President Ron Paul? President Ralph Nader? Americans Split on the Need for a Third Party

politics

Why is it that other countries such as Great Britain have 3 or more major patries, and we only have 2?

politics

Why is it that other countries such as Great Britain have 3 or more major patries, and we only have 2?

3rd party.

The essential problem here is not the number of parties. We could have 100 political parties, and if all of them are as corrupted as the two we already have, what good would come of it? Democrats and Republicans are nothing more than two sides of the same coin. No matter what the campaign platforms may be based upon, the real motivation is power. They seek to gain power, and also to maintain that power. The heart of the problem is that Washington is out of touch with "real" people. The everyday working men and women that keep this country going. Term limits for Congress would be a great way to shake up the political system. For those that would argue that we need experience people in Washington, I ask you, with all the experience in Congress, why is our economy spiraling downward, why are we stuck in a war we can never win, why are there people with no health care, and starving children. Experience is not what we need in Washington, but rather initiative, ability, and someone willing to make intelligent, independent decisions based on what is best for the country and not their party or fat cat lobbyists.

Manipulation

Though 3rd party politics seems like the American dream it ends in an American scheme. It truly weakens the system and can be seen in local politics regularly. Many cities have 8 - 10 people begin the quest for mayorship and by election time have a choice of 2 or 3. As election night closes the local candidate is elected by a third or maybe as low as a 20th of the cities vote. As the early candidates fall out so too does interest thus less voter participation. America...what's in it for ME generation. As Clinton rejoiced in his first term, created by 3rd party votes to Ross Pero, he failed to see that ownership of less than half of the nations vote presented him with a dilemma that his policies were not majority supported. His struggle to achieve for 8 years and his close call to impeachment can be associated to the fact that support for his presidency was not secured by the majority of the public. His hands were tied. He read to much of his own popular press. With the possible election of many candidates comes the reality that special interest is the driving force thus minority rule. It's a majority rule country with a defense for minority checks and balance. Not the other way around. Third parties? Disastrous.

Nader-Paul ticket for national salvation

It would be great if Ron Paul could get together with Ralph Nader, to offer a national salvation ticket. They are both honest people, from opposite sides of the political spectrum. They are both reasonable enough to be able to get along on a minimum platform for cleaning up the mess the republic is in. I think a Ralph Nader - Ron Paul slate would beat the major party slates, now seriously compromised by their stands on the bailout. Nader's ticket is registered in almost all the states. The energy to save the country is there, waiting to be tapped. And Ron Paul's people in particular have shown how you can do it without the mass media on your side. Even so, a Nader-Paul ticket at this stage of the game would be impossible for such as CNN to ignore. Mr Gonzalez, Mr Nader's current running mate should push the idea for the sake of his country.

Another path sought

Of course we need more choices! Most people I run across are somewhere between apathetic and disgusted about the choices the major parties vomit up to us. There's a lot of us that don't like either McCain or Obama. The Soviets took it further with one party. Look what that got them. Yes, more choices!

The corporate media marginalizes people like Ron Paul and Ralph Nader. They are barely mentioned or treated dismissively.

They agree on much and disagree on much. I'd love to see a REAL debate for a change. How about a serious discussion about bringing home the troops from places like Europe and Korea? You won't get it from the major parties. How about a major reform of monetary policy? Getting us out of the UN? Ending the insane failed War on Drugs? Freeing up the markets and seriously protecting our borders? Don't expect change from either McCain or Obama on these and many other issues.

But the major parties decide who gets to be at the "official" debates. The media, which panders to the major parties (and one party in particular and everybody knows which one) give little attention/respect to others who try to wage a campaign for office. Look at the nonsense Bob Barr (Libertarian candidate) has been going through to get on and stay on state ballots or when he tries holding the major parties to the same standard they hold him to regarding ballot access? It's a disgrace.

We have to stop throwing our votes away on the major parties. They've created the mess we're in. We need a different path to get us out. Libertarian. Constitutional. Independent. The choices are out there for those with the guts to stop following the herd.

chicken

LOL

Third Parties in Debates

he Presidential Debate Commission, as it currently exists, is another example of how we have allowed the current dominant political parties to structure this and other elections so as to prevent the rist of a third party.

For example, why cannnot any presidential candidate who is on the ballot in a majority of states immediately qualify for participation in the presidential debate? The current requirement, as I understand it, is that a third party candidate must have 10% support in the polls in order to qualify or be "invited" to this event which allows a presidential candidate to present his or her views in a "free" national forum unlike the expensive TV advertising campaigns. Preventing Bob Barr, Ralph Nader, and Cindy McKinney from participating in the debates defies logic if we want a lively political dialogue at the debates - a libertarian and a progressive or socialist candidate would certainly inject new ideas into the debate rather than having two candidates trying to define the American "middle" from a slightly more liberal or conservative perspective. This practice of limiting the candidates to the two major parties not only makes the debates more boring as we can predict the positions each candidate will take at the debate based on their merely restating positions set forth in months of themed political advertising. Third parties candidate would add an element of interest as lesser known candidates would try to breakout by asserting new ideas into the debate which would enlarge the discussion - for example Libertarian Bob Barr could more forcefully argue for the voucher system to replace our public school system while Ms. McKinney would be more willing than Mr. Obama to argue for a national health insurance plan.

The worst example of the abuse of Congressional privilege and power in attmepting to prevent the rise of a third party challnege to the current political establishment is the whole

presidential campaign fund scheme whereby any only candidates who received at least, I belived, 7.5% of the popular vote has access to any type of the funds that millions of American taxpayers contribute to through their tax returns. Lack of access to that money along with lack of participation in the presidential debates means all third party candidates are essentially sidelined into oblivion - despite the quasi-noteriety of even Ralph Nader. I would again propose that if a candidate is able to gain ballot access in a majority of states, then he or she should have access to the pool of presidential campaign funds. This would allow some access to the process to third parties.

The notion that Americans are generally happy with their choices come the Presidential election each year and do not want third party challenges to the current political establishiment is not borne out either in polling nor the fact that a number of third party candidates have become governors (Jesse Ventura for example in Minnesota) arise from third parties.

comunist wins again

If ,I personally wanted to ploy a country into comunisim and tell them they were free .I would promote and finance two parties. Wow thats exactly what we have ? Get real if this was the free country we all had hoped for in our niave childhood we would mhave 5 or 6 pertys and they would be represented in congress. Ever watch BBC ? or take into account the Iraq gorverment wanting , no demanding many forms of representation to various sectors of society. They just arent gullable enough to believe that they wont be bullied out by the status quo take what you get and be happy about it that we have settled for. Call me a radical , better yet call us your great grandchildrens fore fathers we had some we didnt learn anything from obviously.

president

I feel our President should be voted in on his merits and how he feels he should represent the american public.Not on the color of his skin, or if he is a man or a woman.There is something wrong with this country if this is the only thing that we look at.Sad that it has gotten this far that people dont open there eyes and look pass the race or gender.