushed both Trump and Hillary.

He should have joined the Green Party.

 

[the other mike]

It's REALLY simple to answer.. Only FOUR "party bosses" run Congress. You toe the line, speak the talking points and don't make waves... If YOU DO -- you'll find yourself blackballed like Tulsi Gabbard or other examples that WORKED with DNC, but severely criticized them...

The other 531 members of Congress are bound and gagged and any INITIATIVE or problem solving abilities you have as a member of Congress are wasted...

Folks NOT toeing the party line in Congress get MORE than their share of press inquiries and converage.. Because they are offering "a different take on things" than their party is... Look at the immense coverage that Jeff Flake, Bob Corker got when they announced retirement.. They were the "go to" interview for a leftist press.. Same with McCain to some extent and now Mitt Romney...

531 members are IRRELEVANT and INCONSEQUENTIAL for ANYTHING other then their blind allegiance to party and "suppressing" what they REALLY believe or think...

Is John Brennan going to prison or not ?
He was on Madcow calling our president a f_ing traitor !
Lock that sob up in Siberia.

Military tribunal I bet. ( for national security reasons).
"Where is John Brennan" will be the most popular Google search
of the decade.

 

[flacaltenn]

Not sure there isn't a SIMPLER BETTER solution.. There's NOTHING about our govt or Constitution that DEPENDS on party.. 2 parties in opposition so long have WARPED our government to THEIR needs...

It's EASIER to get on ballots as Independents in most states than as a party supported candidate.. And if you take from the ample supply of well known, and qualified people that CAN do the job and who the public recognizes, you have an UNLIMITED field of better choices..

If you took a "retiring" Congress critter and they RAN as Independent, they would IMMEDIATELY appear smarter, more likeable and more capable than when they were "just a prop" for a party... The party bosses RUN Congress and they STIFLE free and open discussion.. So even just a DOZEN TRUE Independents would change the ENTIRE process in Washington and make the "media interface" much more fair...

Fair enough.
I think Bernie missed the best opportunity in 2016 by
endorsing Hillary Clinton. Although I personally believe that was not so much a reflection on his character, but a glaring peek into how powerful those in charge are...

A picture can say a thousand words.

I'm appalled at the ABILITY of "his" party (not REALLY "his" party) to suppress him.. It's disgusting... Personally, I agree with about 1/2 of what Bernie says.. The parts about Civil Liberties, foreign aid, etc.. Actually BERNIE is not really an "open borders" person.. He's pandering on that. Because you CAN NOT GIVE EVERYONE (citizen or not) all this free shit AND have "open borders"...

But Bernie (bread lines are a GREAT thing) Sanders has too much baggage in his lifetime excuses and support for failed "democratic socialist" movements. The OTHER half of what Bernie wants is based on total incompetence in math, economics and "how things work" and are a real show-stopper...

NO DOUBT the party is abusing him.. He's FREED HIMSELF from that by creating a small, but strong base of support.. And for casting off the muzzle and the leash --- I give him credit...

Better to run as Independent than to create another party that will be dominated by radicals with untenable goals and ideals... THAT kind of party really doesn't have a future in the US...

 

[jc456]

That was Bernie Sanders in 1988, but it's still true today.
Sadly not much has changed in that respect.

Presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks with C-SPAN in 1988 while mayor of Burlington, Vermont. The interview reveals more of Sanders' man-of-the people worldview and political positions, and how little those positions have changed over his 30+ year political career.

1988


2019

why is that independent running as a demofk?

 

[the other mike]

This was the last time I watched Democracy Now, before the election and the whole left caught the TDS virus.

 

[the other mike]

why is that independent running as a demofk?

I love that he never went to the barber. It shows a lot of integrity and individualism.
You get a great sense of lack of self awareness - the opposite of a narcissist like Trump.
It will be a fascinating debate .

 

[JGalt]

That was Bernie Sanders in 1988, but it's still true today.
Sadly not much has changed in that respect.

Presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks with C-SPAN in 1988 while mayor of Burlington, Vermont. The interview reveals more of Sanders' man-of-the people worldview and political positions, and how little those positions have changed over his 30+ year political career.

1988


2019

Bernie needs to run Third Party before the DNC Seth Rich's him

I supposed we'd see plenty of "Bernie Did Not Kill Himself" memes to go along with the Epstein memes.

 

[the other mike]

If Jill Stein was president, Edward Snowden would be the director of national intelligence.

Just the thought of that sends shivers throughout the inner beltway

You think Trump makes them uncomfortable..

 

[flacaltenn]

The problem with most Americans is they only want a third party system for president. They don't do anything in between those 4 years to help create a third party. They mostly don't care about electing local or state politicians from third parties to help them be more viable on the national stage. They do absolutely nothing about creating a voting system that would be beneficial for third parties and negate some of the negatives about having a third party such as the party with the minority point of view would now have a better chance of winning since the other two parties which may be more popular would split the vote.

I've been working on that ACTIVELY for 25 years.. Even had joint activities between the Libertarians and Green Party out in Cali about mutual problems with debate and ballot access..

It's DANG HARD to run a Pres candidate as a 3rd party.. Once you use up all your time, money and energy GETTING on the ballots in 50 states because of AWFUL restrictions on ballot access, you have nothing left for the ACTUAL election... And no chance of debate access..

Running as an INDEPENDENT in contrast is simple, cheap and easy in most states.. Which is why I've changed my tune about parties in general... In FACT, for House and Senate, most 3rd parties RUN candidates as Independents...

 

[jc456]

If Jill Stein was president, Edward Snowden would be the director of national intelligence.

Just the thought of that sends shivers throughout the inner beltway.

they really hate whistle blowers.

 

[Billiejeens]

That was Bernie Sanders in 1988, but it's still true today.
Sadly not much has changed in that respect.

Presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks with C-SPAN in 1988 while mayor of Burlington, Vermont. The interview reveals more of Sanders' man-of-the people worldview and political positions, and how little those positions have changed over his 30+ year political career.

1988


2019

Not sure there isn't a SIMPLER BETTER solution.. There's NOTHING about our govt or Constitution that DEPENDS on party.. 2 parties in opposition so long have WARPED our government to THEIR needs...

It's EASIER to get on ballots as Independents in most states than as a party supported candidate.. And if you take from the ample supply of well known, and qualified people that CAN do the job and who the public recognizes, you have an UNLIMITED field of better choices..

If you took a "retiring" Congress critter and they RAN as Independent, they would IMMEDIATELY appear smarter, more likeable and more capable than when they were "just a prop" for a party... The party bosses RUN Congress and they STIFLE free and open discussion.. So even just a DOZEN TRUE Independents would change the ENTIRE process in Washington and make the "media interface" much more fair...

Why would leaving our political system, make a candidate seem smarter, more likable and capable?

It's REALLY simple to answer.. Only FOUR "party bosses" run Congress. You toe the line, speak the talking points and don't make waves... If YOU DO -- you'll find yourself blackballed like Tulsi Gabbard or other examples that WORKED with DNC, but severely criticized them...

The other 531 members of Congress are bound and gagged and any INITIATIVE or problem solving abilities you have as a member of Congress are wasted...

Folks NOT toeing the party line in Congress get MORE than their share of press inquiries and converage.. Because they are offering "a different take on things" than their party is... Look at the immense coverage that Jeff Flake, Bob Corker got when they announced retirement.. They were the "go to" interview for a leftist press.. Same with McCain to some extent and now Mitt Romney...

531 members are IRRELEVANT and INCONSEQUENTIAL for ANYTHING other then their blind allegiance to party and "suppressing" what they REALLY believe or think...

It's a given that the media will seek out Republicans that don't agree with Republican Leadership - but it doesn't work that way with Democrats.

We vote for a platform, a syllabus, a direction (however you want to describe it)

Once again - Why would leaving our political system, make a candidate seem smarter, more likable and capable

 

[flacaltenn]

By the way, the Libertarian party is the ONLY 3rd party to jump the hurdles and make 50 state ballots for President CONSISTENTLY now for over 15 years... But it's IMMENSELY stressful and frustrating with all the hurdles the 2 "Brand Name" throw at you...

And to be honest, it's only in the last 3 or 5 years, that Libertarians have offered candidates with any national appeal that are REALLY qualified to be President..

 

[rightwinger]

The problem with third parties is they run from the fringes. Far right or far left. They end up drawing votes from their own side and ensuring the other side wins.

A viable third party needs to draw from the middle of both sides. Choose a centrist agenda. Fiscal responsibility, end US global police enforcement, hands off abortion and gun control, sensible healthcare, infrastructure.

 

[the other mike]

they really hate whistle blowers.

Newspeak for the term is being circulated.

Yesterday's category on Jeopardy was 'Whistle blowers"
and the answers were referees from different sports.

 

[Billiejeens]

Bernie and Jill would have crushed both Trump and Hillary.

He should have joined the Green Party.

The idea of Bernie and Jill having any major support outside of the bluest cities is insane.

 

[flacaltenn]

If Jill Stein was president, Edward Snowden would be the director of national intelligence.

Just the thought of that sends shivers throughout the inner beltway

You think Trump makes them uncomfortable..

Country is better off WITHOUT Jill Stein as President.. But as far as EVERYONE'S SECURITY and CIVIL LIBERTIES -- you couldn't do better than Snowden...

A lot of folks who have served in Nat Intel capabilities understand this.. YOU and the country have allowed the Worlds Most Awesome Spy agency to run DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE AGAIN... This is after we all OUTLAWED THAT in the 60s and 70s for abuse...

And SINCE Snowden blew that whistle on DOMESTIC SPYING, it's been awfully and criminally abused.. THAT is what he was warning about.. And it HAPPENED...

He was entirely right. And the next time it's abused like that, it maybe won't be for political purposes, but for ECONOMIC advantage to some of the Swamp Creatures....

 

[Billiejeens]

People who want a third party president will never have someone more viable to support than Donald Trump.

Neither establishment is all-in for him.

 

[HappyJoy]

The problem with most Americans is they only want a third party system for president. They don't do anything in between those 4 years to help create a third party. They mostly don't care about electing local or state politicians from third parties to help them be more viable on the national stage. They do absolutely nothing about creating a voting system that would be beneficial for third parties and negate some of the negatives about having a third party such as the party with the minority point of view would now have a better chance of winning since the other two parties which may be more popular would split the vote.

I've been working on that ACTIVELY for 25 years.. Even had joint activities between the Libertarians and Green Party out in Cali about mutual problems with debate and ballot access..

It's DANG HARD to run a Pres candidate as a 3rd party.. Once you use up all your time, money and energy GETTING on the ballots in 50 states because of AWFUL restrictions on ballot access, you have nothing left for the ACTUAL election... And no chance of debate access..

Running as an INDEPENDENT in contrast is simple, cheap and easy in most states.. Which is why I've changed my tune about parties in general... In FACT, for House and Senate, most 3rd parties RUN candidates as Independents...

That's cool. I actually don't think a third party should really worry about running a candidate for president until they are more established or if only public funds were used in presidential elections. Of course that is going to bring up some challenges in deciding who should receive public funding between serious candidates and the ones that more or less as or are a joke. Anyway, I think they should gain traction first locally and work their way up rather than the other way around.