Neo-liberal Periodical Endorses Raving Socialist

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Aloysius' timestamp='1351827252' post='2502620']
sigh, that whole editorial would've been a perfect set-up for an argument to vote third party. if only people realized the power they could have if they would just stand up and take a courageous stand.
[/quote]Al, I've been thinking about the 3rd party thing.

What is the point of a 3rd Party? Is it to get a specific issue addressed? Is it to get a multitude of issues addressed? If it's one or two issues, how important and different are they to the issues that are supported by the two existing parties? The Parties reflect the majority opinion of the populace. Read the party platforms. Nobody wants to shoot babies in the womb. Nobody wants to strangle the homeless. Nobody wants to invade Canada or Mexico to expand America. Even Obama doesn't want to destroy America.

All politicians need to be elected by the populace. (Yes, I now how the Electoral College works.) It's what people want. If you want the people to want something different, explain it to them. Develop the Issue. Gain support instead of re-creating the wheel or destroying the existing cars. Otherwise, again, it's a minority inflicting it's wants on the majority. Just becasue you think it's more moral or better, doesn't mean you can force your will. Issues and ideas need to be accepted by a significant portion of the populace in a representative government.\

I would think it's a matter of unifying people behind an idea, not sub-dividing people in a group.

Edited November 2, 2012 by Anomaly

[Aloysius]

see, I don't think so. I think it's pretty clear from the numbers that huge portions of the populace are totally dissatisfied with the choices they're being offered. Just look at this article's raving endorsement of Obama... they're not exactly thrilled about him. they'd be much happier with Gary Johnson's or Jill Stein's foreign policies, this particular one might be happier with Gary Johnson's domestic policies but plenty of the reluctant Obama voters would be much happier with Jill Stein's domestic policy. These candidates aren't losing because their positions aren't popular, they're losing because everyone's terrified that if they support them then the boogeyman on the other side of the two-party seesaw will win. Just look at the arguments in favor of Romney even here on phatmass, the strongest ones amount to arguments against Obama.

Honestly, I am working within the two party system, I am not placing my hope in the breakthrough of a third party. I think it'd be hugely helpful for America if one were to break through, and every time around that I fail to bring the Republican Party into line with the things I think it should be in line with, I will withhold my vote from them and either pick a third party or do a write-in... and I'm not talking perfect 100% compliance, I'm talking about it getting in line with things that vast numbers of Americans are actually in favor of (70% want us out of Afghanistan and most of the Middle East, neither party offers that. 80% want the Federal reserve audited, neither party offers that. At least half are decently pro-life, I'd argue that neither party is truly offering even a decently pro-life position (but I don't think we should turn this thread into another flame-war on that issue so let's just ignore that for now), public opinion has turned pretty strongly against the drug-war especially on things like marijuana, neither party really offers an end to that).