Alternative Political Party

[Scott_Lafrance]

With all of the events of the last few days, many of us have grown increasing impatient with the apparent impotence of the Republican Party. This, coupled with the DNCs position on abortion and other “culture of death” issues makes me wonder if now isn’t the time to make a push for an alternative National Party. Without wanting to turn this into an alternative of the Politics Forum, would you consider leaving your party for an alternative?

 

[jlw]

I am going to be the “curmudgon” here, but your frustration is misplaced. Certainly, the republicans are not above criticism. Many faults. BUT…

Liberal Clinton (and Bush 41) appointed judges (Oops, Kennedy and O’Conner were Reagan, huh?) are to blame!!!

You think by voting for a constitution party candidate (and depriving a republican a vote) you will get things done in Washington DC??? That we will get decent judges confirmed to the bench???

Noooooo. You won’t. Democrats will win. And they AREN’T weak-kneed when they have power.

Republcians aren’t perfect, and we have our share of RINOs. But the alternative??? Scary.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

jlw:

I am going to be the “curmudgon” here, but your frustration is misplaced. Certainly, the republicans are not above criticism. Many faults. BUT…

Liberal Clinton (and Bush 41) appointed judges (Oops, Kennedy and O’Conner were Reagan, huh?) are to blame!!!

You think by voting for a constitution party candidate (and depriving a republican a vote) you will get things done in Washington DC??? That we will get decent judges confirmed to the bench???

Noooooo. You won’t. Democrats will win. And they AREN’T weak-kneed when they have power.

Republcians aren’t perfect, and we have our share of RINOs. But the alternative??? Scary.

In case you didn’t read the poll, the Constitution Party is only one of six viable alternatives, plus a write in option. Do you think we are going to get change by maintaining the status quo. If nothing changes, nothing changes.

 

[aimee]

Scott_Lafrance:

In case you didn’t read the poll, the Constitution Party is only one of six viable alternatives, plus a write in option. Do you think we are going to get change by maintaining the status quo. If nothing changes, nothing changes.

I hear you Scott… but as for me none of the ones in the poll…I’ll stay republican and fight within to attain goals…I think it the best way…

 

[vern_humphrey]

Scott_Lafrance:

In case you didn’t read the poll, the Constitution Party is only one of six viable alternatives, plus a write in option. Do you think we are going to get change by maintaining the status quo. If nothing changes, nothing changes.

There is a big difference between an alternative and a **viable **alternative. Electing a single representative from a new party does little to advance the agenda of that party. Even if a Libertarian or a member of the Constitution Party were to be elected President, he’d still have to deal with the Democrats and Republicans who make up the House and Senate.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. If you want change, you have to work for it. The most promising way is to work within the existing framework. Find candidates who are supportable and support them.

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

There is a big difference between an alternative and a **viable **alternative…The most promising way is to work within the existing framework. Find candidates who are supportable and support them.

Just look at the history of third parties in this country, if you doubt Vern’s suggestions.

 

[jlw]

There is a big difference between an alternative and a **viable **alternative

The big reality check for those who are letting this horrific week (what should be a HOLY week, remember) get to their heads. Vern is right.

 

[TPJCatholic]

jlw,

Jesus seemed to be a non-viable option for many Jews in His day.

Parties become viable when the citizens make them so.

Prolife party!

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Richardols:

Just look at the history of third parties in this country, if you doubt Vern’s suggestions.

In case you forgot, both the Democrat and Republican Parties were once third parties. What about the Federalist Party? Or the Whigs? The Democrat-Republicans?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

TPJCatholic:

jlw,

Jesus seemed to be a non-viable option for many Jews in His day.

Parties become viable when the citizens make them so.

Prolife party!

Bravo!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Scott_Lafrance:

In case you forgot, both the Democrat and Republican Parties were once third parties. What about the Federalist Party? Or the Whigs? The Democrat-Republicans?

In the early days of the Republic there were several parties formed. But how many new political parties have emerged in the last century in this country and managed to elect as many as 10% of the total membership of Congress?

The Age of Miracles is over.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

vern humphrey:

In the early days of the Republic there were several parties formed. But how many new political parties have emerged in the last century in this country and managed to elect as many as 10% of the total membership of Congress?

The Age of Miracles is over.

Tell that to Jesus when you are on your knees praying tonight.

 

[Lance]

If a 3rd party is to work, it needs to start at the local level and get officials elected there. A 3rd party has a much better chance of electing a county commisioner, a city alderman or even a state senator than a US congressman. They should build a grass roots base then move onto the national scene. I don’t disagree that we need to get a viable 3rd party going, it just seems to me that they are starting at the wrong level. If you elect tax conscious people who are not for abortion and distributing condoms to kids to the school board they will have a greater impact on your community than your Senator.

 

[jlw]

Scott_Lafrance:

Bravo!

Bravo for GOD as man!

But it doesn’t hold water HERE.

What if Ralph Nader didn’t run in 2000?? Hmm?? What if Pat Buchanan didn’t run?? (His votes in Palm Beach County most certainly would have gone to Gore, so it helped Bush in the end, but)It certainly took AWAY from the guy who was the most VIABLE most-pro-life candidate.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Lance:

If a 3rd party is to work, it needs to start at the local level and get officials elected there. A 3rd party has a much better chance of electing a county commisioner, a city alderman or even a state senator than a US congressman. They should build a grass roots base then move onto the national scene. I don’t disagree that we need to get a viable 3rd party going, it just seems to me that they are starting at the wrong level. If you elect tax conscious people who are not for abortion and distributing condoms to kids to the school board they will have a greater impact on your community than your Senator.

That is what I have been saying, especially during the last election cycle. Go to the politics forum and look up comments from Apologia100 (my old nickname). I said that the Constitution Party was stupid for going after the presidency without any lower office support. I maintain that position.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

jlw:

Bravo for GOD as man!

But it doesn’t hold water HERE.

What if Ralph Nader didn’t run in 2000?? Hmm?? What if Pat Buchanan didn’t run?? (His votes in Palm Beach County most certainly would have gone to Gore, so it helped Bush in the end, but)It certainly took AWAY from the guy who was the most VIABLE most-pro-life candidate.

You seem to be insisting that I am only advocating a thrid party in national elections. I have maintained that if a third party were to take root, it would have to start at the local level, with aldermen, council members, school boards, sherriffs, etc…

 

[Lance]

jlw:

Bravo for GOD as man!

But it doesn’t hold water HERE.

What if Ralph Nader didn’t run in 2000?? Hmm?? What if Pat Buchanan didn’t run?? (His votes in Palm Beach County most certainly would have gone to Gore, so it helped Bush in the end, but)It certainly took AWAY from the guy who was the most VIABLE most-pro-life candidate.

God is not man!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Scott_Lafrance:

That is what I have been saying, especially during the last election cycle. Go to the politics forum and look up comments from Apologia100 (my old nickname). I said that the Constitution Party was stupid for going after the presidency without any lower office support. I maintain that position.

If you want to see that in action, look at the Southern states, where the balance has swung from liberal (and Democratic) to conservative (and Republican.) Before you win the White House, you have to win a lot of court houses.

 

[jlw]

Lance:

God is not man!

No, no no. Lance. You misunderstood. Jesus, God, became man, and dwealt among us. Right?? That’s all.

TPJ was using the analogy to illustrate courage in the face of hard choices in front of us. I get the jist of his point, but we are not asking ourselves to pick between…1) God, or 2)fully turning our back to Him, are we??? No, I don’t think so.

TPJ belives that we are really essentailly cooperating with evil when we vote for republicans because they don’t drop everything else, ignore economic, national security, and (quite real) political realities on the ground, and chain themselves in front of abortion clinics (NO! That’s OUR jobs, not theirs, people).

I don’t fully agree with his assessment. We yearn for heaven, and we must shun the temptations of this worldly things, BUT we still have to live in it. And that means we have to “move the ball” the best way we can, even if it doesn’t look pretty. Make sense??

 

[jlw]

Scott_Lafrance:

You seem to be insisting that I am only advocating a thrid party in national elections. I have maintained that if a third party were to take root, it would have to start at the local level, with aldermen, council members, school boards, sherriffs, etc…

I agree with that approach. However, here in the BLUE state of Oregon, we missed out on a Republican governor (first one in 20 years?) because the Libertarian candidate’s votes were very nearly the margin of victory for the democrat.