Is the United States ready for a third party?

[vssmith]

I wonder if the time is right for a third party to make a legitimate run for the brass ring.

If we are forced to vote between McCain and Hillary then I am ready to vote for a third party candidate. I think Hillary is competent and smart but she is way to cautious to suit me. Additionally, I would like to vote for someone who had the good sense to be against this war from the very beginning. Thirdly, we need candidates who are not afraid to speak truth to the electorate.

[opihimoimoi]

1. I guess we could go with 3rd 4th and 5th Party like some other Nations

That is to say IF WE WANT THE PUBS TO CONTINUE DOMINATION....

[Caution]

2. Sure. Of course that would mean the republicans would win every election.

So yeah, if you want to continue to lose elections to Republicans by all means vote for a third party.

I do NOT understand why people in this country cannot wrap their heads around the concept of grassroots politics, The ONLY way to build a third party is to do it at the local level. There is NO way a third party candidate for President could win until the public becamse used to the concept of the third parties existence in the first place.

[MADem]

3. Well, then you're in the wrong place

Not to be a nanny, but the rules here include the following:

Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office.Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates.

Realistically, if you don't like a particular candidate, rather than gripe about him, or in this case, HER, get out there and work for one you do like. And if you're going to support other parties in elections, you need to push your agenda elsewhere.

[LWolf]

9. I think we're all in the right place.

The OP asked a question; there was no campaigning for a non-"D" candidate.

So many seem to forget the other progressives part of that rule, and do their best to show "other progressives" the cyber door.

[vssmith]

11. Thank you

I thought for a minute there I was going to be kicked out and forced into the Whig Underground or even the Federalist Underground.

[MADem]

12. I was referencing that comment about voting for a third party candidate

If Hillary gets the nom, then third party candidate gets the vote. Sky falling...

I'm a bit tired, frankly, of the odd spates of Hillary is Evil, Wes Clark is Not Sufficiently Democratic, this one is this, that one is that, and "take my ball and go home" posts. And the rules say that those who post here are expected to support DEMOCRATIC candidates, not third party ones. That's a plain, straightforward rule. This isn't THIRD PARTY UNDERGROUND.

If a person supports a particular candidate, the way to do it is to say why that candidate is good, not tear down others. It suggests a weak argument when all one can do is toss bombs.

[Kolesar]

4. Ohio's elections are managed by "the two parties", so it wont' happen here

Welcome to the Democratic Underground :hi:

[lvx35]

5. Yes it is! And here it is:

Its called the conservative party. Its anti-immigration, anti-big government spending, pro-church. A party like this will allow for REAL progress to be made in this country. (provided enough republicans vote for it to put a dem in the whitehouse! ;))

[riona]

6. The Democratic Party's

tenets are basically sound. What we need is a leader who is skilled in implementing those policies. America and the world must assured that he is acting responsibly and that his/her decisions are intelligent, sound, and can be trusted.

[bowens43]

7. This worked for us in 2000

thanks to the greens we have bush......

If you support someone other then the Democratic nominee, don't do it here, it's not welcome and it's a violation of the rules.

[The2ndWheel]

8. For the only people that matter, no

You think the Democrats and Republicans would voluntarily give up potential power? You have two choices, and that's it. The choices you have will only get more wealthy. They may stay white and male, but even if they didn't, the person of a different color and gender would be just as bad. You don't get to the point of running for president without already selling your humanity to the highest bidder long before you run.

[Tesha]

16. You think those Whigs will give up power? We have a two party...

You think those Whigs will give up power? We have a two party
system, Whigs and Democrats, and *THAT'S IT*! No third party
like those ridiculous Republicans could ever get started here!

Tesha

[The2ndWheel]

20. And do we have three major parties?

Getting started is not the problem. There are plenty of parties that exist. The winner take all system doesn't work for more than one party really. We're lucky we have two major ones, if that.

[mrgorth]

10. No

and McCain will crush Hillary like a Mack truck with or without your vote.

[Bonhomme Richard]

13. Maybe, but only after the rightwingnuts are crushed.

Otherwise the vote is split between what's left of the sane voters. Germany in the 30's is a good example of what havoc multiple parties can cause when confronting evil.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. The last successful third party came with the civil war. We're not quite

at that state yet. Our system is simply not designed to accommodate third parties. A progressive/left national third party that consistently garnered enough votes to be considered credible would also consistently unfortunately and regrettably produce solid Republican majorities.

Since we do not have a system such as exist in much of Europe which is accommodating to third parties and there is realistically no possibility whatsoever that will change anytime prior to the collapse of the current order which I do not anticipate will happen anytime soon--we have no choice in my opinion but to work with what we do have.

I look how the far right working from the aftermath of the Goldwater landslide defeat of 1964 changed the big tent Republicans into a distinctly right wing party; so right wing that poor old Barry wasn't even welcome anymore. But, to do this the right wing did back in general elections candidates and Presidents who were clearly not their ideological soul-mates. Richard Nixon would be a socialist wacko by current Republican Party standards. But, it was the Nixon era that gave real rise to the long-term agenda of the right-wing.

Please let me point out that If the Democrats take the House this November 10 members of the Progressive Caucus would become chairmen of committees. John Conyers becomes Chairman of the Judiciary Committee Even a vote for a conservative Dem is a vote for Conyers and the 10.

Furthermore any survey of actual congressional voting records will demonstrate that with the exception of the likes of Zell Miller almost any Democrat including Lieberman and definitely Clinton are still much more progressive than any "moderate" Republican.

This is courtesy of project vote smart - link:

http://www.vote-smart.org/index.htm
_____________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 100 percent in 2004.

“Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 67 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 33 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 0 percent in 2004.
_________________________________


2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Peace Action 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the Peace Action 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Peace Action 75 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Peace Action 38 percent in 2004

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the Peace Action 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Peace Action 13 percent in 2004.
______________________________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 100 percent in 2004

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 0 percent in 2004

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 0 percent in 2004.
__________________

2003-2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 89 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 86 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 78 percent in 2003-2004

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 83 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 0 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 22 percent in 2003-2004.
_____________________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 95 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 75 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 15 percent in 2004..

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 35 percent in 2004.
__________________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 92 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 83 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 17 percent in 2004..

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 33 percent in 2004.
_________________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 110 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 110 percent in 2004

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 92 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 9 percent in 2004

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 9 percent in 2004.
__________________________

2003-2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the National Education Association 85 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the National Education Association 80 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Education Association 85 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the National Education Association 88 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the National Education Association 25 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the National Education Association 35 percent in 2003-2004.
______________________

2003-2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 88 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 100 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 88 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 88 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 13 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 25 percent in 2003-2004.
_____________________________________

2003-2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 96 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 100 percent in 2003-2004

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 100 percent in 2003-2004

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 95 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 7 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 14 percent in 2003-2004.
_____________________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 60 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 80 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 25 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 50 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 0 percent in 2004.
__________________________

2003-2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 92 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 92 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 92 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 56 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 0 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 56 percent in 2003-2004

____________________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 83 percent in 2004.
_____________________________

2004 Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 8 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Kennedy supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 0 percent in 2004

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 0 percent in 2004..

2004 Senator Allen supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 92 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 72 percent in 2004.”

____________________



http://www.dontattackiran.org

[OzarkDem]

15. Welcome to DU!

My, we have so many new members these days!

[Stinky The Clown]

17. Here's a thought for you while you're visiting .......

We keep the Democratic Party. We keep the Republican Party, too, for that matter.

Then we allow for fringe parties.

Like the Talibornagain Party.

Like the Xenophobe Party.

Like the NeoNazi Party

Like the LooneyLeft Party.

Like the Tailgate Party

Like the Hot Tub Party

Like the TalkShitandAccomplishNothing Party

That would leave the Democrats to be (very generally and broadly speaking) the party of Roosevelt and the Republicans to be (also very generally and broadly speaking) the party of Rockefeller.

If that were to happen, then we'd have a real return to sanity.

[wyldwolf]

18. The United States has many parties to choose from

[flaminbats]

19. it does?

why are we discussing a third party while living under a one-party Government?

as I mentioned in previous post, many of us now live in places which only have unopposed Republican officeholders! http://www.politics1.com/_vti_bin/shtml.dll/p1/states.htm/map

[wyldwolf]

21. yes, it does. And we don't live under a one-party government

as I mentioned in previous post, many of us now live in places which only have unopposed Republican officeholders!

Then run for office and oppose them. If you're not a Democrat, then pick one of these parties:

Alaskan Independence Party
Aloha Aina Party
American Centrist Party
America First Party
American Heritage Party
American Independent Party (Currently affiliated with the Constitution Party)
American Party
American Nazi Party
American Reform Party
Charter Party of Cincinnati, Ohio
Communist Party USA
Conservative Party of New York
Conservative Party of the United States of America
Covenant Party (Northern Mariana Islands)
Grassroots Party
Greens/Green Party USA
Independence Party of Minnesota
Independent American Party (Currently affiliated with the Constitution Party)
Independent Citizens Movement (US Virgin Islands)
Labor Party
Liberal Party of Minnesota
Liberal Party of New York
Liberty Union Party
Marijuana Party
Marijuana Reform Party (New York)
Mountain Party (West Virginia)
Natural Law Party
Nebraska Party (Affiliated with the Constitution Party)
New Party
New Progressive Party of Puerto Rico
New Union Party
New York State Right to Life Party
Peace and Freedom Party
Patriot Party
Personal Choice Party
Popular Democratic Party of Puerto Rico
Populist Party of Maryland (Nader 2004-affiliated, unrelated to earlier so-named parties)
Prohibition Party
Puerto Rican Independence Party
Reform Party
Reform Party of Michigan
Republican Moderate Party of Alaska
Revolutionary Communist Party
Socialist Action
Socialist Alternative
Socialist Equality Party (US)
Socialist Labor Party
Socialist Party USA
Socialist Workers Party
Southern Party
Southern Independence Party
United Citizens Party
Unity Party of America
U.S. Pacifist Party
Vermont Progressive Party
Voter rights party
We the People Party
Workers World Party
Working Families Party
Workers Party, USA
World Socialist Party of the United States

[flaminbats]

22. just more than one party doesn't alter one-party control..

Three branches of our government are now under Republican control, so at least one of the other parties has to start winning, hopefully that will be our party! :kick:

[wyldwolf]

23. true, but there are more than one or two parties

...and in some areas, Democrats have solid control.

[NNadir]

24. Yeah. Let's have a party that says "Bush is the same as Gore."

After they leave the scene, they can keep us up to date on the important issues, like NBA officiating and the status of Terrell Owens.

[Kablooie]

25. Here are some ideas for a new party.

The New American Party

[abbiehoff]

26. Yes, I think the conservative wing of the Republican party

is angry enough about the huge deficit to start a party of their own. Get rid of those spend-thrifts currently running the party.

[Asgaya Dihi]

27. Support yes, blind no

I don't claim to be representative of any of your newer members other than myself, they can speak for themselves if they want to. I'm more isues oriented than a loyalist anyway. But from my perspective it would be a mistake to enforce the "support democratic candidates" thing too literally. Yeah, when it comes to the election you don't want someone campaigning for a Republican or whatever instead, but we don't want to be blind followers either and should be allowed room to express frustration or displeasure.

Voting for something we don't agree with isn't a good idea, we found that out when the public elected people based on their "impressions" of honesty or of being someone you'd have a beer with rather than on their stands on the issues. As many have pointed out in the past the public really doesn't support many of the things our current reps have been doing, but they got there anyway through blind support.

It's no better on the Democratic side, that's how we get people like Lieberman telling us to shut up and support the President and Hillary supporting a flag burning amendment. They're pretty sure they can count on us anyway, what other choices do we have? So they play to the middle and the right, the corporate money and lobbies, pretty much ignoring what was supposed to be their base to one degree or another.

If they are made to feel a little uncomfortable, given a little doubt that we can be counted on even when they work against our interests, then good. Maybe they'll pay more attention. Don't work too hard to silence dissent, it can be a good thing.

[Le Taz Hot]

28. First of all,

let me apologize for the rude responses. It's a legitimate question and there are LOTS of people on DU who are NOT Democrats.

The question is a good one as there are millions of Democrats who have been left out by the Democratic Party and there are lots of Republicans who feel the Christian Reich has taken over their party and they are no longer represented, so yes, I think the time is ripe for a third party. I think it would take just the right type of charismatic leader and someone who isn't controlled by "consultant" but yes, I think this is going to be a definite possibility in the not-so-distant future.

Personally, I wish Dean would have gone third party but I know that will never happen.

Good post and don't let the rude bozos scare you off.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

29. Locking

Perhaps it is time for a third party.... This may be debatable... just not on Democratic Underground!!!

In addition, advocating for a third party candidates in races where there is a democratic candidate already running in the race is also not looked upon kindly at DU.
----------------------------------
From the DU rules:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html
Democratic Candidates and the Democratic Party

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.