« Back to The 4th Party’s Group Conversations

Improving a nation.

Started by: Albmore 5 months, 2 weeks ago

9 Comments Report

Group Conversation From:
The 4th Party /groups/the-4th-party/

We are a group forming a new politcal party. Where you decide everything. Your thoughts,YOUR ideas, on YOUR future.

" VOTE EM OUT 2010"

As ...

Start a new Conversation

Other Conversations from The 4th Party:
Other New Conversations:

RSS Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 9
  • 100%
    Albmore5 months, 2 weeks ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    As founder of the 4th party group I was surprised at the beginning on how quickly the group grew. On a more disappointing note I am not pleased with the lack of participatiion.

    There are members here on this site who's views are so extreme left or right, that they will never look at whats best for the nation. They will look only toward their party. Not only on this site but through out the nation. If it is Rev Wright, or Rush..ect both sides are still playing the same old games and leading the American people around by the nose while they go about the same old business.

    Americans we elected a president in Nov. 08. If you voted for him or not. We did not elect a movie star. I see alot of talk and little action. So much to the point that even some left wing followers are now speaking out.

    On the otherside we have the Republican party who still doesn't seem to know what direction they are going or who is in charge.

    My question is when is it going to be enough? What will it take for YOU the people of this GREAT land to say we have had enough of the games. My fellow Americans this is ALL about YOU, YOUR children, YOUR future . We still seem to have more time for the Miss USA gossip and American Idol as for the decission being made in DC that will effect ALL of OUR lives.

    The 2 party system and their way of doing business is ruining OUR country. We have elections next year. It is time to "VOTE EM ALL OUT!"

    An independent congress is what America needs. One that votes on the issues not being tied to politcal party gain. One that serves and votes on the lines that the people wish. One that upholds OUR constituion while at the same time keeping us safe.

    With this in mind I ask you for your help and support. America will rise to its highest when WE the people take it back into OUR hands.

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
    Reply
    loading loading ...
    • 100%
      ClydePRM5 months, 2 weeks ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      I agree.

      Realistically, I see two things being addressed here. First is a candid review of existing office holders. Second is fielding our own candidates. The former may, in fact, lead in natural course to the latter.

      The ABA rates all judicial-appointments candidates. I saw in some discussions here rating existing R and D. I think that's a great thing. Earn credibility through cogent, reasoned, consistent endorsements and critiques.

      If opportunity presents early in the process to field someone, great. Otherwise, issuing press releases, voters' guides, etc., for 2010 primaries and the general has value. It will build credibility.

      As credibility builds and people take notice, the next step is fundraising and candidates under our name.

      One thing I have noticed as I read each post here is a tinge of anger - anger about President Bush, anger about past and present policies. To be direct, that's pointless. It achieves nothing. It isolates. And, worst of all, it is usually shallow. President Bush had policies which could be easily and rightfully attacked - so does every politician. And every politician has policies that can be easily and rightfully supported. I am not interested in living in the past. If this group is to be successful, it begins in the present and moves forward.

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
      Reply
      loading loading ...
      • 100%
        CHAM5 months, 2 weeks ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        Albmore. We do need a viable Independent Party. And I am all for a new party.

        What I hear most is that a Third Party can't win. That is mere speculation. What can be realized from formation of a "party for the American citizen" one based on Constitutional Law and the freedom of individuals to pursue the American Dream is something that can be achieved and you know my thoughts on it.

        As long as we have the Two Headed Beast of Washington no third party will amount to anything. But if we can get rid of one of those heads - everything becomes possible.

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
        Reply
        loading loading ...
        • 100%
          Albmore5 months, 2 weeks ago

          This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

          I agree Cham- that is why I think OUR first move must be beginning to remove them out of power. A nation wide campaign would be to expensive and timely at this point. If we concentrate though only in the areas where elections will be held next year we will be taking a good step in the right direction.

          Our goal should not be one of serving only our party, but serving America, helping America get a fair and Balanced representation in government by filling it with independent parties who are ready to tackle the issues and no longer play party games.

          (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
          Reply
          loading loading ...
          • 100%
            icono15 months, 2 weeks ago

            This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

            To restore America, go back to the basic principles of the Constitution. Rediscover them, then reapply them. Things will then probably work out a lot better.

            Most advocates of the two party system I've talked to seem to think a third party would dilute the effect of the other two parties and thereby lead to a political deadlock ( as if we don't already see a lot of that.) and lead to elections being 'stolen' (?!) by one party over another(as if we don't already suspect such behaviour from the two party system; remember the Florida 'chad' snafu during the Bush- Gore Pres election.) because a third party would 'siphon off votes' from the two primary parties and their candidates( this is assuming that they, the two primary parties, can or will 'field' a superior candidate capable of being President.) This so called siphoning off of votes, in their mind, would mean that the people of the US would not be adequately represented(???) which,IMO, if you look at the workings of DC with the special interest groups being able to sway the Politicians in their favor in lieu of the wants and needs of the people, is IMHO, disingenuous at worst and blandly elitist at best.

            So, IMO, a 'third party' is needed, if for nothing else to safe-guard the interests of 'We The People', as it pretains to the basic tenats of the Constitution, and that idea should be pursued without prejudice or delay.

            (I say "to safe guard the interests of "We The People"" because our usual watch dogs, the Media, is too busy being partisan, ie pointing out everyone else's bias as if they themselves don't have a bias, and fighting for market share to increase profits, in place of presenting the facts and debating the points of any political situation or candidate. So the MSN is no longer a viable watch dog of the DC or World political scene. That is 'one' and I repeat 'one', of the many reasons I find a third party a necessity.)

            (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
            Reply
            loading loading ...
            • 50%
              jovial5 months, 2 weeks ago

              This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

              A fourth party only, Why not a fifth or even 6th? Not everyone that disagrees with the two current parties will automatically identify with this party. The fact is there are many ideas out there, but no one party has a lock on all the ideas out there. Even if a viable 4th party existed, it would no better cover all the issues than any other parties out there now. It would just muddle the politics and would eventually become just as corrupt as the other ones. Why do i say that? Because it takes money to win elections in this country, as soon as a 4th party candidate showed any promise of winning he would be showered with money, cruises, game tickets, and all the rest of the bennies these candidates receive. It would only be a matter of time before we would be deciding between three corrupt parties instead of two. Maybe that's an improvement, maybe not.

              (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
              Reply
              loading loading ...
              • 100%
                Albmore5 months, 2 weeks ago

                This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                Joval I would be happy with 50 as long as no one of them had over wellming power over the others.

                (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
                Reply
                loading loading ...
                • 100%
                  fredricwilliams5 months, 2 weeks ago

                  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                  It might be worthwhile to look at Arrow's Paradox. If there is a third party (or fourth), it is likely that voting for this third party will cause the election of the person who third-party voters like LEAST.

                  The reason is simple, and the usual complaint against third parties. In the presidential election of 2000, there were candidates from several parties: Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, Natural Law, Green, and Reform. Most received very few votes, but the Green Party received 2.7% of the popular vote (Ralph Nader was the candidate). Most people would agree that had Nader not run, his voters would have gone mainly to Al Gore, who would have then won the election, probably with a majority of the popular vote (he won a plurality).

                  Thus, if a new party is formed and does not endorse a candidate of the major parties, it is likely to achieve the opposite of the desired outcome. The platform will draw votes to an unelectable candidate and thus assure the election of the candidate with views least similar to those espoused in the platform.

                  One cure for this is to (1) support candidates in primaries and conventions of the major parties; (2) endorse the better of the two candidates of the major parties; (3) seek to gain control of the Republican Party. This last is because the Republican Party is currently the weaker and more disorganized party, it is blamed for the war and economic problems of the past decade, and its principles are most likely to produce economic revival (as was the case after the 1896 and 1900 election defeats of the Democrats.

                  If the goal is to replace the current tweedle-dum, tweedle-dee two-party system, then the key is to choose a single issue of concern to everyone in the nation (the economy) and based a new party on principles which would attract significant numbers of Republicans -- enough to cause the Republican Party to become a third party.

                  Remember that the Republican Party was founded in the mid-1850s on the single issue of slavery, absorbed most of the Whig Party, and won the presidency in 1860. Perhaps now, an end to economic slavery is the key to a new party.

                  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 4) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 5)
                  Reply
                  loading loading ...

                  Join In On This Conversation!

                  Want to join the discussion? Only members of this group may post comments to this conversation. Why not join right now?

                  Submit a Story

                  Advertisement