Forget a Third Party — Let’s Go for a Fourth Party!
But the tea party is popular and has regular Americans behind it, right? Maybe, but how is it supposed to do anything other than sap support away from the Republicans, thus leaving the Democrats in power? Besides, it’s called the “tea party.” I know that’s a reference to the Boston Tea Party, but nowadays a tea party is something a little girl has with her dolls. Plus, we’re a coffee nation.
So get it out of your heads. You scared the Republicans good in NY-23, but a third party is going to do nothing but ruin us. There’s no way to make it work. You can plot and scheme, but it just reminds me of that Seinfeld episode where Seinfeld is trying to switch from dating one roommate to the other, and he and George plot and plan and eventually come up with the idea to suggest a ménage à trois solution and … well, nothing works. It’s impossible. Give it up. It will never happen.
Unless … hmm …
Okay, hear me out: Maybe a third party would be a complete disaster, but a fourth party could actually work. You see, the liberals are already getting restless with Obama. They don’t understand that their entire ideology is basically political poison, and when Rahm Emanuel tried to calmly explain that to them, it only upset them even more (and even Sarah Palin, oddly). So maybe it’s time we give them a little push. Right now, Democrats are going to start moderating themselves, because they know they’re in for a beating this November and don’t want to make it any worse. This will only make the liberals even angrier, as they’re convinced the Democrats would do awesomely if they would just cram the liberal agenda down the throats of the American people. So we should tell the liberals, “You guys would totally win everything if you just articulated progressive views. Like, if you had a whole party of Alan Graysons, you’d be unstoppable. Also, I saw this guy Che4ever commenting on the Huffington Post that the Rethuglicans should all be locked up; you should find people like him and run them for office in your own party and totally win everything.”
So then the left wing will start its own party — probably called something like the “We Smart Party” — and it will be havoc for the Democrats, but the liberals won’t care because the Democrats were already going down and also because liberals are kinda dense.
So now the Republicans are just going to be sitting easy thinking the whole election is in the bag, not even caring to fire up the base. That’s when we start a fourth party of badass liberty that punches anyone in the face who tries to mess with our freedoms or touch our stuff. We could be like the “Don’t Tread On Me Party” — let’s see the liberals try and come up with a sexual slur for that one (don’t worry; I’m sure they will). Anyway, with the Democrats fractured and the Republicans caught off guard, we could actually succeed.
Maybe.
But probably not.
Still, it’s better than the third-party option. So I don’t want to hear any of your ideas about the need for a third party; that’s political death. But if the other side makes a third party, I’ll listen to the idea of a fourth party.
Though I’ll still probably chicken out and vote Republican. What do you expect? It’s a two-party system.
Aha, the ol’ one, two, three, FOUR! BAM!
The current situation is not-fixable. A new party will not help. There is too much corruption, cronyism, too many Marxist ideologues. I propose that the entire Government, except for essential services, like defense, etc. goes home indefinitely, or at least until the budget is under control.
“Third parties never work.”
Is this satire? It is hard to determine sometimes. But, in case it isn’t, you might want to check back and see what happened to the Whig party.
I think that the Tea Party will survive and prosper. The secret to a viable third party in this situation is that it is a PRIMARY political party, not a general political party.
The entire Goal of the Tea party is to win primaries and influence the Republican party platform.
Another way to look at it is; OK sure the Tea Party is pretty certain to lose in a three way race, so we’re not going to do that, we’re going to take the other parties one on one. First we take on the RINOs and country club Rebublicans in the Primaries, then we take on the Liberals in the General. Why fight two opponents at once when you have the option to divide and conquer?
Is this satire? It is hard to determine sometimes. But, in case it isn’t, you might want to check back and see what happened to the Whig party.
I’m not really sure what happened, since that was like 500 years ago.
Listen to Sarah Palin and Karl Rove:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703444804575071291097797862.html
Karl’s article in the Wall Street Journal said that, in order to maximize their effect, the Tea Partiers should stay independent, and work on their representatives in BOTH parties to get their specific issues with our “debt, spending and over-reaching federal government” addressed.
I’m not sure if this link will work. The second portion is an interview of Sarah Palin by Bill O’Reilly. He doesn’t seem to get it so much, but she does.
My concern is with the outcome of the Tea Parties’ activities: if the objective is any kind of positive action, some sort of central organization would be helpful to make a clear statement of what it should be. If we use the example of the opposition to immigration reform, we see a limp victory. Yes, the very bad proposals were defeated, that defeat did nothing to deal with the problems at hand, caused mostly by the disastrous legislation that is still in place.
#5 Fleming – Now THAT was satire! Brutal!
I am a recovering Republican. I voted Reagan, Perot, Perot, Buchanan and then Obama [I stayed home in between]
I’m the voter you all are fighting to keep.
Item:
Tea baggers and Liberals are anti war.
Tea baggers and Liberals are nationalists.
Tea baggers and Liberals are anti Wall St and pro Main St.
Tea baggers and Liberals are against Multi National Corporate power and influence over elections, borders, employment and trade.
Tea Baggers and Liberals hate Big Banking.
Tea Baggers and Liberals mistrust Israel and question 9/11 [OMG! - we have lift off!!]
My entire family is conservative… love the Tea Baggers – but think Palin has been purchased by the usual suspects – hint – they have very large noses.
There isn’t enough Limbaugh, Hannity, Medved or Savage propaganda to convince the grass roots on either side
that War on Iran is a good thing.
or that open borders brings prosperity…
or that NAFTA will do the same….
or that Bank of America is our friend.
or that Corporations purchasing elections is good for speech.
Now tell me … again… that the GOP is the party of the Tea Baggers….
Hoosier Hawk… read the above description of the Tea Baggers and Liberals.
The Tea Bagger party could very well win.
Both the left and right have been co-opted by the extremes … The liberals and conservatives in my circle of family and friends agree on pretty much everything
EXCEPT
the social wedges manufactured to keep us apart.
Item:
homosexual marriage and the entire homosexual agenda.
abortion… which neither side is as excited about as the media would have us think.
War – conservatives may have been brainwashed to think Muslims are the only terrorists… but thinking people on the right know differently. White phosphorus anyone? — how about selling the body parts off for cash.. and then staging ‘events’ like 9/11 to cover up the crimes of our teensy murderous ‘ally’
People need to look past the manufactured differences – The Reagan administration gave us higher deficits than the Clinton Administration… ditto for Bush Sr. and junior.
DO NOT TELL ME the GOP is the party of smaller government.
the GOP is the party of WAR, WALL ST AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS… and if it means printing more money… so be it.
The Tea baggers have a great idea.. and unlikely allies on the left… if they keep control of the leadership.
Palin has been purchased. Paul and Kucinich have not.
G Marks:
My entire family is conservative… love the Tea Baggers – but think Palin has been purchased by the usual suspects – hint – they have very large noses.
I believe I mentioned third parties attracting crazy people.
G Marks:
My entire family is conservative… love the Tea Baggers – but think Palin has been purchased by the usual suspects – hint – they have very large noses.
Has either you or your family accidentally dyed yourself blue?
GMarks, you are a nutcase, a fool, a troll, or some combination thereof. Please, go spread your antisemitism and your (clever? or whatever) use of the nasty term “tea******” elsewhere.
Speaking of the nasty term:
“We could be like the “Don’t Tread On Me Party” — let’s see the liberals try and come up with a sexual slur for that one (don’t worry; I’m sure they will).”
Yup, they sure will. Get your brainbleach handy and google “trampling fetish”. NSFW.
GMarks,
Basically, you’re saying that Ron Paul = Dennis Kucinich. While I agree they both are funny looking little garden gnomes, I don’t think they would get along in a political party. And the idea that the Tea Party movement is anti-war, anti-big business, or anti-Israel is some highly-refined, weapons grade crazy. Finally, if you think liberals are nationalists or pro-main street, you really to stop eating the bat guano.
The reason 3rd Parties have been such failures is not because of lunatic fringe etc, but because they’re too nationally oriented, even in local races. It’s one thing to nationalize a congressional race when you’re already a national party and already have representation all over, and it can even be done in a mayoral race, but most of the small-scale elections are about almost entirely local issues. If the man running for Dog-Catcher Extraordinaire talks about making abortion safe, legal and rare it does him no good; his job has nothing to do with that. A third party that was really serious about going somewhere and being something other than a spoiler for one party or the other wouldn’t even run anybody for any federal office until it had significant representation in EVERY state legislature in the country and at least a couple of governorships. At that point it could start thinking about Congress and the Presidency with a bit of realism, but what we get instead is tiny parties trying to take it all in one bite, as if it would work even if they won. If the Libertarians somehow won the presidency without a single Representative or Senator, what possible good would she do? At best it would just be 4 years of gridlock, which while not a bad thing in itself, but more than likely Dems and Reps would find lots of things they could agree on just the humiliate the Lib president by overriding the veto over and over again.
America could easily accommodate more than two political parties. Only trouble is nobody has seriously tried to create one. They just go for the empty gestures instead of building an actual party, which is why the best they can do is a Perot and hand a Clinton the presidency.
In Nevada right now, a “false flag operation” is being conducted by leftist operatives. They are registering a new party called the “Tea Party”. This is clearly an attempt to split votes from the Republican Party. I think a similar operation on the left is therefore quite appropriate. How about the “Progressive Party”?
The funniest thing about all this is how the ones who are doing it wrong are never the ones who get the lecture. I mean we just want to do what’s right, and we can see the Republicans aren’t it, so the idea of a third party looks good. Of course it’s doomed, there are too many people who will not be educated and who will vote the way they always have. There is the answer. Use those votes by hijacking the party they’re going to vote for.
Oh wait, that’s what Frank said huh.
What would YOU like to do to fix America?
Step 1: Repeal the 17th Amendment
I think there are two possible paths for the Tea Party.
“Like the NRA” The Tea Parties become a bit of an interest group and endorsing either an R or D who submit to their agenda.
“Under New Management Scenario” where conservatives and Tea Partiers join together and challenge the Republican leadership for control of the party. Throw some of them out replace and change the name of the party.
Federalism is the cure to the disease.
dyed myself blue?
weapons grade crazy?
is that all ya got is name calling???
The tea baggers I know are very much anti war.. .they are military families too!
The tea baggers I know think Wall St, International Corporations and Big Banking are the spawn of evil… if you listen to them, you’ll hear…
The tea baggers I know are anti illegal immigrant, and anti big business determining our elections with their newfound SPEECH – given to them by GOP supremes.
Now tell me again… what’s crazy about this ???
Forget the name calling and tell me which of the above is not true?
cptnmoroni: bat guano?
Ron Paul and Kucinich agree on immigration, war, the Fed, multi national corporations controlling our elections and borders, and yes,,, Israel.
The tea baggers I know are from the old Buchanan wing of the party… highly mistrustful of our nasty little ally… and must speak in code because the neocons and their operatives in government and media have their knives out for any who stray from the ‘company line’..
the reason the Tea Baggers [of which I am one] are a dilemma for websites like this is self evident… look at the ethnic makeup of the contributors….. enough said.
You will not control the tea baggers with sloganeering..
we’ve heard it all before… and we know the ISraelis are as crazy as the mullahs… just different hats.
And I don’t care how many Kristols, Krauthammers and Medveds and Savages you send to brain wash my demographic…I still want out of the Middle East!!
Basically, you’re saying that Ron Paul = Dennis Kucinich. While I agree they both are funny looking little garden gnomes, I don’t think they would get along in a political party. And the idea that the Tea Party movement is anti-war, anti-big business, or anti-Israel is some highly-refined, weapons grade crazy. Finally, if you think liberals are nationalists or pro-main street, you really to stop eating the bat guano.
The real problem lies with the citizens of the US. They must take up the fight to their government and win back their rights as citizens as given to them by their constitution. Arrest the republicans, democrats and their controlling financial influences for treason.
Bring the United States of America back for the people, by the people and allow them to have liberty as intended by the Founding Fathers.
Fight for your rights citizens, before you lose it all.
“is that all ya got is name calling???
The tea baggers I know are…”
Weapons grade.
This is basically a good idea, but not completely thought through. The third party already exists, it is the Green Party. It exists in a number of states. Nader ran on it in 2000 and Cynthia McKinney ran on it in 2008. Like the Tea Party, it is accused of undermining those closest to its own views. The Tea Party movement should, as Fleming suggests, think of itself as a fourth party.
The truth is, the only way that minor parties will ever have a chance is if there is one on each side of the spectrum. Then they can grow naturally, in tandem. They should even arrange debates with each other to demonstrate what a discourse based on different assumptions would be like. They don’t actually subvert their own side of the spectrum because there is a balance to the system. The better that ‘their’ major party addresses their concerns, the more likely it is to win the election. The larger they grow on the margin, the more likely that lightening will strike (nationally or, more likely, locally) and they will actually win an election. Until then, they can assess their efforts in comparison with their major party and in comparison with the other minor party.
This is basically a good idea, but not completely thought through. The third party already exists, it is the Green Party. It exists in a number of states. Nader ran on it in 2000 and Cynthia McKinney ran on it in 2008. Like the Tea Party, it is accused of undermining those closest to its own views. The Tea Party movement should, as Fleming suggests, think of itself as a fourth party.
The truth is, the only way that minor parties will ever have a chance is if there is one on each side of the spectrum. Then they can grow naturally, in tandem. They should even arrange debates with each other to demonstrate what a discourse based on different assumptions would be like. They don’t actually subvert their own side of the spectrum because there is a balance to the system.
The better that ‘their’ major party addresses their concerns, the more likely it is to win the election. The larger they grow on the margin, the more likely that lightening will strike (nationally or, more likely, locally) and they will actually win an election. Until then, they can assess their efforts in comparison with their major party and in comparison with the other minor party.
Sorry, I meant to throw in something about “Paultard tinfoil sombrero anti-semite” but didn’t have the heart to do so in a post regarding namecalling.
“is that all ya got is name calling… you teabaggers?”
Is it better to be so incredibly stupid you are oblivious to the fact? It’s one thing to be stupid and know it, but what if it didn’t hurt?
Number of candidates who received electoral votes in 1860, the first year the Republican candidate won – 4. Maybe Lincoln really was the 4th party candidate.
I like that G Marks fellow. I’ve never before been impressed by someone who so clearly gets it. What a sharp, clear mind! I wished he’d come over to my house. We could talk, I don’t know, tea.
I just have one small quibble and I hope it doesn’t harm your self esteem, Mr. G Marks: Nobody’s fighting to keep you. Tea Party people WANT you to remain a Tea Bagger. Please don’t change for a web site like this. You are so frickin’ awesome just the way you are! DON’T LET THEM STEAL YOUR SOUL!!!
The thing about a fourth party is that the other side has to see the value a counter-balancing third party as well.
Take Taiwan. There are five parties and two are dominate, the KMT and the DPP. The upshot is that the three minor parties are able to mobilize during elections, be heard and sway an election even though they may carry only a fraction of a voting. This is because a statistically significant number of Taiwanese will opt to sit out an election much like that vast swathe in the US. Believe it or not the ratios are just as comparable as are the excuses.
The trick, of course, is for the two major (US) parties to understand their usefulness when the big boys don’t really have a player in a by-election and accept the election of a nominally aligned second tier player.
Frankly, I just don’t see that happening. We have a winner take all scheme and given time either party will reassert itself.
M
Gmarks,
We have no doubt that you are a teabagger, however the rest of us are tea partiers. At least know the name of a group before you claim membership.
There are a variety of political viewpoints in the movement, but what defines it are limited government, much less spending and reduced taxes. We embrace States Rights, the Constitution and individual freedom, we reject statism and big government redistributist socialism.
The tea party isn’t anti war, hated the bailouts, but has no problem with capitalism and doesn’t care one iota about anybody’s race, we only care about those who would attack us or abuse our immigration policies and our misguided entitlement societal policies.
It would be better if you knew a little more about the tea party movement before you took the liberty of defining it.
Perhaps tea perty candidates could win some elections in three way races. That isn’t a reason to try, no reasonable strategist would take on two opponents at the same time when there is an opportunity to confront them seperately. The pundits ask the question “Can the Tea Party become a viable third party?” It already is, and it is having an impact.
At the heart of the issue is the viewpoint that a third party must materialize as a third choice in the general election. Pure rubbish. It is often pointed out that a third party is self defeating since it will simply split the vote of the major party that most closely shares it’s values, allowing the party that least shares those values to win. The prevailing wisdom is that the two party system has a fail safe method of preventing third parties from success.
That is why a third party should stage it’s opposition. Eliminate one opponent in the primaries, then coopt that party’s election resources for a one on one against the other opponent in the general.
The tea party has reached critical mass in recent polls, there are more voters who claim tea party association than Republican. In some districts, the tea party candidate may be defeated in the primaries, but the party can still support the Republican as the lesser of the evils in the general.
The battle lines are forming, the incumbents know that the Republicans are going to have rough primary seasons, and the Democrats aren’t looking forward to the general. It’s the Tea Party!
G Marks (8)
“I am a recovering Republican. I voted Reagan, Perot, Perot, Buchanan and then Obama [I stayed home in between]“
By your own statement, you voted republican, democrat, democrat, democrat, and democrat the past five times you voted. Voting democrat in a way that permits you plausible deniability is still voting democrat. I doubt the Tea Party folks have any illusions about attracting died in the wool democrats like you who vote for the most liberal candidates and don’t even participate when there isn’t anyone liberal enough for them in the running. You say you know a lot of Tea Party folks and obviously knew a lot of the last third party people who aided in elected democrats. Seems to me you’re just a wealth of information on how to ensure that people who are fed up with democrats have an alternative to voting republican as long as that alternative doesn’t hurt the democrats.
Those who swear they’re “independents” but lapped up, absorbed, and spread the democrat lies and propaganda for the past eight years are not the sort of people who will work long and hard to gain control of anything other than their right to say nothing ever changes while they continue to vote democrat one way or another. The so called moderate democrats didn’t fight against the radicals taking over the democrat party, and now the faceless Greek chours of democrat fifth columinists say it’s a good idea to have no say so in either party as long as they get to yammer about their own purity.
have a nice day
I am against war. I want the terrorists to surrender now.
If they won’t surrender, then we have to go get them, or let them come here to fight us, or surrender. Given those choices I would rather go get them.
We need a Fifth party, or party of fifths. We will nominate Vodkapundit as our standard bearer.
Tea baggers and Liberals are nationalists.
Liberals are nationalists?
Tea baggers and Liberals are anti Wall St and pro Main St.
Liberals are anti-Wall Street?
Tea baggers and Liberals are against Multi National Corporate power and influence over elections, borders, employment and trade.
Etc.
Tea Baggers and Liberals hate Big Banking.
Etc.
Dude, you need to learn a little about what liberalism stands for. Once you do, it will no longer be a big surprise to you that liberals regard the “Tea Baggers” with the same warmth and affection as they do Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.
Die yourselves blue??? Blue??? And maybe, like,
grow to ten feet tall?
Ma’we, Na’vi’a – Toruq-makto Omicaya-ru.
GMarks:
On your rant against the FEDS and Multi-National Conglomerates you left out the Illuminated RoethlisBuildaBearBurgerKings who control our breathing via the tri-latteral CPR method. But Hey,2 B 1 Ask 1.
Oh and another commonallity between Paul and Kucinnich, they are both long gone to seed KOOKS
The Joe Stack Party! White middle-aged angry tax protesters. King of the Tea Baggers! Patriot! Joe Horn with a pilot’s license! He’s my man!
What about instead of four parties, we have just one? People already say we do – but we could make that really happen.
I think what the Tea Party should do in each state, is to offer workers as support for each of the most fiscally conservative candidate in the Republican and Democratic primaries. Then after the primaries were done, the Tea Party would offer support for the most fiscally conservative candidate that would win.
It seems like affecting smaller primaries especially would be easy simply through offering manpower that would help a candidate to get out the word that they are, in fact, fiscally conservative. And it would weed out people at all levels that were not, long term a net benefit all over the country. There are a lot of independents that wouldn’t mind helping either party as long as the candidate was fiscally conservative, even if they disagree with the person about some other issues.
That is a real good Idea!! a 3rd and 4th party will really mix it up big time. I like it.
Divide & concur! Sounds very reasonable to me.
GMarks, as long as you use the tea bagger smear you have no credibility. You exposing yourself. Get a life.
Canada’s New Democrats have often been the left wing spoiler for the Liberals, who, in reaction, have consistently stolen the NDP’s policies to court their members. It shows how left Canada is when the Grits have often beat the Tories even with the socialists nagging their heals. A similar leftist party in the US would be an earthquake to the Democrats, leaving a remnant of JFK Democrats behind. These traditional liberals would appeal to some independents, maybe enough to maintain a split left. Nice fantasy. Not likely.
skeeziks:
The Joe Stack Party! White middle-aged angry tax protesters. King of the Tea Baggers! Patriot! Joe Horn with a pilot’s license! He’s my man!
You might want to be more introspective of your own viewpoints if you find they keep leading you to trying to push a square peg into a round hole to justify them.
For the name of the fourth, how about the TANSSAAFL Party? Hard to make up a slur about that one…
Dear Republican Party: Go ^%&$ yourself.
I have been listening to their “small government” lies for 30 years. They have done *nothing* to earn my vote. So I will vote for the Libertarian candidate or no one at all.
I don’t care if the Democrats destroy the country, its better than watching the Republicans do it.
why is President the only job anybody wants? Ron Paul would be the best chairman of the Fed ever. He is not presidential, however.
43. John:
if by your action you could have done the right thing then you’re not going to be able to hide behind the excuse that ‘I voted for the other guy’. You are as guilty as the RINO because you knowingly did not do what you knew would work; you preferred to make a statement that nobody will ever hear.
Do not accept RINOs, but do stick to the party that will get elected. MAKE IT what it should be instead of waiting for somebody else to divine your wishes you pansy!
Kodos: It’s true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about
it? It’s a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.
[murmurs]
Man1: He’s right, this is a two-party system.
Man2: Well, I believe I’ll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.
…
Homer: Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.
(Simpsons did it) :p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1cGiEw5yLo
Yeah, I don’t have anything useful to add. I tried, but all I have is condescension and mockery. I’ll try to come up with disdain, snark, and vitriol next time.
The commenters who look at third parties as vehicles for influencing the two majors have it exactly right. That has generally been the role of third parties. Our party system today is so rigid that no new third party could displace an existing major. So something like the Tea Party has to work by bending the Republicans in a better direction.
That’s what happened in Massachusetts with Scott Brown, by the way. It’s a perfect example of where things are headed.
#42 Dave….. “how about the TANSSAAFL Party?”
WINNER!
This Tea Party candidate for Senate will draw away 22% of the vote from the GOP, and guarantee that Harry the scum Reid will be re-elected. Real smart, Tea baggers! Real Smart! Just because Glenn Beck says both parties have some housekeeping to do, doesn’t translate that the GOP and the Dems are the same!
Forming a third party, like Big Ears, Parrot did, guaranteed Clinton 8-years in office, with less than a majority! Third parties are formed by self-serving, prideful, egomaniacs who are more interested in self-aggrandizement than what is best for the Country!
Run as a GOP. Unless you are a hypoocrite, and really want Reid still in office, because you, Tea Party-ites are his best friend, and I am sure will get invitations to his victory party! DUH!
What don’t you change your party name to the Obstructionist Party, that never gets elected, except in your dreams, and continues to insure that our Nation goes down the drain while you continue to tilt at windmills.
Both GOP senatorial candidates in Nevada are shown as easily dethroning Reid. Youi get in the mix, and Reid wins! Is that what floats your boat? Is that your goal? To think all the GOP registered voters and disgruntled Dems in the State of Nevada are going to not give one vote to the GOP candidate and all the non-Reid votes to your candidate is crazy and dillusional! If that is what you want us to think of your party, and that is all you care about this troubled Nation of ours, then you are not worthy to even have a party name that you wrongly think puts you in the same league with the real original Tea Party patriots!
President George Washington predicted the current state of political corruption in 1796 when he urged Americans to discourage political parties. Instead, Americans elevated Thomas Jefferson’s Republican-Democrat Party into power four years later.
Independent voters now outnumber Thomas Jefferson’s party members for the first time since 1800.
Independent voters have one thing in their favor that political parties do not have: They are the voters created by the writing of the Constitution of the United States. Political parties, as President Washington pointed out, are self-created societies that work to control and destroy free elections.
Since 1800 political party politicians have worked at state level to exclude independent voters from becoming candidates for office. As soon as independent voters find ballot access, political parties are done in this country. They have proven for two hundred years that they cannot govern effectively.