jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (16 posts)

Why We Need A Grassroots Third Party In The United States

  1. gmwilliams profile image84
    gmwilliamsposted 6 years ago

    This country is the greatest, freest, and most democratic country in the world.   We have a constitution and government that the rest of the world aspires to.    However, the Democrats and Republicans are politicians and it is politics as usual instead of considering the needs of the American voter.   What we need is a grassroots third independent party of educated, enlightened, and humanistic people from all walks of life who are in touch with the American people and will do their utmost to solve the existing socioeconomic ills in this great country.   Most politicians pander to the lobbyists and other corporate groups, only being "concerned" with the average person when they want their vote!

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image59
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      There is no need for a third party.  We have seen reform movements that have been integrated, for the most part, with in the two major parties.  The TEA party has altered the Republican party - especially on a grass roots level and the occupy people have been embraced by the power in the Democrat party.

      The 2010 election was proof that movements alter party composition.  Libertarians are not isolated to the Libertarian party, just as the Communist Party USA is not the home of all communists.  There are caucuses within each party that contain groups who would support those parties. 

      A concerted effort by Libertarians, away from their party loyalty, within the Republican party would be far more affective than the Libertarian party has ever been.  It is the commitment to minor parties that has rendered the two major parties hidebound retirement programs for life long politicians.

  2. ShawnB2011 profile image60
    ShawnB2011posted 6 years ago

    Totally agree. I don't get that feeling with any of those who are running now. Honestly, whoever the media wants to be president will be president. It's all in how they build someone up or down as too who becomes president. If such a grassroots party were to exist, do you really think the media will allow them to shine as well as they should? Don't think so.

  3. profile image0
    oldandwiseposted 6 years ago

    I also agree. Seems all they can do is agree to disagree. But then again, how can so many millionaire politicians relate to an average Joe? How can they vote on helping average Joe, if it affects "their bottom line?" How can they relate when they haven't experienced the recession and continue to make money hand over fist? And simply stated, how can they know, when they don't even know the cost of a loaf of bread or a gallon of milk? So yes, we need a third party. One that actually lived and lives the average Joe's existance.

  4. wixor profile image61
    wixorposted 6 years ago

    The problem is that, like nearly all democratic countries, the traditional left and right parties don't exist anymore. They have been replaced by a center, and a right party. Or even, a right, and an extreme right party.

    I'm not sure why you consider USA to be so democratic. After all, you have to work your way up through the party echelons, and then the elections are decided by advertising. How many independents would ever have a chance at being president? And what about minority rights? Does your democracy work for indigenous people?

    1. profile image62
      SanXuaryposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, the two parties in power have one party line called money and who controls it. A third party is exactly what they need to throw a wrench into the system. A party that does not favour sinking six trillion dollars of the tax payers money to keep failed institutions of greed, fraud and waste alive.

  5. profile image0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    A third Party would just become as twisted as the others.
    What we really need is more power of recall given to citizens.  And a better vetting procedure.  And a few other things....

  6. TheMagician profile image90
    TheMagicianposted 6 years ago

    There is a grassroots third party -- Green Party!

    1. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Oh yeah.  I think that's the one where the President (I've forgotten her name, and by now maybe it's someone else anyway) gushed about how she once got to hug a tree.  Seriously.   After I heard her say that, I laughed; then was incredulous that she focused on that instead of the profound issues America is facing.  But hey, she's probably been incorporated into Obama's Progressive Party already, so I doubt she will have a separate impact.

  7. maxoxam41 profile image76
    maxoxam41posted 6 years ago

    In what way is it the freest and most democratic/

  8. Evan G Rogers profile image74
    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago

    We have one: It's Ron Paul.

    Sure, there's an (R) in front of his name, but he's as libertarian as he was when he ran for president as the Libertarian Party back in 1988

    1. mel22 profile image59
      mel22posted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I was gonna say the same thing... Heck even the Green party puts up candidates, but to get them on the ballot these people have to vote them up in primaries. The ' its a waste of a vote' to vote outside the two main is what stops people. I used to be that way until one year I was so fed up w/ candidates I wrote in Santa Claus and have realized I've got the choice and voted real third party candidates ever since with no regrets. The problem is it takes a slew of people to just say "F@#$ @T" and actually 'waste their vote' so to speak to get the third party's needed votes to become an annual place on the ticket outside mayoral and local elections. I once wrote in Ted Nugent for governor as well just for the kicks.

      1. TheMagician profile image90
        TheMagicianposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        This is a great point, people do often figure they're just wasting votes by not voting for one of the two primary parties, and in a way it's true, but we're never going to make a difference if we dont say screw it!

        My first official year I'll be able to vote is 2012, and though I'm somewhat of an "Independent" since I don't like following one specific party, I've always planned on voting Green Party since I do identify with them the most, but I haven't seen enough about the potential candidates. I'm really unhappy with all of the candidates even from the D and R parties so far, ESPECIALLY the democratic party. Goodness. 2012 is full of crazies.

  9. ShawnB2011 profile image60
    ShawnB2011posted 6 years ago

    I would vote for John Stewart. He knows what's up. His mind isn't in the clouds and calls everyone out for their attempted mind games that these folks like to play. He's smart enough to do it, in tune with the public and knows wtf is going on out there. To me that wouldn't be a wasted vote, voting for our choices now certainly would be.

    1. TheMagician profile image90
      TheMagicianposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      All jokes aside, I don't think he'd do too bad. Sometimes I wish television personalities and certain celebrities would just run, because I feel that they'd be amazing. Call me crazy, but I think Oprah would be pretty legit in office -- she might put us into more debt by giving everyone free cars, though.

  10. ShawnB2011 profile image60
    ShawnB2011posted 6 years ago

    Well, look at Ronald Reagan and how well he did. Where are the Reagans out there? Hahaha but at least the car industry will pick up a little!