A Gallop poll shows that fifty-two percent of Americans want a third party — a continuing majority from earlier polls showing as much as 58% who oppose the monopoly of power by the two leading parties. The question is how we can call ourselves a democracy when the two parties are able, through ballot barriers and other means, to prevent a major third party from emerging in the United States. I previously wrote about these barriers and the need for a third party.
For civil libertarians and others, this coming election is a painful example of the crushing monopoly exercised by the Democrats and Republicans. It is impossible for many civil libertarians to vote for Obama given his horrendous record in blocking the torture investigations, continuing military tribunals, re-asserting the right to assassinate American citizens and other policies. The White House, however, is continuing the same cynical calculus used previously by Democratic candidates that civil libertarians and liberals have no where to go. Currently the leading voice against torture, foreign wars and secret prisons is Ron Paul on the Republican side, not Barack Obama.
This poll is an embarrassment in showing that, despite widespread and long-standing unhappiness with both parties, citizens will again be forced to chose between what they view as the lesser of two evils.
Even in the Democratic primary, voters will have no choice as engineered by the Democratic National Committee under the control of the White House. The result is no choice for many voters. We are living through a political crisis in this country and we need fundamental political reform. We have become a nation of lemmings who continue to follow the formula blue state/red state politics imposed by two controlling party machines. Worse yet, we have become a nation of chumps who insist on dozens of different types of bleach to chose from (despite the fact that bleach is chemically identical) but accept that their government will only practically be chosen from one of two parties.
Jonathan Turley
I do not see the prospects of a viable Third Party in my lifetime. I have voted for 3rd party candidates before, but in reality, the candidates were not even in the running. Now. having additional parties like the Green Party and others can influence the issues in an election, but I don’t see them as being successful on the national scene. We should concentrate on getting the correct candidates for either party to run and discuss the issues that the vast majority of the people want. In our current climate, I want to know what the candidate has done about creating jobs or improving the climate to create jobs and what have they done to protect the poor and the middle class and women rights.
Finally, it is not unusual to go with the lesser of two evils in any election and I don’t think having another candidate or two will change that.
A generic third party looks good to a lot of people just as a generic presidential candidate does.
rcampbell,
Buddha and I and others have been discussing the need for a change to the entrenched two party system for over a year on and off the blog. I can only second Buddha’s post at May 11, 2011 at 9:56 am.
We have debate and discussed almost every possibility and of course there are many challenges, but … it is very doable.
More on Ron Paul:
It sure would be nice if, when talking about making changes to American Society, we’d occasionally stop and acknowledge that the rest of the world exists, and so does history.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/05/11/whistleblowers/index.html
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
The WikiLeaks Grand Jury and the still escalating War on Whistleblowing
by Glenn Greenwald
excerpt:
Worrisome Development
National security experts say they can’t remember a time when the Justice Department has pursued so many criminal cases based on leaks of government secrets.
Steve Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists has been following five separate prosecutions, part of what he calls a tremendous surge by the Obama administration.
For people who are concerned about freedom of the press, access to national security information, it’s a worrisome development,” says Aftergood, who writes for the blog Secrecy News [ed: and is a vocal WikiLeaks critic].
Aftergood says some of the most important disclosures of the past decade, including abuses by the U.S. military at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, came out because people concerned about overreach blew the whistle on the government.
“Leaks serve a very valuable function as a kind of safety valve,” he adds. “They help us to get out the information that otherwise would be stuck.”
The Obama Justice Department doesn’t agree.
(end excerpt)
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/poll-obamas-approval-rating-hits-two-year-high.php?ref=fpi Things are looking up for Obama.
Pete wrote:
Give it up USofA. The people are powerless.
Maybe history will say that you had slightly more than 200 good years before ‘money’ took over everything.
You need something like an Egyptian Revolution and a completely new start rather than a third party. What a joke
—————————-
A whole lotta truth…
The special election in NY has three candidates running – the republican, the democrat and the tea party candidate. The republican party could split.
Although as a practical matter, I suspect Pete Moran is correct. Weeds choking out the flower of true democracy, the currently entrenched oligarchy and their lobbyists are going to have to be ripped out by the roots I suspect before any real change happens.
This cannot be surprising since both parties have failed to keep their respective promises to their constituents. There are other options, the Greens http://www.gp.org/index.php and Libertarians http://www.lp.org/ , it just won’t happen by the next election. Continually voting for the two corporatist parties will never change anything, only giving your money and votes or even running as a third party candidate will force the big two to change or go away. So it is time to get out there and raise money and circulate petitions to get these other parties on the ballot and let teams red & blue know they are no longer the only game in town.
rc,
First, the Tea Party isn’t really a third party. They are the extremist wing of the GOP being played as the boogie man to keep sane people in line and from demanding the heads of people like Bush and Cheney on a platter for their crimes while in office.
Second, multiple parties that require coalition building are actually the norm in Parliamentary democracies around the world and while that coalition building does create some instability it mainly create instability for pols who are actually forced to work for change unlike the corporate fed slackers we have here. It also forces them to consider what is best for their constituents because if they aren’t acting in their best interests? Someone else will be. For all their talk about competition, they sure don’t seem to want any for themselves.
Finally, political advertising? Well, yeah, you’ve got a point there, but there a solution to that: ban all political advertising on television and radio. Limit them to billboards and the Internet. Plus, the Internet will force them to give expansive policy platforms by it’s format instead of the policy soundbites they use on TV and radio now.
Third party? You bet. And to echo Blouise, the more the better.
Give it up USofA. The people are powerless.
Maybe history will say that you had slightly more than 200 good years before ‘money’ took over everything.
You need something like an Egyptian Revolution and a completely new start rather than a third party. What a joke.
“I want the option of a third party so bad I can taste it.” -Blouise
Ditto to that… (my response)…
…said out of a sense of frustration. I’m open to the possibiliby that it’s a bad idea… that it won’t solve our problems and may, in fact, make things worse…
Ron Paul doesn’t believe in evolution, see here. Anyone who denies reality is not on my list of candidates that I can support.
I’m not among those clamoring for a third or fourth or eighteenth political party. I don’t see the concept contributing much that is positive in places where multiple parties ar common. I see instead the rise of single-issue (single-minded) legislators unprepared for acting on the broad range of topics required. That leads to unstable alliances, drifting loyalties and an even sloppier process of trying to form and reform coalitions to pass any kind of legislation. Like it’s not tough enough already?
The actions of the Tea Party’s “caucus” in the House is an example of how this muddling doesn’t create better legislation, it prevents the creation of legislation. I’m not berating the Tea Party here, I’m pointing out that they’re conduct is appropriate to their role as a minority caucus. Now imagine the more liberal Progressive wing of the Dems fielding a slate of candidates and some get into office. This would equally hobble a Dem majority. They would likely be as strident as the Tea Party group in trying to bend proposed legislation to their side and thus slow things further. Add to that confusion single issue candidates whose big or sole issue is pro or anti and nothing about passing legislation gets easier.
For one more mind boggling senses-numbing aspect of multiple parties, consider this: Political advertising!
“I want the option of a third party so bad I can taste it.” -Blouise
Ditto to that…
“I also think we, as a people, are sophisticated enough to handle a fourth and fifth party.” -Blouise
I’d like to believe that we are, but… 🙂
————————-
The following comes to mind… (Hope ebbs and flows… Ebbing, today…)
“When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.” -Jonathan Swift
Ron Paul is an anti-woman, anti-union, homophobic republican. Maybe Trump will run as a third party candidate although it is less likely after his birther thing failed. Maybe, we need two more parties because the chances that disaffected democrats will get together with the tea party patriots and support someone like Paul are nil.
Where is Uncle Ralph….
I want the option of a third party so bad I can taste it.
I also think we, as a people, are sophisticated enough to handle a fourth and fifth party.