Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats?

Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Thanks, yeah, Nader got a bit of coverage here too back then. I watched a documentation on "fracking" in the US the other day. Things like that may help the Greens in the US in the long term. Sad, but true.
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Thanks, yeah, Nader got a bit of coverage here too back then. I watched a documentation on "fracking" in the US the other day. Things like that may help the Greens in the US in the long term. Sad, but true.

It definitely has in upstate New York. The Green Party has put an enormous amount of pressure on our state Governor to permanently ban fracking, and while that hasn't happened, he has put a moratorium on it pending "further studies." I personally don't think he has the balls to institute a ban, but we did just get a State Court ruling recently that individual towns/cities can block fracking within New York state. Of course, what will ultimately wind up happening is that wealthier towns will institute their own bans to protect their own health/environment, while struggling, poorer cities that desperately need money will agree to allow fracking—and everything negative that will potentially come with it. It's disgusting, really.
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

There are some bad bad people on the right...
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

There are actually a couple of national level third party officeholders right now—Senators Angus King and Bernie Sanders, both Independents. A lot of people (myself included) would like to see Sanders run for President in 2016; if it happens, it'll be interesting to see whether he campaigns as Democrat or an Independent.

I voted for a third party Presidential candidate (Nader) in 2000, and I took a lot of grief for it from friends and family when Bush walked away with the win over Gore. I live in a state that ALWAYS swings blue, though, so my vote was really of no consequence in the overall election. I just wanted to see the Green Party get a higher popular vote count in order to qualify for funding in the next election.

But yes, third-party (usually Independent, Libertarian, or Green Party) candidates have a lot more success locally, but it's still a two-party dominated field.*

*OK, I just looked it up: There are currently 146 Libertarians and 131 Green Party members in office at the local level right now.


Of course, I just typed a big essay on this, and then all of it disappeared. Extremely frustrating.


This is important to me, so I'm going to type it again. And if it disappears again, I will type it again. And if it disappears yet again, I will type it yet again. This is important to me.


There's absolutely no conceivable way that Bernie Sanders will ever become President of the United States. He simply doesn't have the juice. Howard Dean didn't have the juice either, and we all saw what happened to his campaign. If memory serves me correctly, he didn't win a single state in the Democratic primary. (He might've won Vermont, but I don't think so, I'm not in the mood to look it up on Wikipedia.) I like Bernie Sanders. I like his appearances on MSNBC, I like his perpetually uncombed hair, I like his incredible intellect, I like the vast majority of his viewpoints, however, he just flat out does not have the juice to win a Presidential election. The great William Jennings Bryan failed four times in a row, after winning the Democratic nomination four times in a row, to win the general election to become President of the United States. Bernie Sanders is no William Jennings Bryan. If Bryan didn't have the juice, then under no circumstances does Bernie Sanders.

I need to also mention that both Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy did have the juice to win in '68. Of course, Bobby Kennedy was flat out murdered by the CIA at the Ambassador Hotel in June of '68. (This was right after he won the Democratic primary in California.) Anyone interested in politics should watch the BBC documentary, "RFK Must Die." Watch this documentary. After watching this, if anyone can tell me that the CIA didn't execute Bobby Kennedy, I'll tell you that you're insane. They flat out murdered him, and they murdered him gladly. Bobby Kennedy had the juice to win a Presidential election, and the CIA damn well knew it, so they murdered him. Eugene McCarthy incredibly, and against all odds, had the juice to win a Presidential election. His near breakdown, complete with tears during a campaign speech, sunk him. Most people are too scared to back someone with such beautiful sensitivity, and honest emotion, so they'd rather back total losers like George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton. I'm sorry, but Bernie Sanders doesn't have the juice that Eugene McCarthy or Bobby Kennedy had.

By the way, the "RFK Must Die" documentary is the most phenomenal documentary I've ever seen in my life. It is full of twists and turns, and is absolutely stunning, and completely convincing. The evidence that is presented is completely convincing.

Angus King does have the juice. He has the intellect, the gravitas, and the rare "it" factor. It's an odd "it" factor, but he has it. Absolutely no one saw James Garfield coming. Absolutely no one saw Jimmy Carter coming. Hardly anyone saw Bill Clinton coming. The odds are heavily, and I mean heavily, stacked against independent Angus King. However, in this bubbling cauldron of the current political climate, that I predict will only become more turbulent in the next two years, any f***ing thing is possible. James Garfield shocked in 1880. Jimmy Carter absolutely shocked in 1976. Why not Angus King in 2016? I can see a scenario where the majority of Democrats will back him, possibly the vast majority. Independents will flock to him in droves. Why not? The Democrats have one viable candidate, and that's Vice President Biden. I personally love Vice President Biden, he's one of my favorite politicians of all-time. However, in 2016 he'll be 73 yrs. old ( I think that's correct.) People will discriminate against him because of his age. Never mind the fact that John Paul Stevens retired from the United States Supreme Court at the age of 87, after serving for years with great distinction. Hardly anybody cares about that. Plus the mass media is bored with the Vice President and they'd rather annoint Hillary Clinton, Maryland Governor O'Malley, Chris Christie, or the the definition of tepid, Marco Rubio. Vice President Biden has the juice, but I just can't see him winning a Presidential election. Sadly.

A quick breakdown of the four empty suits, who the mass media craves, and who will love to annoint as the next U.S. President. Maryland Governor O'Malley is a cookie-cutter fake politician, with the charm of Harding, and the sit-on-the-fence bullshit governing style of the Clintons. Hillary Clinton is a borderline disaster. I'd love to see a female President, but under no circumstances do I want to see Hillary Clinton become the next President. And this is coming from a lifelong Democrat. We've had twenty worthless years of the Clinton's and the Bush's controlling the United States Presidency. Twenty years. James Garfield did more good for this country, in the six months that he was President, than Clinton and the Bush's did in their twenty years. (And the last three and a half months of his Presidency was literally on his deathbed.) We simply do not need another day in which one of these knuckleheads are sitting behind some ostentatious desk in the Oval Office. Go the f*** away. Chris Christie does nothing but suck. Go away. Spiro T. Agnew had more intellectual firepower than Marco Rubio. That's literally the worst insult that you can give any politician. Go away.

Damn, Al Gore should have been President. He had 550,000 more popular votes than Bush. I voted for Al Gore, and did so proudly. I proudly voted for John Kerry, and was Shocked that he lost. Are people, the American people, really that f***ing stupid? They are that stupid, at least the majority is. I proudly voted for President Obama in 2008, but then became disillusioned. In 2012, I gave up, and didn't even cast a ballot. I'd love to see Angus King, or Bernie Sanders, ( which would be a miracle) or anybody that I give a damn about, be on the ballot in the general election in 2016. If its Hillary and Christie, or O'Malley and Rubio, or any other empty suit, I'll happily stay home. Happily.



RFK Must Die.png

"RFK Must Die," a shocking documentary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Thanks Justin.

p.s. Love your Avatar!

9k9w2g.jpg
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

indiana-jones-popcorn.gif
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Choice being essential to democracy, it makes the US the best damn democracy in the world...:) Other democracies are equally crap..:)
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Thanks Justin.

p.s. Love your Avatar!

9k9w2g.jpg



You're welcome, Belligerent Ghoul.


I went over the top in writing this, in terms of well, the volatility of it. And I was off topic a good portion of the time, and used the word "juice" about a dozen times too often. Thanks for noticing it though.


I love my avatar too! It's a picture of Caterina Valente. She's an Italian singer, guitarist, dancer, and actress. She's currently 83 years old. She has one of the nicest & friendliest faces I've ever seen. Here are two more nice pictures of her...


220px-Caterina_Valente_1966.jpg Caterina 2.jpg



I must say I like your picture too. I love Pro Wrestling, especially back in the glory days.



** I was partially off topic in the rambling essay I penned the other day and would like to make a few quick points.

- I really like the Green Party, but I don't think they're ever going to get it together enough to make a dent in national politics. It would've happened already. Ralph Nader, who I immensely respect, represented the Green Party amazingly well in the Prez election of 2000. I think he ended up getting around 5.3% of the national vote, or maybe it was a little less than that. I think the Green Party will continue to be a strong voice in American politics, but will have very little sway in any discussion on the national level.

-Frankly, the Libertarians are perplexing and frustrating to me. I respect their fire and passion, but they are a mystery to me. I know they are staunchly against paying taxes and well, what else is on their national platform? I'm lazy, and literally haven't read one paragraph of what their national platform is, and yet I don't blame myself for this. They have to find ways to make people, like me, become curious in what they stand for. This is a lazy way to approach politics but I feel it isn't my job to seek out the heart of the Libertarian cause, it's their job to grab people like me and fire me up. Just like it's not your employer's responsibility to make sure you know what the correct time is to report for work, it's your responsibility to find that out. I can't name a single Libertarian leader on the national level (Ron and Rand Paul are Republicans), and other than not wanting to pay most taxes, I have'nt a clue what these folks stand for. They'll definitely be a strong voice in American politics for years to come but I truly believe, like the Green Party, they won't make much of a dent in national politics. And I truly believe they'll always be perpexing to me.

-The Tea Party is a total disaster for the Republican party. It continues to fracture the party in incredibly stupid ways, and leaves it with a dismal future. This Tea Party movement is literally the most idiotic thing I've ever seen in American politics. They have every right to voice their opinion and incredibly a few times, in their echo chamber, they actually make some sense. However, I feel that politically it's nothing but an exploding neutron bomb for the Republican party, which is fine with me. The Tea Party has zero chance of rising up to claim the Presidency. Zero.

-I wish I had more time to write. The Independents are the one group that can rise up and claim more Senate seats, more House seats, and the Presidency. True, the odds are stacked heavily against them, but I feel this can happen. Ross Perot (who I'm not a fan of and think was significantly overrated) got 19.8% of the vote in the '92 election. He got one in every five votes. Someone with more political skill and intellectual dexterity can literally double these numbers. The Republican party is completely fractured and the Democrats are drifting out to sea, with really no game plan of trying to get back to shore. If the economy takes a turn for the worse, which can Absolutely happen, then I believe an Independent can emerge and steal the election. If the economy tanks, if we enter another Great Depression, if people can't find work, if they can't put food on the table, if they are in jeopardy of losing the roofs over their heads, then all bets are off for the Democratic and Republican Party. People will drop them so fast it will make their heads swim, and in the process chose an Independent to lead the country through its trying times. I hope this scenario doesn't play out, but it very well could. The Panic of 1837, the Panic of 1873, the Great Depression, every and anything can happen. Anyway, that's my two cents worth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Love that you're very passionate about politics and your country, Justin. A good start to change things...

Greetings from ancient Europe;)
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

-The Tea Party is a total disaster for the Republican party. It continues to fracture the party in incredibly stupid ways, and leaves it with a dismal future. This Tea Party movement is literally the most idiotic thing I've ever seen in American politics. They have every right to voice their opinion and incredibly a few times, in their echo chamber, they actually make some sense. However, I feel that politically it's nothing but an exploding neutron bomb for the Republican party, which is fine with me. The Tea Party has zero chance of rising up to claim the Presidency. Zero.

Agreed, and for that reason I somewhat perversely welcome them. That said, I don't think anyone saw David Brat's win over Eric Cantor coming. A seven-term Republican House majority leader defeated by a little-known Tea Partier with $200k?! That's a bit terrifying—the far Right is now considered "moderate," and the far-FAR Right is sliding in. Cantor would likely have become Speaker of the House! Do you think a Tea Party candidate like Brat could make it to third in line? I do now, and it's not that far of a stretch up two rungs to the Presidency.
 
Last edited:
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Agreed, and for that reason I somewhat perversely welcome them. That said, I don't think anyone saw David Brat's win over Eric Cantor coming. A seven-term Republican House majority leader defeated by a little-known Tea Partier with $200k?! That's a bit terrifying—the far Right is now considered "moderate," and the far-FAR Right is sliding in. Cantor would likely have become Speaker of the House! Do you think a Tea Party candidate like Brat could make it to third in line? I do now, and it's not that far of a stretch up two rungs to the Presidency.


I just wrote a big response to your great statement, and one to mattisek as well, and then it disappeared. I'm so tired of that happening. I have to be at work in an hour so I'm going to type a synopsis of what I wrote. It's not as good, I don't know maybe it'll be better. I need to dial down a lot of what I write anyway, except for magical posts like "Mike Connors was Today's F.B.I." Just kidding. Actually I have big things planned for that thread. Back on task....

* I agree, I also like the existence of the tea party because it's making the Republican party implode. And the tea party is making the "tan man," John Boehner, unravel in front of our eyes, which is enjoyable to watch. You're right the tea party could be poised to grab the Speaker of the House position, horrifyingly sooner rather than later. I don't think Boehner can withstand the stress much longer and may step down soon. I don't know anything about Cantor's replacement, I should, but I don't. McCarthy is his name, and I believe he's supposed to be a Boehner style Republican, which is certainly better than tea party Republicans. (I used to be the biggest political junkie ever, but about two or three years ago, I drifted away from it.) I don't care for the likes of Boehner, or Lamar Alexander, or God there's not many left, not many Republicans who at least have "caution" in their vocabulary. The tea party doesn't possess any caution at all. They have almost zero common sense and from what I've seen, very little common courtesy. The tea party is dangerous. The Sarah Palin's and Ted Cruz's of the world are nothing but bad for the country. This is how I feel. I'm going to send this so it doesn't disappear, and then time willing write more.
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Love that you're very passionate about politics and your country, Justin. A good start to change things...

Greetings from ancient Europe;)


Thanks, mattisek. Greetings from the western U.S. :thumb:.
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

Agreed, and for that reason I somewhat perversely welcome them. That said, I don't think anyone saw David Brat's win over Eric Cantor coming. A seven-term Republican House majority leader defeated by a little-known Tea Partier with $200k?! That's a bit terrifying—the far Right is now considered "moderate," and the far-FAR Right is sliding in. Cantor would likely have become Speaker of the House! Do you think a Tea Party candidate like Brat could make it to third in line? I do now, and it's not that far of a stretch up two rungs to the Presidency.


I agree, that "far right" Republicans are now today's "moderate" Republicans. The decent days, when the Nelson Rockerfeller "liberal Republicans" roamed the land, are now just ghosts of the distant past. It was truly amazing what took place in the Mississippi Senate Republican primary a few weeks ago. Long time Senator Thad Cochran was in a royal rumble for his political life, against some knucklehead tea party guy whose name escapes me. Astoundlingly, Mississippi Democrats went to the polls and rallied around the staunchly conservative Cochran. (Mississippi has open primaries in which Democrats, Republicans, Independents, etc. can vote wherever they please. Many states have closed primaries.) Cochran narrowly won and everyone agreed that it was Mississippi Democrats that took him over the top. The same Mississippi Democrats who Cochran never did a damn thing for, in all of his lackluster years in the Senate. The same Mississippi Democrats who Cochran turned a cold shoulder too every chance he got, along with his battering ram voting buddy, Senator Trent Lott. Cochran and Lott voted the same on almost every piece of major legislation over the years. Whenever the aisle was crossed, it was Lott doing the crossing, and not Cochran. Mississippi Democrats echoed everywhere that they voted for Cochran, "because he was the less of two evils." I was amazed this happened. I never thought I would see the day where Democrats would rally around Thad Cochran. However, the general election is approaching, and obviously all of the Democratic support will swing to the Democratic challenger. I don't even know the name of the man or woman running against Cochran, but I sure hope they win.

I'm out of time, and really didn't complete my thought. I was shocked Cantor lost. I'm glad he's gone and hope the Democrat can beat this Brat guy in the general election.
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

We need this now more than ever. Are You Ready for Hillary? Will she change anything? Will anyone?
 
Re: Why isn't there a viable third political party in the U.S.A.? Why only Republicans vs. Democrats

We need this now more than ever. Are You Ready for Hillary? Will she change anything? Will anyone?

Not while your election campaigns are paid for by people who will want something back for the dollars that it will cost them to put their puppet, sorry candidate, in power.
 
Back
Top Bottom