Is America's answer a third party?

by **bumper** » November 9, 2011, 11:35 am

Seems like nothing is getting done these days:

Fed up! McCain predicts rise of third political party

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) addresses the Reuters Washington Summit in the Reuters newsroom in Washington, November 8, 2011. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

By Steve Holland and David Alexander

WASHINGTON | Tue Nov 8, 2011 6:39pm EST

(Reuters) - Senator John McCain predicted on Tuesday a third political party will emerge in response to Americans' economic frustrations and said it might as well be called "the Fed-Up Party."

The Republican Party's presidential nominee in 2008 raised the possibility of a third party about a year ago, but his comments on Tuesday suggest he has hardened his views as polls show Americans increasingly disillusioned with Washington politics.

The 75-year-old McCain may now be the most prominent politician forecasting Americans will look to another party to compete with Democrats and Republicans.

"Unless both parties change, then I think that it's an inevitability. We aren't doing anything for the people," McCain said in blunt remarks at the Reuters Washington Summit.

Americans, he said, are frustrated by sluggish economic growth that has depleted their incomes while corporate executives take in massive salary bonuses.

Asked if the new option would be a centrist party, or a wing of the left or right, McCain quipped; "I think a Fed-Up Party."

McCain spoke from experience. In his home state of Arizona, he said a third of new registered voters are independents and, in many areas of the country, independents are increasingly the swing voters who decide elections.

'PLIGHT OF THE PEOPLE'

As for his own party, McCain expressed frustration that Republicans have not concentrated enough on the concerns of Americans struggling to make ends meet.

"The party, I think, has got to be a lot more responsive to the plight of the people," said McCain, who lost the presidential race to Barack Obama three years ago this month.

"I think we have to weigh in far more heavily on the side of things like reforming the tax code. If we reform the tax code, then many of these large corporations that paid no taxes last year ... maybe they would."

McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee who once developed a reputation as a maverick, is sticking with his own party, at least for now.

"No, I don't think so," he said when asked whether he would saddle up with a third-party movement. "I will continue to complain about things but ... I still haven't given up on the Republican Party."

Third-party candidates in presidential elections have not had success. The most tangible result of a third-party candidacy arguably came in 1992 when Ross Perot collected enough votes from then-Republican President George H. W. Bush to help Democrat Bill Clinton win the White House.

There has been some talk in political circles that the conservative Tea Party movement could eventually field its own presidential candidate, but McCain was doubtful.

"The Tea Party was a movement, not an organization, as we know. And so they've kind of receded. There was never any permanency to them," he said.

"But I think that you could see a national movement, that there's a group of people saying 'look we may disagree on some specific issues but we're not one of them,'" he said.

(Additional reporting by the Reuters Summit Team; editing by Mary Milliken and Jackie Frank)

Politics

by **UdonExpat** » November 10, 2011, 9:08 am

Two parties or ten; it really doesn't matter much. As long as businesses can contribute unlimited funds to politicians, many if not most of them, will be bought and paid for regardless of any political affiliation.

by TJ » November 17, 2011, 10:02 am

Creating a third party can be extremely useful to siphon substantial voters from the opposition's block of voters. But third parties never win. I think it was the Green Party that sunk Gore's election. Nadar and Buchanan pulled off a lot of votes. Then there was that fellow from Texas, Perot(sp?) that killed the Republican chance.

I'd say that a military coup is likely to happen sooner than a third party succeding.

Unfettered lllegal immigration and the organizing of the occupy mobs will soon establish a Democrat hegemony.

The unions, Marxists/communists, and politicied leftists have been organizing for decades; Fabian Socialists, right? They will soon be creating chaos at Tea Party, Republican and Indepentent activities. Their organizers are working to organize the military as they say their revolution will need an army. Think of the Watts and other black riots. They will do the same, demanding negotiations with public officials. Any demand met will always be followed with more and greater demands.

The occupy mobs will grow and continue and other type mobs will be established and join them to drive the ongoing socialist revolution. Expect much more when the U.S. weather improves. The Occupy Spring is only a few months away.

by **maaka** » November 17, 2011, 10:41 am

I dont know what type of voting system the USA has, first past the post, mixed member proportional, STP, SM etc etc, but we downunder have a MMP system which gives you two votes, one for the member in want in your area, and one for the party you want in power..so even though the big party wins the majority of seats in parliament, it can strengthen its position by having agreements on supply and demands with other parties it likes, or feels have similar goals..so we currently have the Businessman party in power, as opposed to the workers party, but they also have agreements with the Green Party, In Maori Party ( indigenous people) and United Party ( center church types ) so we get a broad representation of viewpoints in power, instead of just one side against the other..the Greens , Maori and United all get alittle bite of the cake, and get to introduce the odd Bill in the house, whereas before they would never have got a sniff in..seems to work ok..maybe the USA could look at changing its system, rather than the democrats against the repubs all the time.

by **KB_Texas** » November 17, 2011, 12:05 pm

Until there is a party that agrees with the majority view of the American people, there will be no third party. By that, I mean a party that espouses fiscal responsibility, fundamental human rights, respect for differing views, and putting the country first, instead of greed, cronyism, hard line 'The Party must win' mentality, and stupidity that has become American politics.

I remember when we were taught that every American's view counted, and we should respect that. Today, it is only 'my' view that counts, (or my Party's view) and if you think differently, you are a stupid _______! (insert whatever...liberal, conservative, etc. etc.) The basic respect for others views and ideas has vanished, and the idea of working for the betterment of the country has been replaced by working for the betterment of 'The Party'. Everything becomes a battle, and is getting more and more contentious every day. Name calling, belittlement, minimization, etc. have all become 'standard' practice. Compromise is a lost art.

I do believe that America needs a third party, but not in the vein of what has been espoused so far. It needs a 'middle' party that speaks for the vast majority of Americans who feel that the two party system has become broken. They should refuse to get involved in religion, family, right to life, etc., and build a platform on fiscal responsibility (for ALL, including companies), mutual respect and acceptance of divergent views, and, above all, doing what is right for the country, and I think they could actually win an election with a reasonable candidate. I know a vast majority of my friends feel the same way.

This is my opinion...it means nothing other than a point for discussion on the topic at hand. Your mileage may vary. You may have totally different views, which is your right.

KB

Is America's answer a third party?