OK, I am open to going third party. Lets hear the reasons for or against it

[NNN0LHI]

Listening to the difference between George Galloway and Carl Levin was enough for me today. Give me one Galloway for a hundred John Kerry's any day. The Dem's will never win anything again as far as I am concerned. Why? They don't want to win. They don't have the guts to do what it takes to win. I think the Democratic party is going the way of high buckle shoes. If they can't stand up for what is right anymore they don't stand for anything.

Don

[Bouncy Ball]

1. Let me tell you what I did.

I voted third party for years. In races with only a repuke and a Dem, I voted Dem of course. But wherever I got a chance to vote third party, I did.

The election of 2000 caused me to change my thinking on that.

I decided to formally join the Democratic party and start changing things from the INSIDE rather than hoping to affect change from a third party.

But that's just me. I wish you the best no matter what you decide to do.

[oxbow]

2. Read this:

A good analysis of why 3rd parties are powerless in US politics, and how to change that:
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/10/12/13248/089

an excerpt:

"Suppose someone likes a Libertarian or Green party candidate more than the "Republicrat" choices. They well know that if they were to vote for a minority group, their vote would be wasted unless it's for a candidate in a district where that party is polling better than 25%. Many voters assume that this problem is an inherent fact of democracy, but it is not. The flaw rests squarely on the U.S.'s archaic election system.

Instead of selecting just one candidate, our voting machines should allow voters to answer "yes or no" to each of the candidates. The candidate with the most support would then win. This would safely allow someone to vote for a Libertarian candidate, as well as a Republicrat, without any chance of wasting votes or spoiling an election. Such a system allows for any number of candidates, and has even been shown to increase voter turnout by as much as 50%."

[dave502d]

3. Against it. not enough time.

[PsN2Wind]

4. Don't blame me

I voted for Ross Perot, the only candidate in '92 that told the truth about NAFTA.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bouncy Ball]

8. God.

That's not necessary. Most people in third party are progressives. I don't know why Democrats can't work with them and form alliances like they do in other countries. They win offices that way.

[Booster]

25. I agree that most 3rd party people are progressives, but use

this one name and you'll understand why Dems don't trust them: Ralph Nader. My one-time hero, who not only sold out, but hurt the Dems in both elections so that we ended up with the Dimson. Why, oh why, wouldn't Ralph work with the Dems?

[cestpaspossible]

31. I've always thought it would be helpful if the Greens were viable.

I even voted for Nader in 2000 - not because I thought he was a better choice than Gore, but because I wanted the Greens to get their 5% so they'd get Federal funding in 2004. Of course they fell short, and I vowed never to vote strategically again in a GE.

I was also fairly active in the New Party for a while.

[n2mark]

38. Bouncy Ball

I agree with you.

Forming a third party will only help the pukes. Don't leave the Dem party fight to have them in office, I was better off with the Dems. in office.

[Solly Mack]

17. I'm sorry...who controls all 3 branches of government again?

relevant is a relative word, no?

[cestpaspossible]

20. And which third party has elected someone to Federal office lately?

relevant is a relative word, yes.

[Solly Mack]

23. GOP still control all 3 branches...that's the reality of the word relevant

It does no harm to join with 3rd parties for common goals.

[cestpaspossible]

26. Actually both your comment and mine have some insight

however, you are welcome to believe that you hold a monopoly on insight if you wish.

[Solly Mack]

29. sounds like an exit to me

with a little bit of let me pull this strawman outta my ass thrown in

[Inland]

42. In a sense. The third party run by Nader put Bush in power.

But I doubt that's the relevance that progressives were looking for.

[Solly Mack]

46. Yeah, I've heard that before but I think Bush Inc was going to

steal the election regardless...and that it wasn't a case of someone taking advantage of a close situation...I believe the apparatus for stealing the 2000 election was already in place(hence the voter scrub)...so I don't blame Nader for making it so close and allowing Bush to steal it. Bush Inc was set up for that already.

Now, Nader might have made for a great distraction leading up to what became Selection 2000....but Nader didn't put Bush in power...Bush was going to steal that election regardless. Yes, I'm well aware of the money Nader recieved...


As a progressive or Liberal...or whatever label people are slinging out today with scorn...and a Democrat, I blame Bush Inc for stealing the election and Bush Inc alone...and I'm fairly indifferent to Nader...he only has the power people give him and I don't yield him any.

but NONE of that takes away from the fact that a 3rd party could be viable in this country...

[Nordmadr]

55. Well that was entirely uncalled for. I offer my input here regularly

and I am a member of the Green Party. If the Green Party is irrelevant, it is because of the "We fear change" attitude rampant in this country. If the Green Party supports my ideals and values, then it is part of my responsibility as a citizen to MAKE them relevant. This liberal progressive veteran is tired of the same old lame ass shit. Is party loyalty what really matters? Seems a little too "Good ole boy" to me. It is the issues and values that matter. I support whoever fights for that, regardless of party affiliation.

Olaf

[misanthrope]

66. Valid point...

...worthy of consideration.

[Jacobin]

6. I need to remember the Perot thing

He was third party and got a huge vote, as whacky as he was. I'm completely fed up with the Democratic party. 2/3 have been bought off by the corporatists and the other 1/3 are either too timid or too tired to fight.

I'm beyond sick of this crap. And to have Levin take sides with fucking Norman over a peevish little barb which Israel RICHLY deserves is beyond the fucking pale.

Our entire senate was indicted today and they didn't even have the decency to stand trial. They fucking ran out of the senate like the bunch of cowardly fuckwads that they are.

[KG]

7. your analysis is spot on.

the dems are out of power, and will remain so for the next 10 - 20 years.

so, this is as good a time as any get a viable third party, with freash ideas and energy up and running while the dems continue down their path to irrelevancy.

[alcuno]

9. Carl Levin is Michigan's problem.

You and I have Obama and Durbin. Maureen Dowd said it best, Republicans all say the same thing whether they believe it or not. Democrats, by their very nature, think too much.

If we had a parliamentary system of government, I'd go with the third party. Give the Dems another election cycle and see if we can't pull it together.

Besides, Levin's comments were so innocuous, they are already forgotten.

[Just Me]

47. Okay. I call your post "insightful"!!!

:bounce:

[stevedeshazer]

10. Can't argue with that right now

Today, Galloway delivered the best political smackdown that I've EVER heard.

I just want someone who is willing to tell the truth, and I don't care which party they belong to.

There are far too many pink tu-tus.

[GreenPartyVoter]

11. Well, as a third party member I can tell you a bit about it

Downside: obviously fewer people means less support

People still tend to vote "pragmatically" (Heck, I voted for Kerry myelf because I thought he could win and he would be a step up from **)

You have to jump through a lot of hoops just to maintain party status.


Upside: Smaller/newer parties are like smaller newer businesses.. they have a lot of energy and innovation. Bigger established parties have lost that fire and tend to want to maintain the status quo. (I liken this to the oil companies who for example fight tooth and nail to keep us addicted to oil instead of really throwing themselves into finding new energy sources. Sure, they'll toss you a token hybrid or two to keep you happy, but they aren't really working for what you want.)


Regardless of party size/affiliation: The corruption of the election system is killing our democracy. More vapor trails than paper trails, you can buy your way into office if you hop into bed with the right people and corporations, it's a black and white system--either THIS candidate or THAT candidate, frontloaded primaries, purged voting rolls, not enough time or places to vote, etc etc

So overall, while picking a party is nice and it gives you a way to identify yourself, in the end getting a progressive from ANY party elected is going to require a major overhaul of our election system and our media. (See my election reform page for more.)

[crispini]

60. WRT the energy and innovation in a party.

I'd respectfully like to disagree. My experiences with my local Democratic party since the election have been largely positive, with lots of innovators and new ideas being thrown out about how to revitalize the county party, especially with the Dean and Clark people who have newly come in and united with the party.

Honestly, I think that your VOTE, while important, is not anywhere near as important as giving your time and energy to become a REAL part of the Democratic party. So many people refer to themselves as "Democrats" when all they do is get out and vote. That's all well and good, but Howard Dean himself said that if all you do is VOTE, you get a D on your citizenship grade. You have to give time and/or give money and/or run for office yourself.

Getting involved -- REALLY involved -- in local Democratic party politics is one of the most interesting and fulfilling things I've done in a great while. I wish more people on this board would think locally rather than putting all of their focus on Washington. The only way we will reclaim leadership is one person at a time, one precinct at a time.

[Walt Starr]

12. I'm open to it as well, and would vote third party

if one who shared more of my views than the Democrat were to run.

for now, I'll take my Democratic Senators in Illinois, but I'll be going third party if Blagojevich goes for a second term as governor.

[proud patriot]

13. These issues are so personal to me

I came to DU a green party member . I
just came back to the Dems .

Nationally I've found that until we get
instant runoff voting or some other reform
voting third party actually is dangerous to
my country .

Not only do I think Instant runoff voting will
help third parties but it will also help in
primaries . Of course I could be wrong about all
of this . :shrug:

[snowbear]

14. So... Levin now represents the entire Democratic party to you?

Oh good grief...

~~~~~~~~~~ :nopity:

If you head off into the sunset to a 3rd party forum, have a goodun' and drop by from time to time! :hi:

[KoKo]

15. I came to DU as a Moderate to Right Leaning Dem....I'm now leaning

Socialist.

If this is where you are, then I understand. I've posted about this before, but because you are Male you will have folks listen...I declared my gender and it's irrelevant.

But, I understand exactly what you are saying. Some of us are at the "end of the rope" with faith in our Party.

However, I'm working on gettin Verified Paper Trail, Countable Ballots in my State and DU got me involved on the Precinct level as an Officer where I could fully participate in the Kerry/Edwards 2004 Campaign.

After my unpleasant experience with that...I hang in to try to get the DRE Machines/Paperless OUT OF MY STATE...and if we are not sucessful with that...I'm out of the Democratic Party. :shrug:

From my heart on this. It's too discouraging to give up four years of my life to be trashed by my own party.

BUT! We got Howard Dean as DNC Chair...and I was NOT a Deaniac (as many Du'ers categorized Dean supporters.) I supported Dean, Kucinich and Moseley-Braun. Gave some bucks and went to their functions in my state. I canvassed for John Kerry when he was the nominee.

I didn't have a Dem Candidate I could truly fall in love with..although I liked qualities in all of them. I don't think that we Dems will ever have a perfect Candidate. And, I've given up thinking that our party stands for anything with the "lobbyists/Corporatists controlling it.

I will work towards 2006...but after that, unless I see big changes going into Party Reform for 06, I will be outta Democratic Party for 08. I might decide not to vote if our effort fails to get VVPT for all our states voting machines. Because, who will care...my vote won't count anyway...so why bother. :shrug:

:rant:

[Solly Mack]

19. You were once right leaning?

thump....falls off chair. I honestly don't remember that. WOW...

:)

[KoKo]

34. You don't remember when I posted about Confederate Flag being part

of my "heritage" as a Southener, and when I objected to the Gay Bishop Robinson being confirmed as a Bisop in the Episcopal church?

I even said that "Gone With the Wind" was a great movie because it dealt with issues between the North and South in a human way. :D I also posted that I couldn't stand what I saw as Porn on TV and that little kids didn't need to be subjected to that and I would be happy if the Fundies got rid of "Janet's Boob."

But, I've always been a Populist...I've never veered far from that...just more conservative on some social issues than many DU'ers. :shrug:

I got flamed and trashed here for all those posts.

But, yes, I'm left of where I was then. :-)'s

[Solly Mack]

35. Now that you've tickled my memory

I do recall the flag thingie...

wow...it's been a rambling ride since 2001

[applegrove]

16. Is bad to have a third party in first past the post elections. The

extremes always loose. Which is too bad if they are NDP in Canada (who I would like to see win federally just once in my life..at the very least..so they could look through the books with their eyes).

[firefox]

18. It's the only way to end fascists ping pong

Chomsky has it right when he says the powerful select candidates that meet their requirements and let the public ratify one of them. The game is rigged so that the plutocracy lives. Carter upset the plutocracy when he made it through without getting their blessing. The Hunt Commission changed it so that even that does not happen again. That is why we have a stack of early primaries, so that it is over before the public ever knows anybody or anything that will change.

Kerry even said that he would not be different from Bu$h in substance, but he would be in style. The last election did not even discuss the drug war which brought us the police state and corruption that lead to the destruction of freedom under the disguise of another bogus "War"- the war on terror.

If people don't leave and accept the fascists ping pong under the illusion of an election, things will never change and the wealthy will own the machines and we all will continue to be batteries that can be thrown away when worn out.

Just ask yourself who has a system that protects two parties so well and why we do not have a direct vote that requires a majority for election to office. It would tell people something when there were second elections between two candidates in search of a majority. It would also mean that a third party candidate could be viable by just finishing second with a one on one shot at the plutocratic alternative.

The game is rigged and it includes the media that programs the masses.

[The Gunslinger]

40. AMEN (nt)

[Just Me]

21. IMO until the right-wingers are defeated by any means, 3rd party has no,..

,...value to me or this country.

I've been an independent for most of my life. I am as sick of the two-party turning into single-party corporate syndrome as anyone. But, I want to work on creating the tide that evokes change knowing full damn well that real change NEVER happens quickly.

Levin did piss me off today. He just didn't piss me off enough to pull me away from a long haul investment in humanity.

[oxbow]

22. For a 3rd party to even be relevant...

For a 3rd party to be even relevant, we need to have major voting changes
Namely, instant runoff voting. Those in power will be against this, so it will have to start locally, changing school boards and mayoral races first.


Rage Against the Machine : Why Voting Doesn't Work and What You Can Do About It.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/10/12/13248/089

[oxbow]

28. We also have to break the link between money and power

bribery is now legal, that'a why corporate hacks stay in power.

go here to help us strike at the source of the corruption. http://breakthelink.org./

[Inland]

43. Right. The structure dictates a two party system.

First past the post elections means that you can't split the vote. That's why Bush wins if Nader runs.

[tabasco]

24. I'm pissed at the Dems too but this would be a terrible time ....

for the left to splinter into irrelevant mini-camps. That's what allowed Hitler to come to power. It is time for us to unite under a common banner and defeat a common threat. When we have defeated the greatest danger to our democracy, we can go back to in-fighting.

We owe it to the world to show the discipline to defeat these evil bastards in charge right now.

But if you have made up your mind, good luck.

[eridani]

27. Dems have PCOs, and third parties don't

What else do you need to know? Personal engagement at the precinct level is the only way we will be able to do an end run around the media.

[Virginian]

30. I'm all for it.

Will Ross Perot run again?

How about Neo-cons, Republicans and Democrats as our three parties.

[pnorman]

32. It isn't that they don't want to win.

But most are scared out of their gourds at the thought of losing. They "play it safe", and thereby make themselves easy targets for the neocons-neodixiecrats-neonazis in the White House. Quick answer: You're RIGHT.

pnorman

[Cleita]

33. I'm thinking the same myself, except that I probably

would still vote for the Democratic candidate and issues. Even though you will give up the right to vote in the primaries, in a way it doesn't matter, because the candidates it seems will be preselected anyway. That's how we got John Kerry. Until they fix the way primaries are run where one or two insignificant states decide our candidates, primaries aren't very useful and you won't miss them.

Also, it will give you the opportunity maybe to meet people who are probably more like-minded and in sync with your thinking. I am of course trying to talk to myself about this as well as you.

[Skip Intro]

36. Stay Dem at least until the fouth reich is ousted. No other party

has a shot at doing it.

[Fleshdancer]

37. I'm leaning in that direction as well...

The way I see it, I have very little representation in the Democratic Party right now. It seems pointless, if not dangerous, to become blindly faithful in a party that no longer offers what it use to promise.

What good does it do me to compromise any further at this point? Without a strong opposition party now, I fear for America's future. I see a country that is tangled in even more wars, a turnover of Roe vs Wade, more discrimination against the homosexual community, a dirtier environment, a smaller middle class...the list goes on and on.

My mind isn't made up yet but my decision will be very clear by the actions taken by the DNC and the Democratic leaders by the time midterm elections arrive. Until then, I'm watching and waiting.

[n2mark]

41. Don't give up

just keep communicating with the DNC. Tell them your views, communicate your anger. A third party is not the answer. A third party will only divide the country more and will further the agenda of the RW nuts. This is what the right wingers want to happen. Don't do this please. This is not good.

[LiberallyInclined]

39. Hillary Clinton.

if she's foisted on us as a candidate/nominee in 2008, I'm definitely going third party.

[LittleClarkie]

44. Oh please

You'll be happier and my party will be smaller but stronger minus the negativity. Oh please, DO go third party.

[Inland]

45. It's like emigrating.

Sure, you'll feel more comfortable with a bunch of like minded Canadians, but you haven't won the fight, you've escaped it.

Same with the third parties. Purity is obtained by never having to do anything to win an actual office. They find solace in their irrelevance.

Or better yet, it's like DU.

[David Zephyr]

48. Bravo for having the guts to say it, Don.

You know, I just wrote in mopaul's thread here that "I saw a whole new side of Carl Levin I never knew existed until today, mopaul. Could it be that Senator Levin has a public side when the cameras of U.S. Network Media and U.S. Cable News Media and C-SPAN are rolling?
Could it be that today when only the BBC was broadcasting that Mr. Levin felt, shall we say, free to be himself."

Don, watching Carl Levin behave like a Bushista poodle was an eye opener. For me, that was the bigger story, Levin's treachery.

And there are those here that still defend the Democrats overwhelming endorsement of the Iraqi War Resolution and the Patriot Act.

I feel like a complete fool who has been fooled by pseudo-liberals like Levin.

[NNN0LHI]

49. It doesn't take guts to not want to go down with the ship David

I consider it more self preservation. The leaders we have skippering the ship we are currently all on are all a bunch of corrupt yes men and women. They don't care about any of us. They only care about getting reelected so they don't have to give up the government teat they are sucking off of. That is job 1 for them. They just throw us some cookie crumbs now and then and expect us to be happy we get that. That is my take anyway.

Don

[Lexingtonian]

50. Do go waste your vote, if you like

The Democratic Party will stay relevant, one way or another.

Yeah, the pro-Israel reactionaries-from-insecurity/paranoia can be exceedingly annoying despite very enlightened views on just about any other subject. But latent/excessive conservatism is to be distinguished from true corruption and self-refutation.

If latent or excessive conservatism is an unforgiveable sin, everybody in the Party over age, oh, forty has to be tossed overboard for a transgression or two or three. Don't forget that this also the case in Third Parties- we wouldn't want you to start your life in the Green Party with any illusions about them, either. I'd say every Party on the spectrum is more conservative than Democrats tend to be, at least in social policy matters.

[oxbow]

52. There's no need to feel that way

With instant run off voting, we could vote democrat AND green and whatever else we wanted for the same office, and our vote wouldn't be wasted. Read up on it sometime, it's a brilliantly simple solution

"Instead of selecting just one candidate, our voting machines should allow voters to answer "yes or no" to each of the candidates. The candidate with the most support would then win. This would safely allow someone to vote for a Libertarian candidate, as well as a Republicrat, without any chance of wasting votes or spoiling an election. Such a system allows for any number of candidates, and has even been shown to increase voter turnout by as much as 50%."

[Lexingtonian]

51. (sorry, double posted)

[QC]

53. Oh my. Another dramatic exit thread. How very.

I might be able to work up a little emotion if I had not already seen a few hundred of these before.

[Festivito]

54. Why? If you rename it well, we'll become more outspoken?

Must be a magical name you'll use. Instead of fighting the money of Scaife et al using truth, we'll suddenly become alive with glorious word choice and diction.

We could all use brilliant descriptive techniques. Such, by dividing Dems there could arise the Stupid Party. A party that thinks grand elocutionists will spontaneously generate.

[reality based]

56. I agree that Levin's performance yesterday was shameful.

I had a lot of respect for him until then. Still the Democratic primaries and caucuses are open. The rank and file are angry and restless. It will likely be easier to rehabilitate the Democratic Party than to start an effective new party. If the object is to get a party with purer principles, then a new party is the ticket. If you want to counter the threat of neo-fascist Republicanism, a national front of democrats (small and large "D") is needed. Stay with the Democratic Party.

[IronLionZion]

57. If Chairman Dean can work together with third parties...

then we all can. He allied with the Progressive Party for Vermont elections and won't oppose Bernie Sanders for US Senate. Basically, he cut a deal saying the Dems will let Bernie take the Senate seat and the Progressive Party will let us take the house and other seats.

We need to work together AGAINST the Republicans, our real enemy.

[Junkdrawer]

58. It's a "last ditch" option in a "winner takes all" system, HOWEVER...

given that:

* Electronic election fraud is rampant

* Most of the Democratic party is turning a blind eye to the problem

* Most of the Democratic party has been winnowed, via the above, to
DINOs

the formation of a legitimate third party is necessary, if only to organize legitimate opposition.

Bottom Line: If the Democratic Party doesn't SERIOUSLY address the electronic voting issue, they force the exodus of their "lesser of two evils" supporters. And that pretty much describes me.

[UdoKier]

59. I'm all for 3rd parties, given the utter collapse of the Democrats.

Register as a Green, whatever, it's a fine thing to do. Make sure to vote for them, esp. if you think they have a chance. But if you've got a close senate race between a decent dem and a really shitty repug (let's say Obama vs. Keyes), then vote for the dem.

But if it's a DINO vs a repug, send a message and vote for the Green. If I lived in CT, I could NOT in good conscience vote for Joe Lieberman. EVER.

[Jose Diablo]

61. The only way a 3rd party could be viable

is if the electoral, winner take all, approach is scraped in each state.

The only thing 3rd parties can do at this time is to split a winning parties popular vote. But I am not sure, eliminating the winner take all approach should be scraped. Haven't heard all the angles to this question. Why did the founders set-up the electoral college anyway?

But I hear you on the dissatisfaction with the corporate lap dogs in this party. Money can corrupt, no doubt about that.

You know though, it's interesting that most of the campaign money spent ends right back in the corporate media's pocket. Plus it buys the government. Isn't that interesting? It cost a lot of money to advertise.

[lateo]

62. Welcome to the club Don.

The Democrats have proven themselves spineless cretins over and over. But now what?

[Ravy]

63. I don't think you understand the Democrats role.

When Republicans control the house, senate, administration, and the supreme court, their role is to LIMIT the damage that the Republicans do.

They have to pick their fights, or they win NONE of them.

Those of you who want to so dramatically pack up and leave just because you do not like a compromise, or understand that even Democrats sometimes can take a position against other Democrats are very naive.

You expect the party and EVERY elected representative to agree with your personal position 100% of the time. That is not politics.

The Democratic party is a bit more to the center than I would like to see it right now, but I can see the alternative of it not being there at ALL, and that really frightens me.

Your kind of thinking put Bush in office in the first place.

[Individualist]

64. So am I

I agree with you that if they can't stand up for what is right anymore, they don't stand for anything. Integrity has become obsolete, politics has become a game, and our government is now one of, by and for the corporations. Even Mike Malloy was discussing the option of going to a third party last night.

[indigonation]

65. NOOOOO!

I would like to predict the Repugnants will split apart at some point. How often do you hear - defensively - that they're really Libertarian? Hah - I hear this all the time. They don't even want to admit they're Repugnican.

We have to help them -divide and conquer - we have to be the wedge. We will also get more people to join the Dems.

Now is not the time to split the Dems - we will lose every election. Especially with the rise of the Machine.