Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Independent’ Category

29438685755_5455b144e9_o

“Without the emergence of the Christian-Right in the 1970s…”

Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Without the emergence of the Christian-Right in the 1970s and 1980s, there is no Reform Party USA today. Why, because what is the Reform Party and what’s the point of it? The Reform Party is what the Republican Party use to be and what they believed in. Before they recruited the Christian-Right and broader Far-Right out of the Democratic Party and into the GOP. They use to believe in fiscal responsibility, economic freedom, strong but limited national defense and foreign policy that’s not designed to police the world and they were tolerant or federalist on social issues. Not believing that the Federal Government or government in general, should be used to tell how Americans should live their own lives and make their personal decisions for them. That was the GOP of the 1960s that Dwight Eisenhower essentially created in the 1950s, that Tom Dewey tried to create in the 1940s. That also had a growing conservative-libertarian wing in it led by Barry Goldwater and others.

If Donald Trump takes down the Republican Party in November and they lose the House as well as the Senate and he decides to take his movement with him and perhaps launches a new third-party and perhaps some nationalist party, the Reform Party could become relevant for the first time since Ross Perot launched this movement in the early 1990s. Along with the Libertarians and this is how the Republican Party could become a national party again that can win the presidency, because it would have the members and voters, to compete for the presidency and not need gerrymandered House districts to hold a majority in the House. Or low turnout elections to win a majority in the Senate, because again they would have the voters to be able to compete with Democrats everywhere. Or perhaps the GOP dies and the Reform Party emerges as the new Center-Right party in America. And brings in Libertarians and Northeastern Conservative Republicans.

The Reform Party, to me at least represents the Republican Party when it wasn’t owned by the Christian-Right and broader Far-Right in America. A party where the Ku Klux Klan and other Far-Right European-American nationalist groups, didn’t feel at home in. Because it was a big-tent party that welcomed African-Americans, Latin-Americans, Jewish-Americans, women, Catholics, immigrants, etc. Where it was the party of Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan and yes even Barry Goldwater. Not Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, David Duke, Donald Trump, or the Tea Party. A party that could not only competed in the Northeast with moderate-conservative Republicans, but in the Midwest and the West with Conservative-Libertarians and even California, but in the South as well. And could win high turnout elections, because it had the members and voters to compete everywhere with the Democratic Party. That is no longer the case for the GOP today.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Attachment-1-1007

Source: C-SPAN

Source: C-SPAN: The Contenders- Ross Perot Preview

Ross Perot not that he ever had a real shot at being elected President of the United States, but his style of politics and what he believed in and the people he represents and spoke for and represents how Independent Center-Right political candidates can get elected in America. And I put Ross Perot on the Center-Right in American politics because he is a true fiscal Conservative who believes in fiscal responsibility, not running up debt and deficits.

Ross Perot believes in limited government and that everything that government does has to be limited to what we need it to. Not do not what we want it to do and that all government including entitlement programs have to be efficient and affordable. But someone who was tolerant to moderate on social issues. Who didn’t push those issues and didn’t believe the Federal Government should be involved in them in most cases and would probably leave the states to deal with them.

He was sort of an Eisenhower or Ford Republican whose philosophy was based around accountability. And limiting government to doing the things that we need it to do and do those things well. Who represents roughly forty percent of the country and how people of this mindset could do well in the future especially if they put together one party that represents this whole movement.

Read Full Post »

Attachment-1-992

Source: C-SPAN

Source: C-SPAN: Political Humorist Molly Ivins Talks About Ross Perot From 1992

Ross Perot is classical version of take the good with the bad. As Molly Ivins I believe was explaining that there is a lot to like about the man. And had I actually been old enough to vote in 1992 instead of sixteen years old, I probably would’ve at least considered voting for him. But his weakness’ in a lot of way outweighed his strengths. Because he’s got a Texas sized ego in a New Hampshire size body who thinks a hell of a lot of himself.

And whenever he’s doing something, he tends to give people the idea that what he’s doing is about him. Even as much as he couldn’t stop reminding people in 1992 that he was running for president for the good of the country and I’m sure part of that was true, but he tended to give people the idea that he was the only one who could save the country.

I believe a good way to describe the Ross Perot was that he was a great visionary, but not someone you want quarterbacking your team or a government kinda like a good head coach who didn’t have enough skills to play quarterback very well or play other positions. But someone you might want on the sidelines calling the plays.

Read Full Post »

American Politics

American Politics

Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

The problem that I believe that Centrists have and my question would be what is a Centrist, but the problem that I believe they have is exactly that. What is a Centrist? I believe that is a question that American voters tend to ask as well. And you can give you all you want about forty-percent of the country that are political Independents. Fine, but that doesn’t mean they are all Centrists. It just means they don’t like the Republican Party, or Democratic Party and perhaps the two-party system as a whole.

Americans as much as we get stereotyped as being divided politically tend to believe in similar things. We tend to believe in free and unregulated free speech at least in most cases. We tend to believe in the Right to Privacy and personal freedom as long as we aren’t hurting innocent people. We believe in the Right to Self-Defense as long as it is regulated. We tend to believe in the Freedom of Assembly and being able to associate with whom we please. We believe in property rights and the ability to make a good honest living and live independently. We tend to support the Freedom of Religion. And I could go further.

These aren’t centrist values at least in the sense they came from some centrist philosophy. These are bedrock classical conservative or classical liberal values that the United States was founded on. And I could add another one which would be Americans tend to believe in equal rights for all Americans. These are the liberal and conservative values that made America great. They didn’t come from Centrists, but Liberals and Conservatives who wrote the Constitution.

Where would a Centrist be on these key core issues? And if they believe in all of these things the way they are would they still qualify as Centrists? Since these are liberal and conservative values that come from the center-left and center-right in America. Not the dead-center or the mushy-middle. Or would they reform these key individual rights and make them less liberal or conservative and more moderate. Perhaps the Right to Privacy, but only on the first floor of your home and only inside of your home.

I wonder how the civil rights movement would’ve gone in the 1960s had there not have been a Progressive President in Lyndon Johnson who had served twenty-four years in Congress and eight in the leadership. And instead we had a Centrist Independent instead with no clear record when it came to civil rights because that person was perhaps stuck in the middle. Or if we had a Centrist President during the Civil War, or World War II. Maybe we respond to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, but not respond to the Nazis in Europe murdering all of those Jews. Or perhaps just supply our allies with equipment and hope for the best. Or in the Civil War’s case Africans can be free in America, but just not in the South.

These might be slight exaggerations and poking too much fun at centrism (or not enough) and I’m not saying that centrism doesn’t have it’s place. I believe divided government is where it is useful to take the best from the Democrats and Republicans. Throw out the garbage from both sides and take what is good from both sides and put it in a final package that can work. But my point is there are times when right is right and wrong is wrong. Meaning those things are clear and that you need to take a stand whether it is the liberal or conservative thing to do. Which was my point about those examples I laid out in the previous paragraph. And you need to take those stances for the good of the country. Which is where centrism doesn’t seem very useful or evident.
Charles Wheelan: The Centrist Manifesto: The Strategy

Read Full Post »

 

Attachment-1-152Source: Charles Wheelan: The Centrist Manifesto: Is this Realistic?

I’ve written a couple of blogs over the last few weeks about Independent third parties. And what do I mean by Independent because anyone who is  not a Democrat or Republican politically is technically an Independent. But I’m not talking Independent so much in a party registration, but Independent in an ideological sense. Voters who do not fit in well in the Left or Right boxes. The voters I’m talking about probably lean right in a political sense. But aren’t very partisan and aren’t crazy about the Republican Party, not far enough to the right to be a full-time Republican. Perhaps even like some Democrats, but certainly not far enough to the Left to be a full-time Democrat either. These voters tend to be fiscally conservative but in a pragmatic sense. That they want good government that is clean but also limited. Not trying to do everything for everybody, but there to do the things that we need it to do. And have the resources to do those core things, but spend them wisely and effectively.

The voters I talk about tend to be tolerant to moderate on social issues. They do not think about them strongly and do not like intolerance and discrimination especially through law. But probably not liberal or libertarian either. The voters I’m talking about are basically the Perot voters. Who represent something like forty percent of the country who also decide all of our presidential elections as well. And you put this coalition together and you have one hell of a third-party, a center-right party that is interested in problem solving. And would work with Democrats whenever they can and would always be looking to work with members of other parties if they were ever in power and if the Republican Party doesn’t wake up and goes off a political cliff, you could see this Independence Party that I call it step up and replace the Republican Party as the center-right party in America.

Where I differ with Charles Wheelan, who by the way I just heard of last night and why I’m blogging about this now and I would to read his book as well, is that I think we are talking about the same voters, but he’s talking about purely centrist voters with no real ideological affiliations. I’m talking about fiscal Conservatives who probably use to be Republicans. Or perhaps Blue Dog Southern Democrats who are fiscally conservative and not interested in social issues for the most part except as it relates to civil rights and civil liberties. And perhaps are liberal there or even conservative in the classical sense that government and society shouldn’t be able to discriminate against people based on things that have nothing to do with whatever they are doing. Work and housing to use as examples and do not fit in with the Religious-Right in America.

I’m a Liberal Democrat and probably always well be unless Democratic Socialists take over the Democratic Party. But I do not like the two-party system as a Liberal because it leaves out people simply because of their political views. It is Un-liberal democratic in the sense that it leaves people out because they are a bit further to the Left or Right. Than Democrats and Republicans tend to be or are in the center and are not comfortable being a Democrats or a Republican. Which is why I would like to see the two-party-system abolished and replaced with something more democratic. We need a multiple-party-system that includes Liberals, Progressives and Conservatives of course. But we need something that includes Libertarians on the Right and Socialists on the Left. And Neoconservatives on the Right and perhaps even Communists, Nationalists and Theocrats on the way Far-Left and Far-Right. So we are all represented in America as voters.

You create this multiple-party-system by simply outlawing gerrymandering from the Right and Left that all House districts that are drawn up by the states have to accurately represent the states political affiliations, rather than drawing up districts to simply give Republicans and Democrats better opportunities to win and these districts would have to be approved by a Federal Election Commission made up of Democrats, Republicans and Centrists.

We need universal ballot access that all of the parties are represented on the ballots in all. Federal elections Congress both chambers and the presidency and vice presidency.

We need universal polling that all party nominees for Federal office get polled so a media organization can’t just poll the Democrat and Republican or poll them together. But they have to poll the Libertarian, the Independent from the Independence Party I was talking about. As well as the Constitutionalist and Green or Democratic Socialist that is running as well. So all of the party nominees for office would get ID nationally. As well as in the state and districts that they are running in.

What I’m talking about is easy to put on paper and would work if it were ever to get into law. And if it were ever to become law we would need runoff elections as well. Because it would be very difficult to get fifty percent or more in one round of voting. But it is very difficult to pass especially without a major grassroots movement similar to. Immigration reform because Democrats and Republicans are still in power.

Read Full Post »

Independent For President

Independent For President

Can A Modern Day Ross Perot Win The White House? – YouTube.

A modern Ross Perot or an Independent third-party and I say Independent for a couple of reasons. That I’ll get into later but an Independence Party lets call it for now. Could succeed in America and at some point win the White House but certain things would have to happen first.

You would need an individual or groups of individuals that have a lot of money. Somewhere in the neighborhood of a billion dollars or more together or who could raise that kinda of money. In a year or two years and use that money precisely for a building this Independent third-party. Yes finding a legitimate meaning qualified presidential candidate or several who preferably both have private sector as well as public sector experience. Would good records in both but more importantly these resources would be needed to simply build the party. Build the national but as well as state and local parties so you are represented everywhere well. Where people who think similarly as this party and what this party philosophically stands for. So you have to build the national as well as state and local parties so you can do more than just compete for the White House. But in all sorts of elections like winning seats in state legislatures. Local councils, city mayorship, state governorship and so forth. So your party has a foundation of qualified people who at some point could win and serve at the national level.

As I said I said Independent for a couple of reasons and what I mean by that. Is you need an Independence Party and maybe that party would be the Reform Party. But you need for this to work and Independence Party that is officially independent of the Republican and Democratic parties. But also ideologically independent of these parties as well. And what do I mean by that, well roughly sixty percent of that country is officially independent but also. Ideologically independent as well and what I mean by that. Is they are not only unaffiliated with the Democratic and Republican Parties officially but ideologically as well. They don’t go very far to the right on social or economic issues. They tend to be somewhat fiscally Conservative but not Libertarian. They want good responsible government that is limited to doing what we need it to do with the resources to do those things. They tend to be tolerant-moderate on social issues, perhaps even Liberal on some of them but certainly not Libertarian. And this is a coalition that represents around sixty percent of the country.

So for an Independence Party like this to work. First you need someone or groups of people with the resources to make to happen but you also need. And then you need the coalition to bring to this party and you start with the Independent vote and say look if we were united. We beat both Democrats and Republicans and we would run and fix this country. And then you go to the Northeastern wing of the Republican Party or what is left of that. And go to the Blue Dog Southern/rural wing of the Democratic Party or what is left of that. And bring these people to your side and over time you have a party that could not only compete with but. Beat Democrats and Republicans and hold major public offices.

Read Full Post »

Nathan GonzalezSource: PBS: NewsHour-Nathan Gonzales: Would a Third Major Party Ease Congressional Gridlock?

I’ve probably said this before on this blog, but I’m a proud Liberal Democrat and expect to be a Democrat my entire life. Unless the Far-Left were to takeover the Democratic Party, which is not likely. More likely would be a socialist third-party emerging that could actually challenge Democrats. But the two-party-system simply does not work and even though I do blame the Republicans especially their Far-Right and their anti-government Libertarian-Right more on this, one strong political party in America which is the Democratic Party right now if you look at the power, that they have, but also where they are on the issues compared with Americans as a whole, where they are blowing Republicans away right now, is not enough for a large liberal democracy.

One strong political party even if that political party is my party the Democratic Party is simply not enough. The two-party system right now is not just broken. But it is broken and bankrupt and failing. American voters not just themselves with their gerrymandering and their primary systems that in many cases especially the Republican Party, tend to select the most fringe candidates and people who are least interested in governing. And more interested in building their movement and becoming popular. As we see right now in the House Tea Party Caucus.

The current Republican Party is designed to fail and will go out of business as even a potential governing party, probably within ten years. And if that does happen and a real Center-Right party does not emerge to replace the Republican Party, we will become of a one-party-state. In a country that is supposed to be a liberal democracy. Not healthy, because that is how centralized dictatorships get created. And why we need short-term at least a new Center-Right party to replace what use to be a Center-Right party in the Republican Party.

And why Northeastern and Midwest Republicans and Blue Dog and Southern Democrats need to think about doing this. Getting together with Center-Right Independents who are not Republicans. Because of either the Religious-Right or the partisanship and the Tea Party calling them rhinos and all of that. To save our political system. Long-term I would like to see a multiple-party system going from Socialists, or Communists on the Far-Left.

To Theocrats and Confederates on the Far-Right. While still having the Liberals on the Center-Left. And Conservatives on the Center-Right. But short-term we need a strong Center-Right party in America. To compete against the Center-Left Democratic Party for the good of our political system. So the Republican Party as it is currently set up doesn’t become a failed party. Without a strong party to replace it.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: