Will the Independent Party be the leader one day?
Posted by | Posted in Political Debates
photo taken from textually.org
Will the Independent Party be the leader one day?
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
Yes. If you look throughout the years, you can see a steady increase in the party's membership, and sooner or later one day, people are going to realize that everyone has a different collection of beliefs and you can't stick to one party and agree on every situation that they believe in. Most of the time, these politicians, they say that they belong to the Democratic Party when their history shows being Republican.
The whole political party system is just an illusion. These politicians, they aren't 100% for their party, everyone should be independent, instead of making the election one big money and popularity game.
If everyone was Independent, then you wouldn't have that ganging up like we saw last night with Obama. It clearly looks like a red team vs. blue team type of deal, and with everyone having their own beliefs and not in these big groups, more issues can be solved.
Which Independent party are we talking about?
American Independent Party
I don't know about this one, pass!
Yeah that one sucks. As third parties go.
When your history includes George Wallace you don't get my support.
I don't know about that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._party_affi...
No one wants to be part of a click anymore because it's all one big mess. We need the Independent party to rise so that politicians don't act like children anymore.
Registering as an Independent does not mean you are part of "the independent party". Lots of independents are swing voters between the two major parties. And the rest are divided between a large number of very small minor parties.
The specific one you referenced, the AIP, exists out of the 1968 campaign because of a split between southern democrats and the mainstream party. That's the Wallace (and Lestor Maddox) angle. It's one thing when your party is founded, as the Republicans were, as a little party with a vision that advances civil liberties for everyone, even if that's not where it stands now. It's another when your party is advancing a notion of white supremacy. This has softened now to basically a viewpoint of "Southern Conservativism". But even this much probably caused the party to split last year.
I agree with the premise that greater support for minor parties or a more vigorous and apparent support for independent voting opinions would help out national politics considerably. If only by breaking the left-right hold on our policy perspectives. But not by using the specific party you've referenced.
So far as the major third parties go there are three
The one you referenced (which nationally is called the Constitution Party) summarized as a strong nationalist platform
Libertarian – a strong individualist platform
Green – a strong environmental platform
And that's it.
Various Socialists and Prohibitionists have been around longer, but they're generally very weak and receive almost no national attention. This is why we get claims that Democrats are in fact socialists, because nobody cares to notice we actually have a Socialist party that usually isn't that fond of the Democrats who get called "socialists" (Kucinich may be an exception here).
I'm Libertarian. I hope I live to see the day a third party candidate, period, gets to be elected to some national office.
They will. Independents will be there first though.
Most independents I know do not consider themselves part of an "independent party" but rather independent of ANY party, hence the name independent.
Obviously not everyone understood this…
Things are different in New York.
No. They aren't.
Well Sun Tzu, in New York, we are patriotic and respect other American citizens. I don't believe in outsourcing, and I don't believe American-born children should be robbed of their education from those in other countries. That's New York's standpoint. In that case, we are different.
As far as the Independent thing is concerned, there is an Independent Party and those not affiliated with a party, and a lot of New Yorkers choose the party.
I think you're referring to the "Independence" Party, to which Bloomberg is a party nominee. Not the "Independent" party. Independent is still just a offer for voter registration, not a declaration of party affiliation of any kind. That is still true in NYC as it is elsewhere.
All political parties should be banned, the reason being that the politician has to rely on the party of his/her choice and becomes enslaved by that parties agenda – which was not voted on by the voters, and usually is not what the politician talked about during the campaign.
It is my personal opinion that if the politician ran on his/her own merits and ideals we just might have less corruption up there in DC.
Just my not-so-humble opinion.
i strongly disagree when examining the status quo of a presidnential election, you must look at two very important factors, coverage and funding. sadly independent candidates will never be able to aqiure them
Yea papadawg, all it is in Congress are official clicks. How can all those Republicans have such hatred towards Obama? It's a group effect, all psychological. We have to eliminate that.