What if moderate dems and moderate republicans formed their own party?

[Cant trust em]

Let's say that there were more than 3 "moderate" republicans to begin with.

I think that this is the three party system we really need. The green movement is great, but I don't think that the third party should come from our left. I'm only interested if the right has to give up as much as we do.

Any thoughts?

[MrModerate]

1. Given that the far right wingnuts have abandoned reality . . .

And that most Americans are not intensely political, I think formation a centrist party as you suggest is not only possible, but likely.

The current 'Lican party cannot survive much longer trying to embrace a spectrum from moderates to foam-spewing maniacs. I think we'll see their dissolution within 5 years or so, and reformation as one party of moderates and one cult of cranks. Apolitical types (even if card-carrying members of the religious right) will tend center, while the pusbags screw themselves into the ground or spontaneously combust.

[Celtic_88]

2. Centrist Party

I'm all for it, anything has got to be better than the mess we
are in just now!

[ret5hd]

3. Is it your contention that the left is too left...

and the moderates of the left (blue dogs?) need to compromise with the (relatively) moderately sane right to create a party that makes sense?

If so, count me as not interested.

[rwheeler31]

4. Yeah for the boring party.

[tekisui]

5. That would never win.

[sufrommich]

7. Nothing would make me happier than to see politics in America

become "boring".

[Lyric]

6. Then the Centrist party would win everything and progressive goals

would be effectively dead.

[Cant trust em]

10. I disagree. I think things would have to be more issue based

and less ideology and rhetoric based.

Right now I feel like you have two sides that pretty much just yell at each other. Let's assume that we have pretty even representation in the senate with each controlling a third of the votes. It would force coalition building because no party would be able to hold a strong majority. I think the two party system as it is makes it even less likely to get progressive values in place since you have to sides that are practically diametrically opposed to each other. The chances of bipartisanship are much fewer.

[TBF]

8. That's what you have already. n/t

[leftstreet]

9. One party is plenty. The Central Leadership Corporation cares about us.

Do I need a sarcasm icon?

[mykpart]

11. Let's call it the

Modecratican Party!

[sandnsea]

12. Greens from the left, moderates as Democrats

and Republicans as nutballs.

That is what we need.

Green Party. PUHLEEZE WAKE UP.

[Cant trust em]

16. The current GOP would be the far right.

Over time they will lose the power that they have. But I do feel like the one big sorta left tent that we have now doesn't really work. I like the politics of the Greens, but I think it's tough to break in as a third party from the political fringe.

[Sebastian Doyle]

13. The "Dead Armadillo" party?

[Cant trust em]

15. Are you happy with the two party system?

[Sebastian Doyle]

18. I'd be happier if everyone in THIS party was actually a Democrat.

There needs to be TWO parties before there can be three or more.

[Tim01]

27. THAT'S A POSSUM

Which city do you live in?

[noiretextatique]

14. isn't that the current democratic party?

:shrug:

[Two Americas]

17. yes

I think so.

[Chan790]

19. That is the second worst scenario...

topped only by a permanent GOP majority government. Centrist parties consistently do two things: Kill the left, then drift ever to the right. How would you like to choose between GOP and GOP-lite. That's what happens. Look at Austria; that's the standard epitome of a three-party system state. You have a dead left, the Christian conservative block and the neo-fascist nativist bloc that wants to expel foreigners and militarize the state (It's a Reagan wet-dream.)

Count me out!

[Cant trust em]

21. What is the connection?

Based on issues, why has that dynamic developed?

[Chan790]

36. LIVs.

Low Information Voters...they don't know much, they don't really care...they just turn out consistently and for whomever has been demonized less. They don't tend to vote for things, only against things as they don't know enough to understand why a proposal is good for them.

This means they tend to have a natural slight lean towards whomever wants to spend the least money and do the least things. All of those social safety-net ideas...they've been told they're bad and so those things are bad, they don't think...they just do what they're told. They're against taxes because really who doesn't want to keep more of their money, especially when they don't understand they're getting value back in the form of social programs, so strike two for the left. They tend to feel disconnected from and thus wary of the government. Thus, whomever offers the libertarian ideal of a smaller, less-scary government tends to carry the day.

Once the left is marginalized, the right shifts rightward, calling the center "the new left"; with no real counterbalance-force to its' left, it sure looks that way to the LIV. Thus, the center shifts to the right to prove it's not the "new" left. This drives the right farther right and the center follows. Apply, Rinse, Repeat.

Eventually a new left is formed (or the old left is empowered) when enough people feel that they're not represented by anybody. That can take decades, often it just never really happens at all or happens in some twisted unworkable form...like the Green Party.

Centrist parties are just bad news. If anything, we need a new party of the farther left which is not the Greens and is both unabashedly liberal and powerful to pull our system leftward and balance out the moderate-to-slightly-right wing of the Democratic Party.

(If you can't tell...I have no use for the wing-nutty useless Green Party either. They're not even terribly environmental anymore...just Nader sycophants.)

[4lbs]

20. If that happens, I can see instances where Progressives and freeper/neocon/religious right join to

block moderate proposals.

[Cant trust em]

22. It's funny how sometimes two totally different rationales can come to the same conclusion. NT

[Sebastian Doyle]

23. Considering most so-called "moderate" proposals have really been corporatist bullshit

That might not be such a bad thing.

If the Freepers are as pissed off as I am about what these treasonous criminals have done to this country for the last 28 years, good on them. (Though they voted for most of the people responsible)

[Cant trust em]

26. that's part of my point

I think that the party system as it is winds up making pols slaves rather than leaders. They're so afraid to upset the party bosses it winds up creating a black hole of creativity. It's frustrating to watch people have to toe the line because of fealty.

[Motown_Johnny]

24. I don't see any reason for it. Democrats are in such a strong position now that splitting

of moderates from the rest of the party would do more damage than good IMO.

[Cant trust em]

25. That's now. 8 years from now it could be a different story.

I'm thinking in more of a theoretical world today.

[Motown_Johnny]

28. True, but I would rather see the Repug party die and merge with the Libertarians

that would end the majority of the social issues debates.

[Cant trust em]

32. The current GOP inches closer to obsolecense everyday

Guys like 2000 era John McCain need to get with it and split off. Maybe we'll just start seeing a mass of people calling themselves independent.

[Dr Fate]

29. What if Paul McCartney and Keith Richards had formed their own band together?

LOL!

I dont even know what that means.

Good to see you here, buddy!!

[Cant trust em]

31. You just blew my miiiiiind.

[Motown_Johnny]

33. Then the John Lennon and Keith Richards band would have blown them away

[Cant trust em]

34. Have you seen the Rock and Roll Circus?

Adding Eric Clapton and Mitch Mitchell to the group didn't hurt.

[Sebastian Doyle]

35. They certainly would have

..even if Keith was only playing bass.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVrhaHuK1d8

[960]

30. I'm pretty sure we call it the Democratic Party.

[Urban Prairie]

37. I am opposed to a third party

There are many on my city's messageboard who claim to be "independents" and take potshots (mostly at liberals/progressives) regarding politics and use their claimed status as leaning neither right or left as a defense, which IMO, just like moderates in either party, is a convenient means of avoiding responsibility for anything that goes wrong, and claiming agreement with what goes right. Just a copout and a means to avoid rocking the "vote" of their constituency.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. They already have. Repubs + DLC + Blue Curs = 3rd Party now in power.

[annabanana]

39. They already have - The Corporatist Party

. . . . and they have us by the short & curlies