Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
Michael Medved :: Townhall.com Columnist
Why the Third Party Bust in 2008?
by Michael Medved
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Final returns are still weeks away, but it's not too early to acknowledge one of the big surprises of the presidential election of 2008: the disastrous decline of fringe party candidates in a year that once seemed ripe for their efforts.

As recently as November, 2007, CNN's Lou Dobbs flatly predicted that neither a Democrat nor a Republican could win the White House this time: the certain victor, he declared, would be an Independent or the representative of some newly emergent protest party. His book, "Independents Day: Reawakening the American Spirit," became a major bestseller.

On a similar note, Douglas E. Schoen, former campaign consultant to President Clinton, published "Declaring Independence: The Beginning of the End of the Two Party System" early in 2008, also heralding a breakthrough year for a third party contender who could plausibly capture the White House. Meanwhile, a group known as "Unity '08," comprised of former officeholders and prominent political operatives from both major parties, promised a "Re-United States of America" and promoted an independent fusion "ticket" that would feature a former Democrat and a former Republican as running mates. For several months, speculation surrounded New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who talked of funding his own campaign to the tune of more than $500 million; before he rejected the idea, Bloomberg reportedly discussed running together with outgoing Senator Chuck Hagel from Nebraska.

Even after these dreams of some independent "unity ticket" began to fade, energized Third Party activists continued to proclaim 2008 as a potential breakthrough year. The Libertarian Party, which had fielded little-known ideologues (like 2004's nearly invisible Michael Badnarik) as its presidential candidates for more than two decades, finally secured a well-known former Congressman (Bob Barr of Georgia) to head their ticket. On the left, the Green Party welcomed the candidacy of another former House member from Georgia: the fiery and charismatic Cynthia McKinney. The Constitution Party, fanning conspiratorial fears of a "North American Union" and 9/11 as an inside job, selected radio preacher Chuck Baldwin. And two much-publicized perennial candidates – Ralph Nader on the left and Alan Keyes on the right – launched their own vigorous independent campaigns.

Amazingly, despite all the expectations and activity, these minor party contenders have made little headway. In major polls within two months of the election, none of them drew support from more than 2% of the electorate. Since third party candidates always perform better in polls than they do in the actual returns (because citizens feel more reluctant to waste their ballots once they're in the voting booth), most election experts expect that all five of the major-minors --- McKinney, Barr, Baldwin, Nader and Keyes – will draw less than 2% combined.

In this context, it's reasonable to ask what happened to "Independents Day" or "The Beginning of the End of the Two Party System"?

For one thing, both Republicans and Democrats nominated candidates with strong appeal to cantankerous independents: John McCain and Barack Obama each bucked their party establishments while deploying post- partisan rhetoric against the bickering and gridlock in Washington. Both major candidates claim credible credentials as reformers and promise to break with the painfully polarized politics of the recent past.

The exciting and free-wheeling primary season also served to undermine the familiar protest candidate charge that the major parties shut out dissenters and insurgents. For the first time in fifty-six years, neither a sitting President nor a sitting Vice President ran for the White House so that neither party turned to an obvious front-runner. Both McCain and Obama had been dismissed as hopeless long-shots months before the primaries actually began, and both claimed their nominations only after spirited and highly competitive primary campaigns.

At the same time, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel on the far left and Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo on the far right. ran energetic campaigns for major party nominations, earning considerable exposure on the dozens of nationally televised candidate debates. The combination of intense publicity and strictly limited success for these efforts may have sapped some of the ideological energy that otherwise might have coalesced around some of the fringe candidates in November.

Finally, there's evidence that despite all the premature obituaries for the long-established major parties, the public may have developed a more mature and realistic attitude toward quixotic minor party efforts. Ralph Nader's campaign in 2000 almost certainly represented a turning point: Nader won 2.73% of the final vote and his relative strength in several key states (famously including Florida) almost certainly tilted the unforgettably close election to George W. Bush. In the bitter aftermath of the disputed result and Al Gore's defeat, countless Americans learned the eternal lesson of third party efforts: these campaigns always do the most damage to the serious candidates closest to them ideologically. This message came across at a time when voters had already wearied of the disillusioning electoral antics of Ross Perot: he drew 18.9% and 8.4% in his quixotic campaigns of '92 and '96, respectively, but his "movement" promptly disappeared when the eccentric billionaire lost personal interest.

As a result, the votes for minor party candidates plunged precipitously in 2004. Four years earlier, the three major third-party contenders (Nader of the Green Party, Pat Buchanan of the Reform Party, and Harry Browne of the Libertarians) drew a grand total of 3,718,000 votes. But in 2004, despite 10 million more votes cast overall, the top minor party candidates (Nader, again, of the Greens, Michael Badnarik of the Libertarians, and Michael Peroutka of the Constitution Party) polled only 1,006,000 between them---barely one-fourth the total of just four years before.

In 2008, with another close contest in a national race universally hailed as deeply significant, the number of votes diverted to meaningless, frivolous minor party adventures will probably shrink even further. Along with the greater openness and unpredictability in the primary process, the embarrassments of recent fringe candidacies have helped convince the overwhelming majority of Americans that they can only make a real difference by exercising their precious franchise within the two party system.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Michael Medved's daily syndicated radio talk show reaches one of the largest national audiences every weekday between 3 and 6 PM, Eastern Time. Michael Medved is the author of eleven books, including the bestsellers What Really Happened to the Class of '65?, Hollywood vs. America, Right Turns and, most recently, The Ten Big Lies About America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Michael Medved's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Well Michael.....
After Ross Perot garnered 19% of the popular vote in 1992,splitting the vote for Clinton and costing George Bush, Sr. the Presidency, the FEC pretty much shut the door on 3rd parties by elevating the entrance requirements for viable 3rd party candidates!

If I read some news correctly TODAY...I think that bar has been raised again! Now 3rd party candidates have to get 15% of the vote in primaries to be even eligible to participate in any debates!

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but Perot's 19% vote tally STUNNED and SHOOK the elite political establishment at its' core, and the entrenched powers of the two major parties pretty much said "never again"!

Some people see this as raising benchmarks or obstacles to ensure independent candidates or their voices are drowned out. I have other things I could call it!

"If Third Party players had any brains -
...they'd be Republicans." Most 3rd-party participants pathetically marginalize themselves and throw their votes away. The nice part is that the loonies on the far left and the rubes on the far right usually end up cancelling out each others' votes, rather than cancelling out my vote.

"Third Parties" --- what a waste of political oxygen...

bust???
It might be prudent to wait until the election to say that...

but seriously why don't we hear how many mentions these candidates get on media or face time? or why they are excluded from the BIG GOV. UNI-PARTY???

Why not write about how two parties that "rig" the system to protect themselves have sold out the Constitution and the people? To arrive at the point where a vast majority don't approve of them? Yet, all we see is commentators like You and the "establishment" pretend that the D's and the R's are "all there is" (only ONE choice more than Soviet elections!!!!).

The U.S. is a JOKE...I'll be voting for one of the "other" candidates come Nov., one that isn't a BIG GOV stooge and globalist sellout of the GOP and SOCIALIST DEMOCRAT "uni-party".


Theater of the Absurd
Third parties have no chance of success. Too many people are at the public teet. As more Boomers retire and expect Uncle Santa Claus to send out retirement checks and to pay health care bills, the system will collpase of its own weight. A bigger economic pie would ease the pain. What is the chance the pie is going to get bigger? It's over. FDR didn't save capitalism. He set the stage for socialism. The curtain is up for the final act. President Obama is on stage. A new raw deal is in the making. Maybe Obama will call it the "Contract with America" to put some salt in the wound.

Michael - the Faux Conservative!
What a self-serving article! The conservatives of America have no party - and our so-called conservative leaders like Michael will do nothing to help establish one. When McCain, a clear non-conservative, was clear to be nominated did Michael or Rush or Sean, or... mention the name of the Constitution Party candidate? Hell no! I am surprised Michael mentions Baldwin's name now!

We the People wanted neither of the two major party nominees! Neither major party is liked either. Congress and the President are at record lows for approval - and we have no realistic alternative to vote for - because the Michaels kept them hidden! Day after dreary day, all the talking heads talked about were the major party candidates or those vying for those positions.

Now, Michael has the audacity to say it is the problem of the third party? Another Michael has mentioned that on November 5th, he will start the process to raise a viable third party before the next national election.

Since We the People have no anti-trust laws to break up the two party "biopoly" , We will damn sure do it ourselves! We need a party that represents conservatives - the majority of the electorate!

Poor Lou
Mike writes...smugly:

As recently as November, 2007, CNN's Lou Dobbs flatly predicted that neither a Democrat nor a Republican could win the White House this time:
======
He actually believed the press would report the facts to the American people.
Knowing if they would, there is no chance in **** either a democrat or a republican would ever be elected again.

But because people like you dominate the media Mike, party hacks get heard and so many of you arrogant people have access to the media, we never will get the truth from this rotten media today.

America has no free press, except for the internet and radio, and you being on the radio shows its going down as well, for getting good information and not your partly line bs

When you don't have anything else to..
write about lazy pundits go 3rd party is this finally the year.We are gonna take our country back.It's time to end the gridlock in Washington.The best 3rd party candidate was Jesse Ventura and he kinda lied because all the kids voted for him because they thought he would make pot legal.

The Purpose of Third Parties
isn't to win, it's to force a shift in a major party. Since Nader the Democrats have moved to the far left nominating Obama who, arguably, is to the left of Nader.

Medved's campaign against third parties began right after the 2000 election where certain "moderate" (read "leftist") Republicans lost elections due to the Libertarian Party. A Republican activist sent out the word to the party's minions that the libertarians must be stopped and thus began Medved's childish "losertarian" soliloquys.

The Republican party used to have a "liberty wing" but they were marginalized and replaced by religious big government types like Medved and Bush. (Don't believe for a minute that Medved is small government conservative, he only supports big government candidates like Bush and McCain) The power play by the religious right resulted in Bush's election and the country suffering the worst president since the incomparably incompetent Harry Truman and the unconditional surrender of the Republican party to anti-business populism.

We saw the result with the party moving ever father towards the left going as far as nominating McCain, an authoritarian who actually should be in the Democratic party.

The libertarians failed to move the party to towards the free enterprise, individualist right so what we see in the debates are Obama and McCain debating about how much more powerful the state should be and over how to punish corporate greed. Not a mention of the Community Reinvestment Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley fiasco or even a small hint that government might be the problem and not "greed".

Perhaps four years of Obama will finish off the moribund, "me too" Republican party and let us start over.

well put Apollo
I used to listen to mr. Medved all the time on the radio, but as soon as he started his campaign AGAINST the third parties I only listen to him on his holiday specials (as he is an EXCELLENT historian/storyteller).

Third parties are a bust this year
because this is no time for fooling around. Nader used to be amusing. He is no longer. We need to get this country out of the hands of the Republicans and straighten up what is wrong.

It ain't going to be easy. I would love to think that it will be a relatively painless turnaround. I don't think that is going to happen. The only thing that allows me to actually sleep at night is that I feel assured that Obama will win. I know he is a very smart and confident guy and I know that his financial advisers are the cream of the crop.

The critical factor for third parties...
...in our time, is whether there's a clear winner already in the field from the major parties. This stems from the "don't waste your vote" phenomenon.

American voters are swayed by two things above all others: fear and greed. Fear of "the other guy" -- our guy might not be George Washington, but he's better than THEIR clown -- and greed for the handouts and privileges we expect from an administration from our own party. In a tight race such as this one, those motivators overwhelm the ones that lead some of us to cast "protest votes."

I'm a former Libertarian Party state chairman and once ran Ron Paul's 1988 NY State presidential campaign -- and I can't imagine allowing even one vote not to go to John McCain and Sarah Palin this November. Not because they're perfect by my lights -- far from it -- but out of fear of Barack Obama and an unrestrainable Democratic hegemony in Congress. I consider myself fairly representative of "maverick" voters in our time.

Night Gallery with Michael Medved

If anyone wants to take a tour through the landscape demise of the American Republic they will have to hop on board the Medved Night Gallery tour.

Medved slams any competing parties to the already two Major parties both Democrat and Republican which have a clear monopoly which makes it hard for third parties to compete.

Its ashamed but both parties cover each others Gluteus Maximus...and this is the real problem. Even the News Media puts up walls and road blocks as well as hurdles for the so called fringe third parties...

Just think about when the last time you saw a third party get any kind of fair and equal or balanced coverage and that will tell you exactly why Dr Ron Paul was marginalized with Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo. Only a moron like Medved would be polyanna around the whole thing. Too bad Medved doesnt get a set!! ??
Maybe his voice would get deeper eh?

I don't take any
pro-lifer serious who would split the pro-life vote, when clearly Palin is successful pro-life in action, and says alot about McCain's true beliefs on life. I live in a country that gets nothing done because of a multi-party system. Its a good way to put the minority in charge, and a good way to create grid-lock. Let us remember Ross H. Perot.

Proxy Votes for Barack Obama
Rationalizations for Obama

The complex process the human mind uses to arrive at decision-making has been the topic of many volumes.

One consensus that is generally held is the human mind can justify any decision and any action that it takes.

Rationalization is the mortal enemy of facts, logic and reason.

Rationalization is in ‘simple’ terms, a defense mechanism that attempts to explain bad decisions or behavior in a rational logical manner.

Rationalizing that a vote for any candidate that cannot win is not a vote for Obama gives us a prime example of rationalization.

Rationalizing that a ‘symbolic’ vote will teach the major parties a lesson contrasts the reality of their premise that the major parties ‘do not know what they are doing’ and ‘haven’t learned from the past’.

Teaching 'Politicians' a lesson is oxymoronic at best - Obama-Followers will vote for Obama regardless.

Third party votes at this time in history, is simply a 'proxy' vote for Obama that gives one a feeling of 'superior' Patriotism, I guess.

Rationalizing that ones closely held principles trump the safety and wellfare of America and its citizens is little different from those who want America destroyed.

Those who say we need to return to the Constitution that many Americans have left or attempted to destroy will be best accomplished by giving Obama and Liberals their desires and wishes to control America, is akin to giving children matches and gasoline.

The children will surely learn a lesson if survival succeeds in overcoming the odds.

Rationalizing that an Obama presidency will be good for America in the long run defies facts, logic and reason.

McCain/Palin 08

3rd party myth
Generally, 3rd parties are simply splinter groups from either the Dems or Republicans. The Dixiecrats came from the Democrat Party; Perot's party came from the Republicans.

This year, the election hinges on the contest between capitalism and socialism. Obama wants to destroy the capitalst system and install a market-socialist government similar to Red China. That's why Soros and the international socialist community are strongly backing Obama.

There's no room for single-issue parties like the Green Party or the Libertarians. This year, we decide whether America will look like the land of opportunity or the land of Castro/Chavez/Kim.

Most Americans understand that and don't have time to waste their votes on the feel-good issue like the environment.


Retired Geek
Now who's feeling superior? Get off your stump, Chump.

Retired Geek, 6:52 AM post.

Some call it the "ultimatum game".

For example - people who have become convinced that some group or some thing is hurting them and is getting away with it, those people will then try to fight back in any way they can.

But here's the tragic kicker. They will try to gight back - even at the expense of who or what they the love most... be it themselves, their family or their country.

The righteous indignation that these people feel is at times totally and fully justified. But tragically, it comes with a horribly destructive element that winds up hurting much more than helping.

The only encouragement that I would offer here, is that these people and the country would be far better served if they focused their efforts on, for example, taking control of the GOP from within... and in that way generating a change for America that would be real and lasting.

And geek, thanks for your amazing posts. They are both informative and illuminating.

My only hope... that they will change enough hearts to make a difference.

If Obama gets in, America will suffer.



Not Even Close Medved
Third party who? If none of the candidates had spoken a word or paid for an ad, which one would win? Obama by a landslide. Why Medved? The MSM has delivered him to the White House without question. Add in the lib celebrities, and you have an excellent mix for electing a Prez. Perot proved that. Even if he is a little bent and nuts, the MSM briefed everyone around the world that he was a coocoo. Yes, you did, in fact, hear Perot's giant sucking sound from the NAFTA style agreements or do you want to debate that? Even I, one of the little people understood what was happening then and now we are in our 32nd year of trade deficits. According to the MSM Perot was a dunce and Klintoon was another lib savior. Well, we have another one on the way to the WH but this time it will be the end of our nation as we once knew it.

Geek
Rational thought is the by definition the use of facts, reason and logic to arrive at a decision.

Who exactly gets to decide how others vote? You? And here I have been thinking it was free country. Thanks for putting me straight.

The only vote
that's wasted is the one not cast. I've voted Libertarian for years and will again in November. My hope is to gradually move the Republican Party I in that direction.
Voting for a Democrat or Republican now is like voting "Simms Red" or "Simms Blue" (from the movie "Moon over Parador").

Americans...
Thinking their vote is wasted. Many are afraid to vote for who ever they think will be the loser.

Personally any vote that is not principled based is wasted in chaos.

They are against wars, government spending and yet vote for this pundits election after election and wonder why we have the same old problems.

At least when I vote Libertarian, even as a loser with hope. I know I am not one of those doing the same old thing and getting the same old results.

Other choices - third parties
I'm not sure I understand the apparent delight at the failure of third parties, so called "fringe" candidates to register in polls. My experience with poll questions is they are biased against any candidate that isn't in a major party.
When you limit choices to the narrow selection we now have, innovation is stifled and voter apathy increases.
My guess is that people are not engaged as they are too busy trying to manage their lives as inflation and direct taxation take more of their wealth. The people who are engaged are the ones who get benefits from the government via taking it from their fellow citizens. I'd probably vote for Ocain or McBama too, if I wanted more handouts or considered health care a right to be provided at taxpayer expense!
But I don't, so Bob Barr gets my vote.
Of course, if your one who likes big government and want it to get bigger or are really happy with the way things are, thanks to republicrats and democans,and want more of the same, then keep voting for the status quo!

Everytime
Mudved writes one of these clums against third parties, he barely manages a one or two rating.

YEs the stakes are high this year. Maybe this is exactly when third parties should be gaining support and momentum.

If ever there was a good argument against the MSM and their greed for ratings instead of reporting news..this year is it. Third parties are losing this year because the MSM is promoting the top two like never before.

The funny thing (if there is a funny thing in all this) is now people are at that "I am sick of all this political BS" phase and just want it to be over. So despite these silly debates and who won or who got in more jabs etc....People are just wanting this farce to be done with. Thanks to the media, people are starting to tune it out.

I say good. Turn off the TV folks. Have a board game with your family or go for a walk instead. In 30 days it will be over and we can all get back to our regular lives. Although the media is already trying to paint this as a "multi state" contested election ALREADY. They don't want this to end.

Left and Lefter
McCain's bailout of homeowners is just another mechanism to take from those who managed their financial future to give to those that did not, and I for one, have had it with him.

McCain is poison. Obama is stronger poison. When faced with that proposition, I believe it makes sense to 'throw the Hail Mary'. I will vote for Barr, even if I am the only person in America who does so.

Don Juan
I noticed that the MSM kept repeating that Hillary Clinton came up with the "purchase bad debt" a few weeks ago in order to steal some of McCain's thunder for his proposal.

I guess it's not really important on whether or not things get fixed, but really WHO came up with the working plan FIRST and who gets credit for it.

Waiting for the final curtain
Had Ron Paul been on the ballot, you'd be whistling a different tune sir. Fact is we independents are waiting for the two socialist "Major" bought and owned by special interest and big business parties to finish the slide of this nation into utter destruction, morally, financially and militarily.

By that time, with their bank accounts looted and refrigerators empty; maybe the sheeple will finally wake up, switch off "American Idol" stop buying into the two party propaganda; finally realize these parties have been hijacked by interests other than theirs, and restart this nation. A two party stranglehold cuts off innovation and ideas. The public lapses into the sort of coma it has been in for decades and the rot of corruption is inevitable. You mean to tell me that there are universally only two solutions to a problem? We are only better than the old USSR by one party. In fact as both parties are run by the same group of people the difference is a sham. The argument that not to cast a vote for someone who will certainly win is not only anti-democratic, but flat out evil.

This is why the Founding Fathers opposed political parties; they knew it would atrophy the Republic.

To portray these two jackasses as "reformers" who will "break with the painfully polarized politics of the recent past..." is a knee slapper. They have BOTH endorsed this pork laden "bailout" proving that they both kiss the same rear ends.

Thanks for starting my day with a laugh Medved. You are just another "useful idiot" for the status quo. I’m writing in Ron Paul.

Hey Medved
You've been telling your audience for months that Obama can't speak without a teleprompter. How do you explain his performance last night?

Medved did the same thing when people were fainting at Obama rallies. Without any evidence at all, he accused Obama of staging the faintings.

Just another example of the way Medved cynically manipulates his audience for political ends. Shame on you Medved. You should have more respect for your audience than to assume that they would fall for your distortions and lies.

Phylo out.

CANCEL THIS ELECTION
This election should be halted by the federal courts until something is resolved that is so incredibly important, it's almost criminal that I have to post it. It should be on the mind of EVERYBODY:

OBAMA MUST BE MADE TO PROVE HIS CITIZENSHIP.

If you don't agree with this, than you want a "Constitutional crisis" to take place...that's all.

Third Parties Will Be
A bust until they can get a respectable minority in Congress. Third parties are needed, but no third party President can properly govern until he/she does not have to face a Congress ruled by either major party.

Our electoral system...
...as manipulated by Republican/Democrats virtually forces people to vote for what they think they can get as opposed to what they really want. Because Medved is fundamentally dishonest, he will never admit this truth.

Not that my sphere of influnece
is any where near the size of Medved's, but my friends, my co-workers, the owner of the local 7/11, my barber...are all fed up with the current system.

Most have realized that Democrats and Republicans are nothing more that "two wings of the same bird of prey."

I do believe that the final straw was the bailout because no rational thinking human being can justify that theft from the taxpayer, with billions in bribe money imbedded.

Me, I'm voting for Ron Paul's nominee, the Constitution Party Candidate. And I'll be writing in the names of other third party candidates for the other slots on the ballot. I would rather see a dysfunctional third party in power, than the organized mob that we currently and most certainly will, have.

Care to join me in unseating the monopoly?

Perhaps this "October surprise" will be the rise of the third party...which might explain Mr. Medved's article.

whats funny
whats funny is that if all of these "so-called" conservative pundits were to actually promote the man that was actually the most Conservative it wouldn't be McCain the supposed “conservative” talker how she could push McCain when his track record shows he’s not pro-life, not pro-2nd amendment and not even close to being fiscally conservative.!!! I also reminded these "demagogues" that the man they alledgedly "believe" is the best choice for president sponsored some of the most horrific anti-first amendment legislation when he penned the McCain-Feingold bill.

“So exactly how is McCain any different on those issues than his Democrat opponents?”

If these cranks were to promote an honest Conservative they would be behind Chuck Baldwin like I am...

Just say no to the CFR stooges of the Uni-party that are flushing our sovereignty and Constitution down the toilet.

Constitution Party is what the GOP was decades ago before they turned to the "dark side" of socialism and BIG GOV statism.

Please People...
For the sake of the country VOTE Barr, he's the only CONSERVATIVE left in this years race. McCain has proven after last nights debate that he's a closet LIBERAL, we always knew he was a LEFTY at heart. Voting for the 700 billion bailout and proposing the purchase of BAD morgages provides more evidence to this fact. Theres no time left for McCain, but theres still time left for folks to ralley around the Barr campaign...which is the only real "GAME CHANGER" left for conservatives.

VOTE BARR!!!

Libertarian vulgarized society

Libertarians cannot help themselves - they must cite their 'Mantra' "...All I want is to be left alone to do what I wish, provided that others are not harmed if I do..."

Most anything is permissable by Libertarians because if someone doesn’t like it, they can choose not to participate in it.

But what we can’t do is choose not to live in a culture that has been vulgarized by Libertarians.

Like most intellectual sophistry, everything is theoritical to a Libertarian.

The concept that all that is good is only that which is freely chosen simply means that there is NO inherent good or evil - I strongly disagree with that.

Who then will decide whether or not someone is harmed by their choices?

What then will the penalty be, if someone is harmed by their choices?

For a Libertarian society to function successfully, it would require a nation of ideologues. This is an accusation often made of Socialism and Communism, but it is no less accurate here.

Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics are usually the Libertarians.

Libertarians believe they can arm themselves with an ideologue and rhetoric and the 'Impurity' of their ideal society and force the rest of us to live in it.

I decline to allow libertarians the sophistical trick of using a vulgar libertarianism to agitate for what they want by defending a refined version of their doctrine when challenged philosophically. I’ve seen Marxists pull that before.

The entire electoral system is broken
I don't see how Mr. Medved can say that any politically knowledgeable voters "can only make a real difference by exercising their precious franchise within the two party system." I think the number of voters who believe there is an actual difference in the agendas of the Republicans and Democrats is fairly small. Voters have been doing for decades exactly what I and millions of other voters have been doing--voting for "the lesser of two evils."

When was the last time we had a president who was not associated with the Council on Foreign Relations and/or the Bilderbergs? Is that a pre-requisite for holding office?

The only reason third party candidates are doing no better now than they are is because during this election cycle they have been more marginalized by the pro-Left major media than ever before, and they have been totally eliminated from presenting their ideas to the idea-hungry voters by the absurd presidential "debate" requirements.

The only way American voters can be properly served is by passing election reform laws which will end the monopolies of the Republicans and Democrats, but, of course, that will never happen because it would require legislation by the Republicrats in Congress.

Libertarians How will you handle this?

“When we get in a tussle, we appeal to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution’s ratifiers to give direction. Some, like Justice Scalia, conclude that the original understanding must be followed and if we obey this rule, democracy is respected.

Others, like Justice Breyer, insist that sometimes the original understanding can take you only so far -- that on the truly big arguments, we have to take context, history, and the practical outcomes of a decision into account.

I have to side with Justice Breyer’s view of the Constitution -- that it is not a static but rather a living document and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.”
Barack Obama, In his 2006 book 'The Audacity of Hope'.

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set," he said. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded."
Barack Obama Speech July 2, 2008 Colorado Springs CO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is YOUR proposal to deal with a President with a filibuster proof congress and a personal 'Civilian Security Force', just as strong and just as powerful as the US Military?

Send Barack Obama a copy of the US Constitution?

Send a message to Congress that is totally controlled by Obama followers?

What will you say to your children and grandchildren - "I told them so'?

That you helped destroy American freedom and liberty by casting a 'proxy vote for Barack Obama?

Explain to all of us how helping to destroy America is good for America?

Micheal is smoking what?
Cynthia McKinnney is charismatic?
Both candidates appeal to independents? Neither appeal to most people.
The people have been so dumbed down, by design I might add, to accept either the Marxist or the Socialist. Both parties are being run by the same people. Why else would candidates like Tancredo, Cox, Hunter and Paul get no attention early on? Because they are CONSERVATIVE. Why do the Constitution Party candidates get no attention? Because....oh I repeat myself.

McCain/Palin...
What a friggen joke folks, we all know it by now, but have refused to acknowledge the obvious truth. This ticket is a disater, it's self destructing before our eye's. However, theres still time for those who love this COUNTRY to ralley around Bob Barr...the only REAL CONSERVATIVE left in the race.

Don't waste your vote on McCain, he wouldn't waste his on you. He has a long record of voting against REPUBLICANS...long. Ask yourself this question, how many times has McCain left CONSERVATIVES out in the cold? Now in a time when he needs our votes the most, HE goes out and supports the BAILOUT. He goes out and proposes a plan to purchase BAD PAPER, BAD MORGAGES!!! He goes out and proves that in reality he's just another "LIBERAL" at heart.

Bob Barr 08

Third Party Bust in 2008?
Our two party system, with our current two choices for the top job, is NOT going to give citizens meaningful change. Both candidates will perpetuate the same old crap, even if Reps is the slightly less threatening. Other parties with saner platforms, like Ron Paul, should get a fair chance at being elected. We are a sick Nation and we get the government we deserve.

Retired Geek:
Your posts indicate that you know very little about Libertarians. As I recall you are a Baldwin supporter. If that is correct, please tell which of The Seven Principles of the Constitution Party you endorse?

InsightingTruth et al

McCain/Palin 08


Why the third party bust?
Moral cowardice.

Next question?

Absolute Freedom?

Libertarians want absolute freedom. The empiracal evidence is that NO society in the world has ever voted for absolute freedom. This is why Democracies or our Constitutional Republic, have NEVER elected a Libertarian Government or NEVER will.

This refusal of citizens to reject absolute freedom, is a refutal of Libertarianisms primary premise, 'all that is good is freely chosen', those that 'freely choose' reject Libertarianism - what a Paradox.

This means the only way a Libertarian government will ever come to power is through 'Coercion', which is the same approach that Communism takes. A Libertarian form of government would have to be imposed, rather than freely chosen.

Libertarians believe that their political philosophy is the only 'True Political Philosophy' and all others are false. The Libertarians are the Marxists of the right, reducing social life to economics.

Most, if not all Libertarians, want to disband the military and law enforcement leaving the citizenry free to do whatever they so desire in society, but exposed to rogue nations and to more powerful rogue individuals in America (study what goes on in prison).

Libertarians forget that for much of the population, preaching maximum freedom merely results in lack of self-restraint and lawlessness.



Sorry Retired Geek:
I must have momentarily confused you with someone else.

Retired Geek
You are totally dismissing the viability of the Constitution Party. In my eyes, they are far more socially and economically akin to conservatives than our current crop at the GOP.

Retired Geek
Could you please delay posting until your meds kick in? Then at least you might manage a modicum of coherence and truthfulness.

InsightingTruth et al

I was raised in a family of Humanists/Atheists and became a Marxist by choice - this went back at least three generations before me.

In September of 1972, I began my recovery from all three.

I have debated in public and since the advent of the Internet against Humanism/Atheism and Marxism for over thirty years.

I do NOT know as much about Libertarianism, admittedly, but theoritical approaches always look at their theories from the perspective of what is correct about their theories and never about what could go wrong.

I am an individuslist for limited government - but I also measure the comprimise of what is the best recovery plan from any given political approach.

The smaller the problem the easier it is to solve and recover.

Barack Obama will damage America to the extent that it will take decades to overcome, if ever.

I liked what Ron Paul had to say and would have rather had him as the Republican candidate but he isn't.

Barack Obama will rule by 'Executive or Presidential Orders' which would take a 2/3 majority of the Reid/Pelosi congress to overcome.

Every social issue from Education to his 'Civilian Security Force' and his 20 city 'Empowerment' zones will be here for our lifetimes.

No suprise
Why is this a suprise?

People don't want to "waste" their vote on someone who can't win (is voting for McCain in California or for Obama in Utah a wasted vote too?). The major third parties like the Libertarian and Green Parties don't do well enough to get matching funds (exception Reform in 2000 based on Perot's success in 1996, it got matching funds which were hijacked by Pat Buchanan). It is hard for third parties to fund raise, no matching funds and thus mass media access is limited--no TV ads for example or even radio. They are even denied the free media of being invited to the debates.

Until Americans decide that sending a message is more important than sending basically the same back to Washington, third parties will continue to be minor. The last third party to win the presidency was 1860--and only because the Democratic Party had broken into pieces and the Whigs had imploded and vanished from the face of the earth. Others have done well enough to come in second (Bull Moose with Teddy in 1912) or get electoral votes (States' Rights in 1948, American Independence Party in 1968), but even Ross Perot's nearly 20% in the popular vote in 1992 was not enough to win a single elector.

If the US went to a parliamentary system then third parties would matter. I'd love to see the US go to such a system, but for now with a winner take all type system which presidential systems are, you are going to be stuck with the two-major parties winning all the time and both parties are rotten to the core so you get what you vote for.

wayward1 et al

You may be right, but they cannot win - every vote for them is a proxy vote for Barack Obama.

RW et al

Personal attacks and name calling are all one has when they have no reasoned argument based on facts, logic and reason.

You see, Michael...
... the reason third parties are getting so little traction this year is because Obama and McCain are so obviously the best and brightest in American politics (sarcasm off/).
I do wish Medved would limit himself to grumbling about movies. When he moves into politics, he just proves that TH has too many columnists with too little to say.

Total BS
"Most, if not all Libertarians, want to disband the military and law enforcement leaving the citizenry free to do whatever they so desire in society..."

You are confusing anarchists with Libertarians. They do not want to disband the police as they recognize that police are needed for society to function nor are they against the military--they do however stress military service should be voluntary and the US should restrain its military force to facing dire and immediate threats to the state--it rejects the US being the policeman of the world. It also rejects the legitimacy of the state using the police to enforce drug laws or what consenting adults do with each other sexually or telling someone they must wear a seatbelt or telling a businesses owner he can't allow smoking in his place of business.

Libertarians can't win because the American system is gamed for either a Democrat or a GOP to win. As for coercion, yes Geek you say that over and over.

Nepal--elected communist government in free and open elections. The State of East Bengal, communist government in place since 1977, elected over and over again since that date. If elections were held today in China even if the elections were totally open and free, the CCP would win in a landslide.

I am a Individualist

The individual citizen is the smallest minority in any society.

A primary element of individualism is individual responsibility for self-determination, decisions, actions, deeds and accepting responsibility for everything one does or fails to do. An integral part of that responsibility is productivity.

The individualist realizes that little nature gives one is suited for survival and must be transformed to meet their needs and the needs of those they are responsible for i.e. family.

The individualist must be pro-active and seek to enhance skills, knowledge and implements to ensure the survival and well being of self and family.

The individualist reasons that their identity is based on individual actions and pursuits and not on a group whether that group is race, gender, sexual preference or industry.

The individualist does not seek a life apart from others but understands that others are only a part of reality whereas ‘collectivists see the group as reality’.

This important distinction allows individuals to interact with other individuals instead of the mediator of the collectivist group.

Reason and thought are individualistic by definition, as no one can think or reason for another. Individuals can start with the ideas of other individuals and build upon those ideas or create new ideas and thought but every step is individualistic based on other individuals not on a collectivist group.

The individualist believes in a Constitutional Republic that is ruled by law and NOT in a Democracy that is mob rule.

The individualist believes that the government should be limited and its power and should be constrained on the individual citizen.

If 3rd-party efforts are so nugatory...?
--
...why is it that knee-jerk authoritarian hacks like Medved spend so much time, effort, and sputtering stupidity in denigrating them?

The implied answer is that Mr. Medved and his owners *FEAR* the potential for third-party efforts to galvanize insurgencies not only at the polls but within "their" GOP, as we've seen in the recent presidential candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul.

The mindless Rockefeller Republican suck-ups here keep scoffing (nervously, with their fingers crossed) at Dr. Paul's presence in this election cycle, but they do so because they know full well not only that he was objectively and theoretically right in everything he said -

(( as if the present "bailout" mess isn't proof of that ))

- but that his campaign truly caught the popular imagination, and even though they moved heaven and earth (with the help of the MSM) to undermine and suppress the voters' consideration of Dr. Paul and his ideas, he became and remains a presence on the scene that threatens everything that men like Michael Medved and his co-religionists stand for.

The persistent and increasing voice in favor of "third-party" alternatives to the established wings of the great bipartisan Boot-On-Your-Neck Party indicates that the machinators on both right and left are not as solid in their tyrannous control of the American political scene as they think (or would like), and it bothers them.

Why else would we have been seeing Mr. Medved struggling so hard and so persistently to unwedge his twisted-up panties from the crack in his bloated butt?





=====
"Believe what you like about 'wasting your vote', nothing will ever alter a fundamental assumption on the part of Democrats, Republicans - and the vast bureaucracy they've created together - that even the slightest manifestation of individuality (let alone individualism) is a threat that must be dealt with."

-- L. Neil Smith

Fact Check:
Michael, you wrote: "The Constitution Party, fanning conspiratorial fears of a "North American Union"..."

To reduce a party down to a couple of issues that aren't even listed on the party's platform is irresponsible and reckless.

And here's a free tip: The North American Union is for real. If not, then why have there been 2 U.S. Congressional resolutions (H. Con. Res. 40 & H. Con. Res. 487) introduced in order to thwart it's implementation? Please check your facts before you carelessly throw around the term "conspiracy" next time.

I’m loving it!
Medved is getting trounced!
Let me add my two cents in, using Conservative principles that Medved may have once understood.

First, he heaps praise on the most liberal of the candidates: He says Cynthia McKinney is “charismatic” and then claims that Obama bucks his party and is post-partisan!
He then characterizes Paul and Tancredo as being from the “far right”, and calls them “fringe” candidates, just before praising Ralph Nader’s 2000 run and characterizing the Constitution Party as conspiracy theorists.

Medved then appeals to populism and for the establishment while denouncing the Individual. He tells us that we shouldn’t vote for a third party because no one else is. “Join the herd!” says Medved. “Be like us.” “Everyone is doing it!”

His attacks on third parties not through, Medved continues to marginalize those who would vote their Own conscience, who take their vote seriously as a chance to let Their One Vote be counted as their voice in the wilderness.
“… votes diverted to meaningless, frivolous minor party adventures…”
“…the embarrassments of recent fringe candidacies…”
“…citizens feel more reluctant to waste their ballots…”

Don’t waste your vote this election. Vote Your conscience. Let Your voice be heard. Vote third party if you don’t like the alternative.

I’ll be voting Barr this election and my conscience is clear. Can the rest of you say the same as you toe the Party line in this election where both major party candidates try to out-liberal each other?

Retired Geek
You forgot one:

The Individual takes his responsibility to voice His views by voting seriously, and will not be swayed just because some geek on the internet tries to bully Him by saying that he is wasting his vote or voting for some other candidate by proxy.

tweaky
Not all 3rd parties are on the right--Greens for example. Why should a Libertarian be a Republican, the GOP spends money like a drunk sailor, wants to increase the power of the state at the expense of liberty, thinks it knows best in regards to what sexual activities one should engage in, and a host of other things? Sorry, if real conservatives and not theocratic authoritarians had any brains they would be Libertarians.

Truman was closer to Conservative

Truman was closer to Conservative values than John McCain.

That is NOT the issue.

The issue is recovery and hurting our country as little as possible.

Third party votes are proxy votes for Barack Obama and that is indisputable.

Those who want to hurt America to prove their point is NO better than anyone else who wants to hurt America.

Apollo
Exactly right. Also, every major political change (not all of them good) has come from a third party--women's right to vote, direct election of US senators, anti-slavery, prohibition, income tax.

When a minor party begins to gain on some issue one of the major parties will co-opt that issue and the minor party is left with the good issue as well as many of the bad ones while the major party will have none of the bad ones and the good one too so the voters will vote for the major party over the minor party. But if more would support the minor parties, the good polices they do support would be more likely to be adopted one of the major parties. Replacing most taxes with user fees for example, abolishing the FCC and on and on.

Have a Good Afternoon

I am off to my volunteer work of visiting the homebound.

All of you could volunteer an hour or two a week.

Libertarians
DavidMac:

Are not a single issue party--taxes, drugs, what adults do with other consenting adults, immigration, government censorship, government police-state tactics, government supported land-grabs, the proper role of the military, foreign policy, size of government--does this sound like a one-issue party to you?

Geek:

Proxy for Obama, good. Let him win, if the GOP wants Libertarians to vote for it maybe they can start to do things to earn their votes for those who value freedom.

scottK
Get this through your head--Libertarians aren't part of the GOP and they have just as many problems with the GOP as they do with the Democrats. Why fight from within a party that they don't belong to? Like saying you would be better served by changing the Democrat party from within. Why should a Libertarian vote for the GOP? Because Obama is worse? Hard to see how he could be worse than Bush on issues that Libertarians care about. McCain just promised last night 300 billion to buy up people's mortages--I can tell you that isn't going to give people who vote Libertarian a nice warm feeling inside about McCain or the GOP.

Akagi - Your perception is correct
--
Despite Retired Geek's endless yammering about how a vote this year for *any* third-party presidential candidate is somehow "a proxy vote for Obama," I credit fully your conclusion that the (nominally) Republican Party requires some negative conditioning.

Like the dog who keeps crapping the rug, the Rockefeller Republicans need to have their collective nose shoved firmly into their sh!t and whacked briskly about the a$s.

Certainly there's nothing in the heads of men like Medved and McCain to which we can appeal.

Unfortunately, everything from the '96 campaign of Dole to the present fumblenuts display being put on by Crash Test Johnny indicates that the GOP "mainstream" is polluted beyond repair, and those sonsofbitches are truly incapable of being housetrained.

Evidence like Retired Geek's flustered incapacitation and impotent thought-blocking -

(( Note his remark to the effect that: "I do NOT know as much about Libertarianism, admittedly, but theoritical approaches always look at their theories from the perspective of what is correct about their theories and never about what could go wrong." Pitiful. ))

- the mangy, defecating dog of Republicanism may warrent nothing more than to be put mercifully and immediately to sleep.

Their latest load - for which the Republicans themselves are both directly and indirectly responsible - will be solidly soiling the Oval Office rug with Barack the Magic Marxist.

And we're not going to get that stench out of our nostrils for at least four solid, horrible years.

--

Medved
Let me ask you a question.

I'm the RNC.

You're a conservative.

I feed you crap sandwiches for lunch everyday (RINO candidates) and you munch away w/o a complaint.

Think filet mignon will be on the lunch menu tomorrow?

Screw the RNC. They foisted McCranky on us.

I just hope that his RINO taint does poison Palin.

I'll take Ovomit for four years followed by a CONSERVATIVE landslide in 2012.

Akagi
EXACTLY!

I would FAR rather have Obammy screwing up with a "D" behind his name that WE can point to in 2010 and 2012 vice McShamnesty taking Soros money for his Reform Institute and trying to pass Amnesty on us.

A McVanity POTUS will only make it harder for us to get Conservatives elected in 2010 and 2012.

Geek
McCain/Palin 08--great and add them to Dole/Kemp 96--maybe you can keep their sticker on your car as a show of pride like Dems did with Gore/Lieberman and Kerry/Edwards. Obama will be president-elect in 27 days and some odd hours.

The world didn't end when Ma was elected, and it won't end when Obama is. Life will go on, trust me.

Akagi, well said

I can't believe we agree again, but there it is.

I'm tired of hearing how "we can't afford to vote our principles THIS time" because the Universe is going to implode or whatever if Obama's elected.

There's NEVER a safe time in history; if people weren't so willing to abandon their principles in the interest of some political "expediency" or perceived incipient disaster, we wouldn't be in this current mess in the first place.

Now we have two liberals running for President, one in each of the major parties.

Well, I have one principle I never break: I don't vote for liberals. Ever. Regardless of the letter they stick behind their names.

As to MEDVED:

Just an unapologetic neo-con. Conservative (hawkish) on war policy, liberal on social policy.

The fact that people even listen to this loon shows just how far from REAL conservatism the GOP has wandered.


America
"Those who want to hurt America to prove their point is NO better than anyone else who wants to hurt America."

Bush has done more harm to America than any president since Carter or LBJ. Care to look at the debt he has added? Like to look at the very un-conservative actions like NCLB and McCain wants to add 300 billion in buying mortages and thinks global warming is real?

Sorry, I don't see McCain or the GOP being doing any less harm and neither he or Obama will do as much harm as Bush has the last 8 years. There should be an anti-Mount Rushmore--my choices--Bush, Carter, LBJ.


anti-Mount Rushmore
The faces should be carved into a warm pile of road-apples.

Akagi
"There should be an anti-Mount Rushmore--my choices--Bush, Carter, LBJ"
----------------

Thats hilarious. Any suggestions on where to build it. Maybe next to one of our giant landfills. Someplace that attracts a lot of birds so that they can continue to cr@p on it all day long. We need a fourth though. Can we put two faces of Carter?

ALL HOPE IS LOST
Obama will be a disaster, leading us closer to socialism, but McCain will only stall it to 2012.

It isn't going to be pretty. If you have a gun, hide it; if you don't have one, buy one. If you have money, shelter it from the IRS. Work for cash. Pull a John Galt. Screw the parasites.

Get ready to move to Texas or Alaska and secede from the Union of Obama wins. It won't be pretty with Obama, Pelosi, and Reid in charge.

A frightening "Obama Timeline" is at:
http://colony14.net/id41.html

An even more frightening list of "What Obama would do..." is at:
http://colony14.net/id35.html

For western bondbeam @ 13:48
How about Bubba for the fourth face?

based on Medved's reasoning
The Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party should STILL BE IN POWER. They were the only two parties at the time so, of course, the people could/should only have voted for either one. Oops. Guess they messed up, huh?

So, if your vote counts only if your guy wins, then:

McCain will lose. Don't throw away your vote on him.

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."
- John Quincy Adams

THE GREAT CYCLICAL CONVERGENCE
On Election Day November 4th an unprecedented event in the history of American presidential politics will take place: the convergence of two Republican election cycles for presidential candidates. One cycle going back 140 years occurs every 28 years, and the second cycle going back 120 years occurs every 40 years. Both cycles began in years that ended in the number 8, were initiated by two war heroes born in Ohio (where the McCain-Palin ticket was born) and saw at the start of their last cyclic rounds the election of two candidates from the West. These two grand converging cycles are just two of many highly auspicious signs indicating the victory of John McCain in November

Click ApolloSpeaks and read my piece John McCain, Hero of Destiny: Signs of Republican Victory.


svpallava - ''How about Bubba...''
--
"...for the fourth face?"


No matter how high the Rockefeller Republicans and their cross-the-aisle colleagues in the National Socialist Party have been shoveling it, you simply can't pile crap high enough to provide the medium for a Mt. Rushmore-sized portrayal of Cumstain Clinton.

Admittedly, his features lend themselves perfectly to depiction in a material that sags and stinks, but a few rainstorms would result in a dissolution as thoroughgoing as that undergone by the man's own character.

--

I fear the stories of McCain's...
...heroism are exaggerated. I cannot reconcile the self-absorbed, America hating, political coward McCain, with the heroic tales that circulate about him. If anyone has an explanation of how a true hero degenerates into the gelatinous mass of pusillanimous politician that McCain has always been I'd like to hear it.

Knock it off with third party bashing!
The major parties are nothing but a big bunch of whiny children when it comes to third parties.

Third party votes do NOT cause major parties to lose elections any more than not voting does.

Voting third party is mathematically the same as not voting. Half of the eligible voting population stays home on election day.
If three quarters of this non-voting bloc were to vote for a third party, there is a strong possibility that a third party could be victorious.

This Presidential election, like the last two, will be determined by a small number of voters.
Only 10 or 15 states are battleground states, and in these states, no more than 20% of voters
are undecided. Third party voters in stronghold states will not sway the election one way or another (the electoral college has done a superb job of silencing a large percentage of voters).

Mr. Medved should focus his criticism on non-voters and people who are undecided until election day (because many of them simply didn't do their homework), instead of name-calling third party voters.

Third party voters are neither unrealistic (they do not truly expect to win) nor immature (they have scrupulously determined both major candidates to be sorely lacking).

I'm voting 3rd party
Well, the system is fairly well setup to prevent third party candidates from making any inroads. Most Americans don't realize how little difference exists between McCain and Obama and don't really care as long as times are good.

That might change in the very near future as the world economy tanks. I look for someone like Ron Paul (maybe ex-NM governor Garry Johnson) to lead the charge. But that will only happen if people are hurting big time and demand real change.

New Polls!
From Real Clear Politics - Wednesday, 10/08/08


Gallup Tracking (10/05 - 10/07) Obama: 52%, McCain: 41% - Obama +11

Rasmussen Tracking (10/05 - 10/07) Obama: 51%, McCain: 45% - Obama +6

Reuters/CSpan/Zogby Tracking (10/05 - 10/07) Obama: 47%, McCain: 45% - Obama +2

Hotline/FD Tracking (10/05 - 10/07) Obama: 45%, McCain: 44% - Obama +1

GW/Battleground Tracking (10/02 - 10/07) Obama: 49%, McCain: 45% - Obama +4

Ipsos/McClatchy (10/02 - 10/06) Obama: 47%, McCain: 40% - Obama +7

NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl (10/04 - 10/05) Obama: 49%, McCain: 43% - Obama +6

CBS News (10/03 - 10/05) Obama: 48%, McCain: 45% - Obama +3

CNN (10/03 - 10/05) Obama: 53%, McCain: 45% - Obama +8

Democracy Corps (D) (10/01 - 10/05) Obama: 49%, McCain: 46% - Obama +3

----------

The RCP Electoral Map remains as follows:


Obama/Biden: 264

McCain/Palin: 163

Toss Up: 111

Obama is now close to sealing the deal in the "toss-up" states of Ohio, Virginia, Nevada, Colorado and Florida.

This election, in other words, could be a wipe-out. With the dems taking larger majorities in the Senate and House.

Cycles
In 1888, Benjamin Harrison won--he was from Indiana, he moved there when he was 21. He was born in Ohio, Lincoln was from Illinois too does that mean Obama is going to win because a president came from there? He did roam around back in 1864 near my house. He was with Sherman A hero? I guess depends what you mean by that. He was a brigade commander and pretty much lost to history. 1868? Grant, one of the worst presidents in the history of the United States.

so every 28 years back to 1868 would be 1980? 1952? 1924? 1896? 1868? And every 40 years for 120 years? 1968? 1928? 1888? Saw the cycles are war heroes from Ohio and the other those from the west? The 1868 cycle contains non-military service presidents--Calvin Coolidge (1924) and he was from Vermont not Ohio. Eisenhower was a war hero, but from Kansas and later Gettysburg. Reagan, no war hero. The other cycle. Harrison was from Indiana via Ohio, Hoover was from Iowa, Nixon was from California. The only things these cycles have in common is the GOP won each time.

Try this: since 1944, a Democrat has been elected every 16 years and 16 can be divided by 8 where this year ends in. Since 1912, a Democrat has been elected every 32 years, since 1944, a Democrat has been elected very 64 years--all of these are factors of eight which this years ends in. Every other 8 years since 1944, the Democrat has been elected, the last time a Democrat was elected to his first term was 1992 and he served 8 years followed by the election of the GOP in 2000 and he served two terms, this cycle predicts Obama will be elected in 2008.

Totally useless in predictive value.




Bubba's head might too big and
would distort the monument. Maybe if he was stuck left of center his melon might not dwarf Carter's.

Josh
Fox has Obama at 273 EC--it is over. Unless something comes out that links Obama to planning 9/11 or something, it is over. Get used to the term "President Obama."


Medved
"have helped convince the overwhelming majority of Americans that they can only make a real difference by exercising their precious franchise within the two party system."

I have long known you are dumb as dirt, but this last phrase brings your stupidity to new lows.

Most states are solid blue or red--if you are GOP in California your vote is meaningless as California is solid blue and the same goes for a Democrat in Utah or South Carolina. The election will be won or lost in a few states--in some cases a single state. If you don't live in one of those states you can't make a difference either.

If you want Libertarians to vote GOP which seems to be your angle here, have the GOP start doing things the Libertarians can support. Hint: 300 billion for a mortage buyout is not the way to do it.


It's been over for the GOP...
...since the NH primary. McCain, with the aid and abetting of the MSM, became the sacrificial goat. As I watched the MSM build McCain into the front-runner, and the RNC rolled over and let it happen, I knew the GOP would not win The White House.

I did not give up hope however. I tried to enlighten and persuade anyone who would listen, that McCain was a bonafide loser. For the fiftieth (at least) time: McCain cannot win!

A vote for McCain is a wasted vote. So it was written; so it will be.

Josh - Sniveling poll-plotzing
--
So?



=====
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

-- H.L. Mencken

Michael Medved=Neocon puke
There isn't any 'wonder' why honest, intelligent, patriotic REAL conservatives like Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, Alan Keyes, etc., never get any 'traction' in the election process on voting days like the forth-coming Nov. 4.

Nope, there's no wonder at all with Neocons like Michael Medved pretending to 'voice' the views of conservatives.

Good Lord, above.... during the Republican primaries the Neocon Fox News Channel effectively eliminated Ron Paul from the debates. Right then spelled the demise of any real hope for a fiscal conservative, Robert Taft like Republican from coming to the forefront/rescue to knock off the liberal wing of the Elephant's War Party. A few days later Florida's Governor Crist stabbed Romney in the back by indorsing Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy's and the Mexican's favorite Elephant Juan McCain. Crist's knife in the back of Romney killed hope for even a moderate conservative Republican gaining the White House. Hence...

There isn't any wonder why Obama will win in November.... because the MSM and Quislings, like Michael Medved, who 'speak' for the so-called 'right' have torpedoed the chances of real conservatives like Ron Paul and Bob Barr.

Lou Dobbs and Glen Beck reported there's been a rush of sales on guns, vegetable seeds, tomato plants and fruit trees. 'Ya wonder why?


Medved: Propaganda Minister-In-Waiting
Going to be waiting for a long time.
McCain will lose and the votes for Barr and Baldwin by conservatives that can't stomach his D-Lite policies will be largely responsible.

Third parties DO make a difference, that's why the propaganda from Medved.

Barr
Not sure if you can compare Barr and Buchanan. Barr basically a Libertarian, Buchanan some sort of twisted faux populist, the King Fish meets Randall Terry with some old time isolationism to boot. Barr is pro-free trade and is not against legal immigration, Pat is.

Barr opposes the states from enforcing immigration laws, supports abortion left to the states. He isn't a conservative as the term is usually applied. He opposes the war in Iraq as does Buchanan, but that doesn't make him and Pat the same.

Ron Paul
Gahotdog? Not Hotdawg?

When was the last time a sitting member of the House won the presidency? Like me to tell you? 1880, James Garfield, a hero of the Civil War much of the country had heard of--who has heard of Ron Paul or Duncan Hunter? Nobody that's who.

Paul was in the debates--remember his comment where he blamed the US for 9/11 and Rudy jumped down his throat? But once it was clear he had no chance, he was dropped from the debates along with the other losers. Recall what #3 said about coming in second? Means you lost first.


Libertarians are a 'Hoot'

Libertarians say "...All I want is to be left alone to do what I wish, provided that others are not harmed if I do..."

Apparently voicing ones opinion hurts Libertarians - listen to their protests about freedom of speech by anyone critical of them.

Libertarians want freedom, unless that freedom is someone voicing opposition to Libertarian nonsense.

Libertarian speak:
------------------
"The man with the strident voice was still talking remorselessly away...
It was just a noise, a quack-quack-quacking...
This was not a real human being but some kind of dummy.
It was not the man's brain that was speaking, it was his larynx.
The stuff that was coming out of him consisted of words,
but it was not speech in the true sense:
it was noise uttered in unconsciousness,
like the quacking of a duck." George Orwell 1984

Neoliberal Arrogance
That's how I sum up Medveds columns. He has a sense of arrogance normally reserved for the Ivy League Elites of Liberalism. Oh that's right, he's from the same mold. Never mind.

Ron Paul Losertarian here. I'm done with the lesser of two evils argument. Look where that's got us. I believe in the individual and the associated responsibilities that come along with it.

It's very clear to me that neither the GOP or the Dems believe in individual freedom and responsibility. Maybe the GOP can earn my vote back. lol. Now that's funny. As much as I despise the blatant socialist agenda of the Dems., the neoliberals are just as dangerous in my opinion.

The MSM and Talk Radio are SOCIALISTS
There is nothing remotely CONSERVATIVE about either one of these media. It was no surprise that Sean Insanity and Rush Bimbo were in the tank for Giuliani from day one and then however much they had previously slammed McShamnesty got in lock-step unison right behind him like the loyal Socialist Apparatchiks they are.

Both of these media pilloried Tancredo, Hunter, and Ron Paul relentlessly, and the only guy who let Chuck Baldwin speak on his show was Lou Dobbs, the only respectable man in the media these days who actually GETS IT. His book is a must-read if you want to know how both parties are nothing but Socialist Corporate Whores who care not one iota about We The People anymore. Why, you ask does the media slam 3rd party candidates so badly??? FOLLOW THE MONEY!!! Biennially, at election time the two major parties are charged major bucks by the media to get their campaign advertisements aired. The MSM gets its big bucks from the 2 major parties and Corporate America's advertising dollars. The Corporate Whores in DC get their money also from the same CEO's that do business with the media. It's all a good ol' boys' network of corruption - government and publicity for the highest bidder. The system was designed from the get-go by the 2 major parties to keep 3rd parties from stealing their thunder.


Cont'd...
I take issue with Medved's lie about the Constitution Party. We have never purported that 911 was an inside-job. That's just like Medved to equate anything that he finds uncomfortable with the lunatic fringe. The Constitution party believes in just that - following the damn Constitution -something the 2 major parties have long since forgotten as they expedite America's plunge into open-borders, globalist Socialism and no-accountability Corporate welfare which is exactly what their buddies in the CFR want.

It may come as a surprise to most of you that Jerome Corsi is NOT A REPUBLICAN AT ALL. He is a member of the Constitution Party who was almost asked to run for President, but he turned it down. When asked who he is supporting in this election, he said "Chuck Baldwin" not John McShamnesty. Jerome Corsi has also written extensively about how the GOP is up to their eyeballs in the North American Union. Even John McShamnesty is a bonafide member of the Council Of Foreign Relations - Surprise! Surprise! Now you know why he supports open borders and Illegal Immigration just like his fellow globalist, Socialist, businessman CEO's in the CFR and many of his fellow Democratic Senators, GOP Senators, and Congressman as well as George Bush. Another Presidential candidate and former Libertarian Presidential candidate, Ron Paul, also recently endorsed Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. Yeah, I doubt Medved or any of you RINO's and CINO's know that because you'll never jhear this from the MSM or the CINO talk radio that's completely in the tank for McShamnesty.


DC: District of Communists
I just heard today that AIG, upon learning they would be bailed out by the government in the latest "bipartisan" Socialist move, treated their upper management employees to a $440,000 trip to celebrate courtesy of YOU & ME. Now, do you think these 2 parties in DC did the right thing with YOUR MONEY???

Vote 3rd party like your life depended on it - IT DOES!!! When you vote for the lesser of two evils, you STILL GET EVIL as witnessed by the 860 billion dollar bailout, the 300 billion dollar bailout, and Pelosi's recently announced "need" for 150 billion more or McShamnesty's recently announced "need" for 300 billion more!!! THESE 2 MAJOPR PARTIES ARE SOCIALISTS ON STEROIDS!!!

Geek
You're talking nonsense. You just stated you don't know what a Libertarian is. So why keep embarrassing yourself with the nonsense falsities? We're not beating you over the head for your (very poor IMO)decision to vote for the GOP. Go right ahead.

It's a waste of time sitting on your high horse looking down on those that don't see it your way. That's usually the position liberals take. You know the "your just too stupid to get it" arrogance that the elites on both sides of the political spectrum display.

Believe it or not there are people that disagree with you that have principled intelligent positions. Your rants and false statements contain nothing to change those positions.

I urge you to read up on the Libertarian platform and see if you agree with most of it. I don't agree with everyting, but my pet peeve is the Federal Gov. Libertarians are not anarchists or isolationist as we are so often accused. I want the Federal Gov. dramatically reduced in size and that's never going to happen under this two party system. I want the power returned to the states as intended. Voting GOP or DEM is voting for bigger government and I simply refuse.

Take care.

The Federal Elections Commission
also known commonly as the FEC was established by both major parties to keep out 3rd Parties and this We the People from having a voice in DC. It is 150% UNCONSTITUTIONAL to deprive 3rd parties from ballots on arbitrary whimsical rules. If any of you find your 3rd party candidate did not make it to your State's ballot, you have all the right in the Constitution ofthe United States to write in your 3rd Party candidate, and your respective State had better give you that option if you choose to use it, or they can be sued in Federal Court. If the State or the Federal government tries to convince you that your candidate didn't jump through the right hoops, IT'S ALL HOGWASH and ILLEGAL just as the FEC itself is an ILLEGAL INSTITUTION! Don't be chickenshit, America; stand up to the Socialists in DC who have muzzled your 1st Amendment rights to be heard at the polls.

Conservative 3rd Parties Need Airwaves
It would revolutionize the American People's access to 3rd party Conservative Constitutional politics and galvanize We the People. It would educate the masses as to the intentions of how the Founding Fathers intended to run this government. This is the missing link. Can you imagine, my fellow true Conservatives of Libertarian and Constitution party ilk, what a 3rd party TV or radio show or network could do for rescuing this nation from DC, status quo politics-as-usual - SNAFU??? It would be Revolutionary - 1776 all over again! It would be like the Republican Revolution of 1994 except this time we would be electing TRUE CONSERVATIVES for a change. If 3rd party websites would solicit funds for a national tv or radio network or even just a national tv or radio show, this would be an excellent start of a Political Revolution, the likes of which America has not seen since 1776. Just think, we would likely never hear the Medved drivel, Air America, or the CINO talk radio shameless shills for the GOP ever again, and it would usher in a whole new political paradigm. Imagine mainstream parties like the Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party and dwindling ranks of blowhards in the GOP and Democratic Party. Invariably, it would be highly likely under such conditions that the Democrat-Lite GOP and the Democrats having been reduced deservingly to backbencher status would coalesce into their own 3rd party as yet another election-year gimmick to satisfy their wanton lust for power, greed, corporate socialism, and corruption. Imagine what DC would be like without Corporations on "K" street with their legions of lobbyist buying off the whores in the GOP and the Democratic party.


Cont'd...
Imagine what it would be like to turn on your tv or radio and find that Washington is getting Constitutional government back and there's NO SCANDALS to report because the crooks in the 2 major parties have al been prosecuted FOR ONCE and jailed for a very, very long time for dereliction of duty and supporting anti-American activities such as the open border, the endless bailouts of their Wall Street buddies and fellow Socialists, TREASON, the North American Union, NAFTA, and Illegal Immigration policies that directly threaten the lives of countless Americans and our own national security. The fact of the matter is that when 3rd Parties do take the reigns of power the two major parties will likely be serving in jail where they belong. That's why they really want to shut us up; they know we are on to their corruption and gaming of the system and The American People.

Why Do They Still Call Them Debates?
Because if both 2 major Socialist parties are no longer distinguishable on anything but the war and taxes, it doesn't leave much else to talk about, to actually DEBATE, now does it???

I'm late to the party
but why not post a few responses anyway...

at 10:23 Retired Geek wrote "Free spirits, the ambitious, ex-socialists, drug users, and sexual eccentrics are usually the Libertarians."
You left out the founding fathers and Ronald Reagan.


Apollo, I agree with most of your points - the purpose of 3rd party voting (to shift a major party, not to win), and that McCain is an authoritarian.

But I'm curious about your comment that "The power play by the religious right resulted in Bush's election..." Who would have been the GOP nominee / POTUS had that not happened?

I and most of my friends are both very religious and politially more libertarian than conservative. I haven't yet decided whether to vote for Barr or Baldwin, but it sure won't be McCain.

The only way I can see myself voting for McCain is if he admits that his campaign finance bill was an unconstitutional monstrosity and vows to do everything he can to have it repealed. But instead, he piles on by supporting this unconstitutional bailout.

As GunnyG© said, I just hope Palin can avoid the stain of McCain's socialism. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. She's not a libertarian purist, but she'd sure be a step in the right direction (like Reagan was).

The Socialist GOP & DNC Media Know..
that if Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or Chuck Baldwin had just one minute with these two buffoons, they would be cleaning their clocks. The networks would all be breaking for a commercial so fast that you'd think you had accidentally sat on your remote and changed the channel!

MENSHEVIKS AND BOLSHEVIKS
the globalist, and the d.c. parties make it virtually impossible to get on 50 state and all territory ballots. millions of dollars and party hack bureaucrats denying the 3rd party ballot placement.
the unconstitutional hijacking of the american elections for generations is leading this country into turdworldism.

i remember god reagan stating in a speech that the unites states was going from an industrial manufacturing economy to a 'service economy'.

this is what the 1st and 2nd parties have brought to our country.

adios

ab normal
lancaster, mexifornia, greater aztlan
push 1 for english gringo dudes
viva la raza
viva amnestia
viva mccain
viva obama
viva mecha
viva emergency rooms
viva identy theft
viva home depot
viva grass blowers
viva section 8 housing
viva free education
viva comprehensive immigration reform bills
viva mexico

SMyles - Appealing to logic...
--
...and a sense of rationality in Retired Geek is a useless pursuit.

He's a self-professed individualist who - in spite of being confronted at every turn with the stark evidence that the Rockefeller Republican Tweedle Dum (Crash Test Johnny and his puppetmasters) is just as tyrannous and destructive as the National Socialist Tweedle Dee (Mocha Marvin, the faux negro) - squeals and grunts and paws the earth in an effort to armtwist everyone he can into wasting their ballots on his conception of the lesser of two evils.

A decidedly anti-individualist former Naval aviator who's made his political chops by wiping his brownshoe butt with the 1st Amendment.

See "McCain-Feingold."


And Retired Geek compounds the evidence of his head-up-the-sigmoid character by claiming repeatedly that the election of Barack the Magic Mulatto to the presidency would somehow be *worse* than putting a nominal Republican on the bull's-eye for what is going to be the worst economic meltdown since the Carter Administration.

Possible since the reign of FDR.

(( Whom the GOP's "Maverick" Enemy Ace professes to worship so fervently. ))

For the putative conservative - who vests his hope for political redemption in the Republican Party like a chaste wife repeatedly infected with VD by her philandering husband - the thought of a bumbling, blind, "bipartisan" clod like Johnny in the White House when this load of manure comes sliming down like the avalanche of filth that it is....


Well, if you want to say "bye-bye!" to the Republican Party for the next forty years, just cast your vote in November for John McCain and get that sorry sonofabitch into the presidency.

'Cause you do *NOT* want anyone in the Oval Office with an (R) after his name when this Hitchcock-ian flock of chickens-from-hell come home to roost in the next year or two.

Or didn't Hoover's experience teach you stupid friggin' Republicans anything at all?

--

SJDoc
Bravo. You certainly save me a lot of typing.

Proportional Representation....
....Is the answer.

Why is it that the majority winner of any elective gets all the marbles, while all the rest get nothing?

So fifty-one percent of those who bother to vote, get all the power. The forty-nine percent who lost, plus the additional number (usually equal in number to either faction) who didn't bother to vote, are completely un-represented.

Usually, about fifteen to twenty-five percent of eligible voters determine the outcome (usually, about half of those registered to vote to bother to vote because they figure "why bother." An additional number, about equal to the non-voters, never even bother to register.)

Why not spread the power around a little? Give every congressional district 10 representatives, instead of just one, and apportion them proportionally. Thus, in a typical district, you might get (at first) four Republicans, three Democrats, two Libertarians, and maybe an occasional Green or Constitutionalist.

Instead of just two parties becoming ever more bland and non-controversial, in an attempt to garner votes, you could have candidates actually stick to their guns. At least, things could get interesting. As the system is now, elections are a two-year exercise in complete boredom.

The system now encourages apathy because you have to choose between tweedle dee and tweedle dum. Open things up!

Running Scared
Bob Barr is the ONLY presidential candidate who will work to restore Constitutional principles!

Call the Commission for Presidential Debates at 202-872-1020 and ask that Barr be included in the upcoming debate!! Let's make this happen!!

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -Monhandas Ghandi

More on Proportional Representation....
After a few elections, people would start to understand that they don't have to choose the lesser of two evils; they can at least vote in a few candidates who represent their views.

Maybe in some districts you would start to get (out of ten representatives) six Libertarians, one Republican, one Democrat, and two Constitutionalists.

In San Francisco, maybe you would get six Greens, one Republican, one Democrat, and two Libertarians.

The point is, you would no longer have to try to "pick the winner," which is always an exercise in futility. You could actually vote for candidates who represent your views.

For example, in some states, why bother to vote at all? In Utah, if you're a Democrat, why bother to vote for President at all? Mathematically, you have no chance. If you live in Vermont, why bother to vote Republican?

I would also recommend the presidency be divided among at least the top three vote getters (Jefferson actually recommended this, having read about the Triumvirate of the early Roman Republic--smart guy, you know).

This way, instead of getting one nitwit with total authority as president, you might get one nitwit, one smart guy, and maybe an ideologue or two. Presidential approval of new laws would require either unanimity, or three of five approval. Otherwise, a new law is vetoed. Again, this way, minority voters get some degree of representation.

The Founders originally envisioned the system as the top vote getter being president, and the number two vote getter being vice president, where he would be an important rival of the president and have some degree of power as president of the Senate.

Last Point ....
On proportional representation.

Candidates, instead of having to appeal to the broadest, blandest "consensus" in order to win all the marbles, could actually focus on narrower, more focused ideologies. Eventually, no one would want to vote for the bland, un-principled jerk who tries to appeal to everyone. They would instead try to appeal to people whom they would really try to represent.

Ten representatives for every congressional district!

Replace the single executive Presidency with five Presidents. Three would be required to approve any legislation or any other executive action.


don't waste your vote
juan mclame is going to get rolled anyway by barry osama.

I really do you believe people are going to hold their nose and vote for juan. This is going to happen because most folks are clueless about other choices like Bob Barr who actually is the truest conservative running.

I do believe that there will be many people like me that will not waste our votes by voting to socialist like rino/cino juan mclame because we are tired of the big government repugnicunt party.

People will vote third party or stay home thereby giving osama the victory. The repugnicunts need to be punished not rewarded and this is what is going to happen. osama will roll juan and third party votes for Bob Barr will be significant.

Paolo.....Bingo!

I've been making that same argument for years, and you summarized it beautifully.

Kudos.

Qualify that, paolo

I've been making the same arguments on "proportional representation", specifically as to apportionment of Electoral Delegates.

That's what would open elections up and take away the "two-party" hegemony and monopoly.

I think you went a bit far as to multiple presidents, and essentially a British Parliamentary-style government.

I don't agree with that.


The Romans tried multiple presidents,
right before they stopped being a republic and started being an empire. I don't think it would go well for us either.

Did you guys see where Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party (he had been on the fence between Bob Barr and Baldwin)?

This happened two weeks ago - I just found out about this evening - so it may be old news to the rest of you.


The last four paragraphs of Paul's statement are the relevant ones:
http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-23/ron-paul-endorses-chuck-b aldwin-for-president/

Third parties aren't the answer, but...
I think you will in time see a third party emerge and perhaps even more as the economy of this country gets worse and worse. And it will be entirely futile. Those additional parties will essentially become clones of the two existing parties. The culture has to change before you can have real political change and no conservative is even considering that. Their focus is entirely on politics and government and thus they will continue to fail to change the political direction of this country.

You have re-defined the word RINO!
Michael, you arrogant moron, You pushed hard for a RINO to be nominated and with the collusion of the RINO party, mostly latinos banking on open borders, you pissed all over this country for your own idealogical purposes because your left wing roots were coming home to roost. Now you realize that a CONSERVATIVE party is wretching over the disgusting socialists, populist crap that is coming out of this mans mouth and you are trying to cover your despicable little pathetic butt! You are pure RINO michael, ROTTEN In N OUT!

Real change...
...has to start somewhere. A small group of THer's have been advocating the third party strategy since the primaries. It has not been a popular position but I see evidence here that the idea is growing as McAmnesty begins to fade in this election.

Next time around perhaps there will be more of us.

Paolo - ''complete boredom''?
--
Unless you consider unremitting nausea and vomiting a "boring" condition, I wouldn't try to describe the present political system with quite so mild a word.

Your idea for a parsed presidency (to gain Americans much the some sort of proportional voice in the Executive branch as we're supposed to have in the Legislative) is interesting as all hell.

I'd certainly support it.

Anything that divides any branch of government and compels every "malignant jobholder" to bring his machinations and deviousness out into the open - squabbling and bickering and griping and dickering - not only exposes them to the public eye but also throws gravel into each machine politician's respective gearbox.

The Founders responsible for the Constitution -

(( which is *NOT* to say the Founders responsible for the Revolution itself; remember Patrick Henry's remark "I smell a rat!" when told of Alexander Hamilton's plan to "revise" the Articles of Confederation ))

- originally conceived the presidency to be little more than the same kind of chief-of-state they'd known as subjects of the British crown, a symbolic one-man instantiation of the national image, with the real power irrevocably and overwhelmingly vested in their version of Parliament - the Congress.

Jefferson (away in France at the time) even called the proposed president "a bad edition of a Polish king" (Polish kings at that time were essentially figureheads elected for life).

The powers invidiously accumulated in the presidency (especially during the second century of our nation's history) are nowhere *NEAR* what the Founders intended for that institution - or for the man who infests it.

For better proof of the viability of your proposal, consider that we have the frantic opposition of BrianR, as complete a totalitarian a$shole as we ever get on Townhall.com

What more do you want?

--

Trouble is, the "

RickV404 - As the present situation...
--
...continues effectively (and more glaringly) to deprive the real majority of American citizens of a voice in the control of the vast illegitimacy imposed upon us in lieu of a lawful government, I begin to believe that the alternative to a genuine restructuring of the nominally Republican Party ("republican" it most certainly is not!) is civil insurrection, either formally organized or spontaneously diffuse.

RickV404 observes:

"I think you will in time see a third party emerge and perhaps even more as the economy of this country gets worse and worse. And it will be entirely futile. Those additional parties will essentially become clones of the two existing parties. The culture has to change before you can have real political change...."


The "culture" change of which you speak will, I think, be borne less of genuine widespread principled political awareness - for those who govern have done a tremendously effective job (by way of "public education") to pound the broad mass of Americans into anticonceptual helplessness - but of desperation.

If things get as bad as they were in the 1930s - and they might - the uprisings feared so much by the "progressive" politicians of that day (Republicans and Democrats alike, for both had already become interventive, anti-freedom "progressives" by that time), facilitated by channels of communication like the Internet, might well happen.

The most likely outcome will be the growth in power of Dubbya's *Heimat Sicherheitsdienst* (direct translation of "Homeland Security Department," y'know) to levels that might have suited the tastes of Heinrich Himmler and Hermann Goering.

A lot of us real, honest-to-Jefferson conservatives might have to get used to camp living.

As in "concentration camp."

--

Geek
"listen to their protests about freedom of speech by anyone critical of them."

We don't have a problem with you speaking (or posting). You can prove to us how little you understand all you want, but don't expect us to sit back and be quiet either. Pointing out you are an idiot is not a protest against free speech, just pointing out the obvious.

BrainR
"British Parliamentary-style government."

I'd like to see that, you don't have co-presidents. In countries without Constitutional monarchs, you do have elected presidents as head of state, but they are little more than super ambassadors have no real power. The government is run by the prime minister and the executive is inside the legislative branch as the cabinet--the cabinet also being MPs. The PM elected by the majority of the MPs--meaning usually elected by the majority party. And while in many cases, these systems boil down to two-party or even one-party systems (UK with the Tories and Labour, Japan with the LDP) it does allow a voice for parties that in the US has no voice--the UK have the Lib-Dems for example--they have some 60 seats, how many seats does the Libertarian Party have? In Japan, even the Japanese Communist Party has seats. This would end the winner-take-all system you have now and minor parties would at least have some representation. Keep the president, just strip him of all powers and let him go to funerals and things.

There are some countries that do have something like co-presidents--Taiwan has a mixed presidential/parliamentary system. Be nice to change that too, but China and the US aren't too keen in Taiwan moving forward with Constitutional reforms and since Ma was elected a dead issue anyway, but even here the real power is with the premier and not the president.






You don't get it Medved!
All of you elites like to claim that every election as the most important, the most significant, and it is part of the overall plan of the DEM/GOP/MSM


"For one thing, both Republicans and Democrats nominated candidates with strong appeal to cantankerous independents"

Once again Mr. Medved shows his elitism

You and your fellow elites are always claiming how each election is the most important, the most significant. The DEM/GOP/MSM propaganda machines have been using this tactic for years as part of the scam on the American people to keep power in their own hands.

"For one thing, both Republicans and
Democrats nominated candidates with
strong appeal to cantankerous
independents:"

This quote is the most absurd thing anyone who claims to be a political observer could possibly say. Both candidates are probably the most unappealing set of characters to be brought before the citizens for another lesser of two evils choice.

The reasons Independent/Third Party candidates have struggled this year is simply more of the same, in particular, the powerful MSM that refuses to give voice to I/TP candidates as well as the vast amount of power and money controlled by the two major parties.

It is also true that this has become the first real internet election. I/TP candidates will be armed and ready for 2010 & 2012. This new avenue will be the strong point for I/TP the next go around.

For those interested in how the elites have stolen our inheritance with their virtual lock on power, please visit my website, JOEOLIVAFORPRESIDENT.ORG. Thanks, Joe

Paolo
"Ten representatives for every congressional district!"

These are known as multi-member districts. Say a district has five seats, usually a voter would vote for who they like best and the top five in this case get a seat (known as Single non-tranferable vote). This was a system that the Li Fa Yuan in Taiwan used until the election in 2008, the body was cut in half and the multi-member districts and SNTV replaced by single member districts and a first-past the post system (with some additional seats via proportional representation). Also used in some elections in Japan's House of Councillors and a few other countries. If you had 10 seats for every Congressional district, the House would have 4,350 members larger than China's NPC (with 2,985 members). Another system would be the Single transferable vote (STV) which also used multi-member districts. I support the multi-member districts for the US and SNTV to elect them, but the size of the new legislature (having a unicameral body) would have to remain around 535.

Paolo
"The Founders originally envisioned the system as the top vote getter being president, and the number two vote getter being vice president, where he would be an important rival of the president and have some degree of power as president of the Senate."

Actually this was the case until the Congress and the States f'ed with the Constitution by passing and ratifying the 12th Amendment. It changed Article II, Section 1, clause 3. John Adams (1789 and 1792), Thomas Jefferson (1796) and Aaron Burr (1800) were the second-place finishers and thus VP, with the 12th, the President and VP were elected together and usually (but not always--Lincoln-Johnson for example) from the same party.

"Losertarian" or Loserpublican?
I don't share Michael Medved's hatred of third parties, and in fact I'm planning to vote for Bob Barr on the Libertarian ticket. But until recently I might have reluctantly agreed with Medved's claim that 2008 is not the year when Barr or any other minor-party candidate will get any significant traction.

After the last few days I'm not so sure. For one thing, John McCain continues to offend libertarians and free-market conservatives with his support of the Wall Street bailout and other panicky proposals for economic meddling.

But more important, Medved's main argument to those of us who don't share his worshipful, slobbering adulation of John McCain, is that no matter how much we may dislike him we have to vote for McCain because he is the only alternative to Obama and the Democrats who ahs a "chance to win". But what if McCain no longer has a chance to win? What if, by Election Day, McCain is so far in the hole that he has even less chance to win than Hoover in 1932 or McGovern in 1972? This looks like a distinct possibility.

In that case-- even assuming we do believe McCain is a "lesser evil" compared to Obama-- what reason is left to hold our noses and vote for McCain? We might just as well vote for the "Losertarian" we really like rather than the "Loserpublican" McCain.

Power Play
chris:

The Republican party was cobbled together in the 50's and 60's. It consisted of three main groups (with some overlap) - The old line free-market, anti-New Deal conservatives, a group of anti-communist liberals who felt that the Democratic party had betrayed them by not opposing communism more forcefully and a group of devout Christians who opposed communism because it was atheistic.

Essentially, all three groups were united by anti-communism but not much else. At first, the Christians were quite opposed to government control of the individual because of their legitimate fear that the state would violate their right to worship as they chose. This made them natural allies for the liberty wing.

However, after the fall of communism and the rise of fundamentalist religions the alliance between the liberty wing and the religious right unraveled over issues like pornography and abortion. Shifting their allegiance to the liberal big government wing they helped to rid the Republican party of libertarians and helped the more authoritarian elements of the party in the hope they could increase their control of schools and other public institutions.

It was that shift that resulted in G W Bush and the dramatic increase in the power of the executive which will now be turned over to Obama.

NPWL - It really isn't difficult...
--
...for Chuck Baldwin or Bob Barr to "stand MILES above the liberal McCain."

Anybody floating on a life raft in a certain quarter of the Pacific is standing "MILES above" a slimer scooting his itchy butt across the bottom of the Mindanao Trench.

--

End the Fed Rally on Oct 22
I would encourage everyone to take part in the End the Fed Rally to be held Oct 22. There will be a protest against the Fed in 38 cities across America.

For more details visit:

http://www.endthefed.US
http://www.endthefed.blogspot.com
http://www.restoretherepublic.net/home.php

As the Fed induced financial collapse unfolds, We the People face both the greatest dangers to our Freedom, Sovereignty and Prosperity as well as the greatest opportunity to reveal the true nature of the Federal Reserve System and organize to bring about its End. Thank you for being one of those who choose to take up the challenge of these difficult and dangerous times.

No foundation
No foundation, is the main reason there is no viable third party in the United States. Only being involved in regional matters except for the presidential election leave most parties out of the minds of most of the voting public. Grassroot movement for a couple of years on the local levels of government to establish voting records of the candidates as they move up the political ladder. Then a platform would be established and the voting public would have something to understand about the parties agenda. Only three things will make a party succeed in these times border security proponent, prolifer, elimination of the IRS and the department of education, establishing English as official language of the United States, and requiring 100% of all prison sentencing to be served.

Let's see...
When I'm interviewing a prospective employee, I discover that he/she is not qualified. What do I do? I don't opt for another unqualified candidate, simply because they are slightly better than the first unqualified candidate. I keep looking until I find a candidate that is actually qualified. That's who I hire.

While I don't have the sole say in who becomes president, the principle remains the same. I will no longer help perpetuate this insane cycle of opting for the lesser of two evils.

Not voting is the same as voting for whoever wins, because you have not contested anything. A vote based on conscience and principle is never wasted. If you truly believe that McCain will be a good president, then by all means vote for him. The same applies with Obama. However, if you vote for either man because you consider them the better of two bad choices then you are part of the problem that is ailing our nation.

The deck is stacked against third partie
Mr. Medved, with all due respect, I'd argue that the reason 3rd party candidates don't do well is due to several factors. First you have the two major parties controlling who gets on the state ballot (because they are in control of state boards of elections) and they set he rules for legitimacy of parties within a state. The major parties stack the deck in their favor.

Secondly, the 3rd parties do not have the funding the major parties do, so it's difficult to reach the household of voting Americans. Typically the MSM does not believe in depth interviews with the candidates are anything short of wasting time.

And Thirdly, the average voter does not care to know the stances of the candidates from the two main political parties, so why would they spend time on something far less shiny. Third parties do not compete with bread and circuses
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.