Last week we had a spirited discussion about the Fairness Doctrine, and out of that discussion, a number of readers commented on how the current status quo in Washington results in little progress. The fierce partisanship between the Republicans and Democrats seems to be resulting in more grid-lock and greater vilification of each other, rather than the goal of finding common ground in the making of public policy.
I have been a disgruntled Independent since I was 18 and voted for Ronald Reagan many years ago. In fact, Ronnie was the only Democrat or Republican that I have ever voted for President. I am a strong believer in the need to create a strong third party within the US. The current two-party system creates an environment that is a quite a paradox. As the two party’s policies actually move closer together, the division and ranker in both the elected and the electorate are actually increasing. Strange days indeed, quite peculiar Mama.
I had high hopes for the Reform Party, however Ross Perot ultimately proved he was a bit crazy, and abandoned the party once it was not all about him. I would have liked to have seen him provide support even after he was no longer a candidate. All of the other third parties sit too far outside the common mainstream “silent majority” to really have a chance. Candidates like Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanan, Michael Anthony Peroutka, and Cynthia Ann McKinney have not really been able to draw much, if any, attention.
In order for a third party to gain a foothold it must have a nationally known political figure step up to the challenge. In 1912, that was Teddy Roosevelt, who had lost the Republican nomination, and created the Bull Moose Party. Later in 1980, John Anderson ran against Carter and Reagan. Then in 1992 and 1996 Ross Perot tried to mix it up with Clinton and Bush. Ultimately they all failed, and no true third-party ever lasted past their nominee.
So, that is where Hillary steps in… Ok, stop laughing. If Hillary split from the Democrat Party, and announced her run as an Independent, I would guarantee that she would easily win the coming election. If she selected a young, middle of the road conservative as the VP candidate, she would effective split the Republicans and Democrats, and ride to the White House on the 49.5% of the public who love her, and Bill.
Who would you vote for as a third party candidate? Would you support Hillary?
| 4.0 (3 people) |
18 Comments
Let me offer a few responses to this. Before I do that, I need to provide some background.
I have been extremely involved in politics for the past several years, and my wife is a senior organizer for Common Cause, with much of her work focused on electoral reform.
You state, “In order for a third party to gain a foothold it must have a nationally known political figure step up to the challenge. ” Yet the problem, as you touch upon, is that any person with so much presence on the national stage is likely to be so much more concerned about themselves than about building a lasting infrastructure to support an effective minor party.
A successful minor party attempt needs not only to get elected to the highest office in our country, but needs to get people elected into congress, state legislatures and other offices.
This task is complicated by the electoral laws that stand on the books in many states making ballot access much more difficult for minor party candidates.
So, why aren’t people interested in minor parties working more on electoral campaign? Again, the issue of hubris of minor party leaders.
Minor party leaders too often refuse to work with other minor party leaders to bring about the electoral access that will help the efforts of all minor parties.
So, does your state allow fusion voting that makes it easier to for minor parties to gain ballot line access?
aldon @ orient lodges last blog post..Assorted Updates
i could probably get behind hillary if she’d leave the damn second amendment alone.
I am behind Hillary all the way.
I also have expressed support for a functional multi-party system in this country, along with a constitutional amendment to eliminate the Electoral College and use the Direct Popular Vote to elect the president. See http://www.boomerwithaview.com
Elections Issuess last blog post..Michelle Obama - Asset or Liability?
I would actively work against Hillary if she wound up running as an independent. As much as I dislike McCain and Obama, I simply can’t stand that awful Hillary. I’m a bit biased because I’m an Arkansan and it was common knowledge that she looked on my fellow Arkies as uneducated, inbred white trash while she had the misfortune of living here.
Regardless, your idea of a viable third party is a great one. However, I would suggest finding someone to lead it who is not an established politician. Why? The established politicos are a large part of the problem. Why invite them to establish a new party based on the failed ideas they carry with them?
The Hawgs last blog post..Jerks causing car wrecks and more Jeff Foxworthy
In 1992, Ross Perot garnered about 19 percent of the national popular vote and zero electoral votes. I imagine Hillary Clinton would do about as well in 2008, even though it would be nearly impossible to get on the ballot in a lot of states just 70 days before the election.
There was a few states in which Perot finished second and earned more than 20 percent of the vote. But he didn’t win any states.
There’s the problem. Unless the third-party candidate wins–not a respectable showing (the U.S. system is first place or bust)–his or her supporters have nowhere to go afterward. I think a lot of people would back third-party candidates but they have told they’d be “wasting” their votes if they do so. Better to pick the lesser of the two major-party evils, they’re told. Most of the time, that’s what happens.
I don’t think a parliamentary system works any better. Imagine six parties with 15 or 20 percent of the membership battling for a working coalition. Imagine Italy!
Tysons last blog post..Recent Contests Draw Parallels
It rather amazes me that you think Hillary would have a chance as a third party candidate. Hillary was the only candidate I absolutely, positively will Never vote for. I agree we desperately need reform from the two party gridlock, but I don’t see how it will ever happen.
Alans last blog post..House Lust
I would absolutely vote for a third party candidate and with the choices facing me, I would vote for Hillary.
Mountain Womans last blog post..What a Quarter Horse Taught Me
Aldon, thanks for your comments, as always. This time I do not have anything to argue with you about
As you say, even if a third party could win the White House, without members in Congress and at the local level, it probably would not have much chance at long-term success.
My state, Maryland, does not support fusion voting. I have done some more reading about the concept, and will write about it more in the future.
I just watched Hillary’s DNC speech and came away thinking the same as you, that if she declared independence, she would win the election. I had never heard her speak before, and I was impressed with her clarity. (I would rather read the issues and decide based on them instead of their political personas. I just don’t like TV and the 3-second sound bites.)
I can also understand The Hawg’s feelings about her history here in Arkansas. But, it’s not enough to turn away from her now, 16 years after she left the state. A lot of learning has hit that woman in the last 16 years.
She is the single minded focus this country needs - well, at least she is far better than the other choices we have.
Theresas last blog post..It’s Not About Race Already
It seems like the Hawg took off and caught Hillary in some lies in here speech. It ticks me off, because how can you know find out about stuff like that? What we need to know to make an educated decision is buried deep and out of reach to those of us who don’t follow politics closely, very very closely.
The Natural State Hawg
I think Hillary showed last night at the DNC that she is by far the most presidential of all the candidates. if she gave campaign speeches the way she made her speech last night, it would have been a done deal long ago that she would have won the nomination and the the white house. I think she suffered from bad campaign advice and a bit of arrogance. Hillary has had her dose of humble pie. While she won’t split from the democrats now, after McCain wins the General Election, Hillary comes back in 4 years stronger than ever.
Matt Urdans last blog post..Vote For Me
Theresa:
The only way you can find out about stuff like that is by being very involved in the process. You know what I do for a living and our members have been screaming for the health care reform I mentioned since about 1991.
We were in Washington, in fact, as part of NAR’s yearly meetings in that city when that 2006 bill was butchered in the Senate.
What annoyed me about her speech was just how she took what happened, spun it to her party’s advantage and repackaged it as the truth. This all goes back to the thing that annoys me the most about business as usual in D.C. — lying through your teeth has become an acceptable practice for BOTH parties.
If a viable third party springs up that is fronted by someone with the severely lacking qualities of honesty and integrity, I’ll vote for that bunch every single time.
Hillary’s just not to be trusted.
Oh how good it is to hear more and more people coming out in favor of a strong third party!! I have made a point in the last two elections to vote 3rd party…this one may be too close to do that with, but Im keeping it in my mind anyway.
I agree that someone strong needs to do the third party thing, but not with Hillary at the helm (dont even get me started, lol)
Thyme2dreams last blog post..Red Hot & Wired Treasury
Amen. I supported her all along and after her speech Monday night, I agree that she could form a third party, which, I think would actually be good for the country.
I might support a third party candidate if they stood for common-sense solutions to our problems. My personal values run closer to the conservative Republican side, so for me, a supportable third-party candidate would have to be a better conservative than the Reps.
Thanks for everyones comments. I think some folks thought my post was an endorsement for Hillary, in fact one Stumbler’s review called me an “idiot”. My first hate mail, I love it!
Like the Hawg, I am not a huge fan of Hillary’s. What I am a fan of is choice, and the best ideas wins. With only two views, I think we don’t have enough ideas, and the ideas get lost in the partisanship.
You know I have always heard (and agreed basically) that voting for a third party candidate was throwing your vote away.
But I have to be honest this time I would do it. After the way the Democratic powers-that-be screwed Hillary out of the nomination… I would vote for her if she ran as a third party even if it did ‘throw my vote away’ in the end.
Nice site btw I’ll definitely be back.
Hedons last blog post..Liberal anthropologist from Omega Seti 3
Post a Comment