Were a Centrist 3rd party to form, would you support it?

[M.D. Rawlings]

Just curious.

This could be an interesting discussion.

People would probably be interested in defining "Centrist".

Also, you might want to count in the personality factor. Were a really well known American to decide to take an independent run for the White House, would you support that person?

Why not just vote for a toaster or a doorknob?

Mickey Mouse for Mayor!

What is a centrist anyway, some kind soap or underarm deodorant?

A string of policies, a string of peals?

A laundry list?

A stream of banalities?

Tell me what.

Tell me how.

Tell me why.

What's wrong with "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"?

How about we rally around that? What do you say? Got something better? Something bolder? Something fresh? Something new? Really? What could you have that's worth dying for?

What's wrong with liberty?

Got some?

"Can I get an L? Alright, folks, I got an L. Can I get an i? Don't be shy. I got an L. Can I get an i? There she is. I got an i. I need a b. Who's got the b? The man with the plan in the corner has got a b. Sweet. I got Lib once. Can I hang an e on it? Come on folks, we're almost there. Daddy needs an e. Ding! Ding! There it is. I got an e to hang on L-i-b. Give me an r. Just one time me an r, folks. There she blows! Now give ol' Good Golly his Molly. Where's that t? I need a t now. Give me a t. There it is! I got t for two. I got Libert. Throw me a y. Don't make me cry. Throw that bone. Doggy needs his bone. Come on now. I got Libert once. I got Libert twice. Last chance, boys, Mr. Bojangles needs a y. Lord, have mercy, I got a y. Now put it all together, and tell me what that spells."

"Liberty!"

"That's right. Say it again."

"Liberty!"

"Now that's nice. Real nice."

 

[Pogo]

Bizarre post. Bars must be doing a two-for-one.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Just curious.

This could be an interesting discussion.

People would probably be interested in defining "Centrist".

Also, you might want to count in the personality factor. Were a really well known American to decide to take an independent run for the White House, would you support that person?

A centrist is a person who lacks conviction, knowledge or a moral compass.....a fence-sitter. So, no, I would not vote for anyone who does not understand political philosophy.

Why do you think this? Do you think that only the extremes have something to contribute to the forward movement of US-American society?

I disagree with the context of the question. Conservatism isn't extreme, it is natural, as it allows people to pursue their own life, and does not grow a centralized government to lord over us, paid for by confiscatory policies. Modern liberalism (not classical liberalism) is a vehicle to expand government, in a sense, a self-serving governmental construct that creates the much-needed dependents to feed and support it.

But don't take my word for it (few do). Just draw from the vast wealth of knowledge that history gives us. Liberalism ALWAYS leads to tyranny, everywhere and every time it has been tired. Conservatism is the attempt at an antidote, and most eloquently inculcated in our Constitution.

I love this topic. Anyone who wants to discuss in detail, turn me on....

Disagree with the bolded.


That's not true with regard to conservatism as it has been practiced for more than the last 40 years.


Conservatism doesn't allow people to pursue their own life, as those on the right seek to deny gay Americans their equal protection rights, women their privacy rights, and transgender persons their right to individual liberty. We see conservatives hostile to religious liberty, hostile to Islam, hostile to those free from faith, and advocating that religious dogma be codified into secular law with 'defense of marriage' acts and 'personhood' legislation.


For example, we have posts in threads on this very forum by conservatives advocating that gay Americans be denied access to public accommodations and denied access to marriage contract law they're eligible to participate in, for no other reason than who they are: persons seeking to pursue their own life.


Your perception of conservatism may have been true during the 50s and 60s, but it's clearly not true today, where the agenda pursued by the political right is clearly in conflict with the fundamental principles of individual liberty.

Ol' Forked Tongue's at it again. . . . Mr. Bojangles needs some liberty. You ain't got no liberty. You got nothin' but lies. Mr. Bojangles can't live on lies. L-i-e-s don't spell Liberty.

No soup for you.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Just curious.

This could be an interesting discussion.

People would probably be interested in defining "Centrist".

Also, you might want to count in the personality factor. Were a really well known American to decide to take an independent run for the White House, would you support that person?

A centrist is a person who lacks conviction, knowledge or a moral compass.....a fence-sitter. So, no, I would not vote for anyone who does not understand political philosophy.

bullshit.....is that what someone told ya?.....

Okay smart guy, on what set of principles does a centrist rely upon? What set of convictions, philosophy? Capitulation? Finger to the wind? Mob rules?

You'll have to do better than "bullshit" to advance this discussion.

speaking for me.....it depends on what issue you are talking about.....i can be pretty conservative on some things and pretty liberal on others.....i dont care for either party but that doesnt mean i would not agree with one of them on something.....mostly i cant stand the far right and left.....i dont admire people who follow their little parties no matter what....even if they dont agree with them....if you want me to say more you will have to wait until i get back....the wife is letting me know its time to go....

With all due respect, you did not answer my question. On WHAT does the "centrist" base their position??

i said i was speaking for me.....i base my position on what the issue is...tell me the issue and i will tell you my position....

 

[Genevieve]

Just curious.

This could be an interesting discussion.

People would probably be interested in defining "Centrist".

Also, you might want to count in the personality factor. Were a really well known American to decide to take an independent run for the White House, would you support that person?

Only if that Centrist Party or Independent person had a shot at it.
If I bother to vote I want it to count.

 

[percysunshine]

If it had a snowball's chance in hell of making a difference in federal legislation, and if it fit into my personal philosophy of what a third voice in federal politics should broadcast, then I'd work my ass off for a third party. Oh wait a minute...I already did that. We were called...we were called...oh yea! We were called the Reform Party. Sorry about that, but you know how ephemeral the memory can be when it comes to third party history in this country.

"As for a third party, we tried that, the People's Party. Unfortunately we forgot that in order to have a third party you must first have two other parties" --- Gore Vidal (roughly)

I thought the Democrat Party was The Peoples Party.
.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

A centrist is a person who lacks conviction, knowledge or a moral compass.....a fence-sitter. So, no, I would not vote for anyone who does not understand political philosophy.

Considering that moderates/centralist are known to be pragmatic, saying that they "lacks conviction, knowledge or a moral compass.....a fence-sitter" demonstrates someone drinking way too much of the daily partisan Kool-aid. In actuality, the opposite is true.
Strong partisans have a high tendency to go with whatever rigid stance their ideology dictates to them. That approach is lazy and very, very narrow-minded, it also lacks the usage of using one's grey matter. It lacks looking at issues objectively. In other words, it's the easy way out.
Without objective and inquiring thinking, the simple wheel wouldn't of ever come to existence. The Constitution would not have been born.
The only way to solve a problem is putting your hands around it, looking at the entire problem from all angles and dissecting the problem to find the best solution. Problems are not solved by just looking at one side of the problem.
How long did civilization think the world was flat? It took centuries for someone to challenge the age old theory that the world was indeed flat because people were content to believe what was fed to them. Every successful company is successful because of the usage of objective thinking to further their success.
A pragmatic individual studies the issue and comes to a conclusion. A follower just accepts what they are told by their small minded leaders.
Thinking out of the box is the perfect approach to any problem, thinking within a box leads to certain failure.

Pragmatic! Objective thinking? Hands around the problem? Thinking outside the box?

Sounds like a stream of platitudes, albeit, all damned up by a pile of manure with sugar on top to dampen the smell, but no banana.

Got banana?

Who's got the banana?

Oh, wait! There it is. The man's got his hands around it. Hmm. A real problem.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Bizarre post. Bars must be doing a two-for-one.

Got banana?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You don't need a centrist party when both major parties are to the right off where previous presidents have been.

How about we just demand that the money be taken out of politics and that campaigns be run with a higher standard for honesty and accuracy.

How about we demand that journalists ask follow up questions and stop the dopey effort to appear "right down the middle".

How about we just demand that the money be taken out of politics

The only way to get money out of politics is to get the government out of the economy.

 

[Pogo]

If it had a snowball's chance in hell of making a difference in federal legislation, and if it fit into my personal philosophy of what a third voice in federal politics should broadcast, then I'd work my ass off for a third party. Oh wait a minute...I already did that. We were called...we were called...oh yea! We were called the Reform Party. Sorry about that, but you know how ephemeral the memory can be when it comes to third party history in this country.

"As for a third party, we tried that, the People's Party. Unfortunately we forgot that in order to have a third party you must first have two other parties" --- Gore Vidal (roughly)

I thought the Democrat Party was The Peoples Party.

There is no such thing as the "Democrat Party".

 

[percysunshine]

If it had a snowball's chance in hell of making a difference in federal legislation, and if it fit into my personal philosophy of what a third voice in federal politics should broadcast, then I'd work my ass off for a third party. Oh wait a minute...I already did that. We were called...we were called...oh yea! We were called the Reform Party. Sorry about that, but you know how ephemeral the memory can be when it comes to third party history in this country.

"As for a third party, we tried that, the People's Party. Unfortunately we forgot that in order to have a third party you must first have two other parties" --- Gore Vidal (roughly)

I thought the Democrat Party was The Peoples Party.

There is no such thing as the "Democrat Party".

.
So you admit they are Communists?

Wow.
.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

You know, Canada has five federal political parties that often have to govern by way of coalition, by cooperation. They haven't fallen off the planet via turmoil. In fact, the UN has ranked them #1 in quality of life/standard of living about 100 of the past 101 years...I exaggerate, but you get the point. Calgary was ranked by Forbes a few years ago as being the most livable city in the world (pop. 1 million or more). I can't imagine Burger King's major long-term consideration in jumping ship for Hoserland being just corporate taxes. I'm sure the quality of life in the Great White North had a lot to do with their decision...and Canada's long history of political stability let’s don’t forget, even if they do have five parties.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Bizarre post. Bars must be doing a two-for-one.

Speaking of which. . . .

A duck walks into a bar, bellys up and orders a charcoal-filtered nice on the rocks. This quack likes his smooth chilled, see. The bartender serves the duck his drink, and the duck tells the bartender to bring him some gumballs.

"Sorry, don't have any gumballs," the bartender tells the duck.

So the duck downs his smooth, pays and leaves, see.

The next day, the duck returns and orders another nice on the rocks. "Let me get some gumballs with that."

"Like I told you yesterday, I don't have any gumballs."

The duck downs his smooth, pays and leaves.

Same thing the next day: the duck orders a nice on the rocks and gumballs.

"Look here, you stupid quack, I've told you twice already that I don't have any friggin' gumballs. Ask me about gumballs one more time and I'll nail you to that wall by your bill. Check?"

The duck downs his smooth, pays and leaves.

The duck comes back to the bar again the next day, and orders a nice on the rocks and a box of nails.

"Does this look like Ace Hardware? I ain't got any damn nails either."

"Then give me some gumballs."
________________________________________

You guys making any headway on that centrist thing yet?

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

You know, Canada has five federal political parties that often have to govern by way of coalition, by cooperation. They haven't fallen off the planet via turmoil. In fact, the UN has ranked them #1 in quality of life/standard of living about 100 of the past 101 years...I exaggerate, but you get the point. Calgary was ranked by Forbes a few years ago as being the most livable city in the world (pop. 1 million or more). I can't imagine Burger King's major long-term consideration in jumping ship for Hoserland being just corporate taxes. I'm sure the quality of life in the Great White North had a lot to do with their decision...and Canada's long history of political stability let’s don’t forget, even if they do have five parties.

Of course, Calgary's in western Canada. It's a conservative town. The folks of Alberta like Americans, not so much their leftist cousins in northern Canada.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

You know, Canada has five federal political parties that often have to govern by way of coalition, by cooperation. They haven't fallen off the planet via turmoil. In fact, the UN has ranked them #1 in quality of life/standard of living about 100 of the past 101 years...I exaggerate, but you get the point. Calgary was ranked by Forbes a few years ago as being the most livable city in the world (pop. 1 million or more). I can't imagine Burger King's major long-term consideration in jumping ship for Hoserland being just corporate taxes. I'm sure the quality of life in the Great White North had a lot to do with their decision...and Canada's long history of political stability let’s don’t forget, even if they do have five parties.

Of course, Calgary's in western Canada. It's a conservative town. The folks of Alberta like Americans, not so much their leftist cousins in northern Canada.

I have business dealings up there. Alberta has always had more in common with Texas than it does with the rest of Canada. It's oil rich, it hosts the largest community of expatriate Americans in the world, and they genuinely like Americans there. Cowboys and Indians and oil tycoons, that's what Alberta is. You know that on 9/11, in spite of blowing snow and sub-freezing weather, thousands of Calgarians spontaneously lined up outside Red Cross stations, clinics, and hospitals to donate blood for the victims. That didn't happen anywhere else in the world outside our own borders.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

If it had a snowball's chance in hell of making a difference in federal legislation, and if it fit into my personal philosophy of what a third voice in federal politics should broadcast, then I'd work my ass off for a third party. Oh wait a minute...I already did that. We were called...we were called...oh yea! We were called the Reform Party. Sorry about that, but you know how ephemeral the memory can be when it comes to third party history in this country.

"As for a third party, we tried that, the People's Party. Unfortunately we forgot that in order to have a third party you must first have two other parties" --- Gore Vidal (roughly)

I thought the Democrat Party was The Peoples Party.

There is no such thing as the "Democrat Party".

Sure there is. I even went to some with my bleeding heart libtard wife. They get falling-down drunk and snort a lot of coke at democrat parties.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Still lookin' for some headway on that centrist thingy. We got plenty of slogans, bromides, platitudes, etcetera, etcetera. . . .

We got some talk about thinking outside the box, pragmatism, objectivity, ideology is bad, a hands on man, problem solver . . . a real man about town, so to speak.

Beware of those problem solvers, I always say, especially those who pretend human beings live in ideological vacuums.

Now a fella tells me he's a libertarian, I pretty much know what he has in mind to do. Check?

Same thing with a contemporary American conservative. Check?

Both are classical liberals.

Liberty.

But apparently liberty's too extreme for the centrist. The Founders are too extreme for the centrist.

Dude says he's a "liberal," well, now, I know he's a leftist, a progressive, a socialist, a collectivist, a man about mobocratic rule, judicial oligarchy, big government.

What the centrist tells us when he tells us he's a centrist is that he's not an extremist; that is to say, he doesn't do liberty, as that's too extreme. He's about tyranny, just not so much as lefty is. He's tyranny lite or halfway tyranny, a little tyranny here, a little tyranny there. He likes tyranny, just not the full monty. But he ain't no ideologue, supposedly, as he thinks his tyranny outside the box.

 

[eagle1462010]

Definitely No...........I'm in agreement that these are fence sitters and I don't sit on the Fence. I agree with the Tea Party Movement and it's move to limit the Gov't and restore fiscal sanity to this country.

Given the massive debt I don't see any compromise with the left, who refuse to do nothing but whine every time cuts are made with the exception of the military. Even though our debt continues to explode.........

I don't agree with Status Quo of either party. They are career politicians who are bought and sold like whores to their favorite political sponsor. Which is why the Status Quo must go.............

Two parties, same result. I want the GOP to go back to being Conservative, and not the lame as Rhino's they are today.

 

[Kondor3]

A Centrist borrows elements from both the Left and the Right and blends them into a comprehensive whole.

A Centrist is not married to one ideology and exists in the Real World, beyond the realm of polar opposites.

As usual, The Truth (including Political Truth [functionality]) lies somewhere in the Middle - a.k.a. the Center.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

A Centrist borrows elements from both the Left and the Right and blends them into a comprehensive whole.

A Centrist is not married to one ideology and exists in the Real World, beyond the realm of polar opposites.

As usual, The Truth (including Political Truth [functionality]) lies somewhere in the Middle - a.k.a. the Center.

More slogans. . . .