A New National Party That Will Contest 2012 Elections Becomes Inevitable
Public respect for both parties in congress is now at an all-time low. The president is increasingly seen as a well-spoken empty suit who occasionally mouths popular views he doesn’t go on to defend, and invariably caves to people he purports to oppose.
There’s an opportunity here for a new national political grouping to not only challenge a political class in Washington that is so obviously out of tune with the wishes of most Americans, but to actually win the White House, and than gather into itself a large number of present Republican and Democratic operatives disgusted with their present party’s behavior. It’s an opportunity that soon, very soon, perhaps as early as right after the current obscene debt ceiling fandango ends, will bear fruit.
The fact is we no longer have a real two party system in this country. A two party system in which rational but differing views of governance compete and are then negotiated into legislation. Rather, we have a one-party system under two party names.
It’s the old Republican Party with a far-right branch, and a center-right branch that bills itself “Democrats.” Both branches of this one-in-the-form-of two parties services the same special interests, the only difference being that at certain times, most emphatically during election years, one of these branches pretends it doesn’t. Few are fooled by this pretense any longer.
The far-right branch of this Republican collective sneers that those who don’t go along with their nostrums are lefty, liberal progressives whose time has past and who are out of tune with present realities. The center-right branch of this Republican collective, currently fronted by their beard in the White House, calls these same liberal, lefty, progressives silly, shrill, and other patronizingly offensive names. Their idea here is that when 2012 rolls around this will show independents that Mr. Obama is fair and balanced, while the objects of his contempt on the left will be swayed back into his fold by another round of nicely modulated lies.
Neither branch of this two-headed Republican collective has twigged (or seems to care) that what progressives want today — protection of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a host of other federally funded programs the poor and middle class depend on — are what the majority of Americans also want. And that trickle down economics no longer passes the smell test for this majority, which also wants higher taxes for the rich that will make cuts for programs others need less necessary.
Discontent with the present party system is making a new party grouping that could win the White House in 2012 and perhaps a large chunk of congress as well a very real possibility.
Let the pros inside the Beltway natter about all the institutional roadblocks that render this impossible, and about the failure of past third party efforts. And when they finish nattering…
The Whigs died and the Republicans took their place with a better program in 1856. It’s gonna happen again in 2012. It’s gonna happen because this is still the United States of America, and the majority of this country’s people is not gonna be eaten alive by ideological nutters and pusilanimous careerists.
More from (and about) this writer at http://cootavengers.com/
27 Responses to “A New National Party That Will Contest 2012 Elections Becomes Inevitable”
The author sees both parties as being to the “right”. I don’t agree, but in the end I’ve always felt that the two party system doesn’t just hurt centrists. Just as the author doesn’t feel his is represented by a Democratic party he finds is not liberal enough, both the left and the right are too diverse to be forced to back just one party (“take it or leave it”).
Starting a new party won’t, IMO, solve the problem for everyone, or solve it in the long term. It will have to have a coherent strategy that will appeal to some of those shut out in place (be it the center, left, or right), but it will leave others in the same position. And, in the end, the electoral system will push things back into two parties which will then try and make everyone chose “one or the other”.
In the end what we need is electoral reform and to break up the two party system.
“the majority of this country’s people is not gonna be eaten alive by ideological nutters and pusilanimous careerists”
Would that be the same “majority” that voted for a mediocre con-artist named George Bush? Cuz if they did that twice then you may be on the optimistic side. That said, nothing focuses the concentration like pain.
Btw, I do see both parties as being toward the right, but it’s been a gradual (insidious) enough process that many have become used to it.
When far leftists argue that both parties are too far to the right or when far rightists say that both parties are too far left, I take comfort, because it means that neither party has yet been captured by REAL extremists like the ones complaining.
Both parties to the right? Far-left gross distortion, once again!
The problem we face, “DPS,” is that the two major parties write law as well as control the electoral system.
Meanwhile, what’s meant by “a new national party”? It’s not reversion to 1930s-1960s liberal dinosaur nonsense and continuing to overfeed the overgrown federal monster, is it? Just wondering.
To all,
My piece isn’t an opinion. It’s a prediction. I think what I say is going to happen should happen. But even if I don’t want it happen, it is going to happen.
Think. All it took was a total unknown with a lot of money to get on Larry King and say he was going to run. And think of the level of discontent among voters then and now. And remember that Perot ended getting 17 percent of the popular vote.
It’s coming. Matters in this country have reached a point where it has to come, Isn’t that obvious?
Logan I’d take your comment more seriously if I thought you’d demonstrated some ability to determine what “far leftists” and “far rightists” actually were. For example, I’m guessing you view me as a “far leftist”, whereas all those cute little political tests that abound on the internet put me within a stones throw of the center. And DLS? Your comment, “far-left gross distortion” is exactly what I would have expected. You go boy!!!
I still think people are dismissing Palin too quickly.
I assume you are a far leftist because you obsessive hate on all Republicans and all conservatives and almost all moderates literally every single time you post here, JSpencer. Moreover, you yourself have confirmed that you hate Republicans so much that you feel yourself justified not only in giving Democrats a total pass, but also in demanding that every single author and commenter here do the same.
I don’t think I am out on a limb with this determination, but I would eagerly welcome any evidence from you that you are not as extreme left as you have appeared to be.
Absalon, I would never underestimate the ability of this electorate to make utterly clueless choices. They’ve done it before.
Logan, not only are you “out on a limb” with your “determination”, but your falling through mid-air. You clearly don’t have the slightest grasp of who I am, what I believe, or how I feel about people. This comment of yours:
“I assume you are a far leftist because you obsessive hate on all Republicans and all conservatives and almost all moderates literally every single time you post here, JSpencer.”
That is not only a lie, but it is offensive. When you say something like this you reveal more about yourself than you should ever want anyone to know. I’d say shame on you, but I’m not sure if you know what that even means.
If I have misjudged you, I apologize, JSpencer. I don’t think I have misjudged you, however, especially in light of your continuing pattern of personal attacks and abuse towards literally everyone who disagrees with you about anything.
I am also willing to try not to make judgments about your political beliefs based solely on what you say on a blog as soon as you are willing to grant the same courtesy towards others. Alas, I fear this may founder on the same double-standards problem we’ve discussed before.
Seriously, do you even see conservatives as fully human? It doesn’t seem like it.
A credible third party will never happen.
http://www.forbes.com/2010/05/13/third-parties-fusion-voting-elections-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html
Michael,
I don’t see a third party candidate coming. There are two “disaffected” groups right now, TP folks and the far left.
The TP folks are not going to go third party this cycle. They don’t trust plutocrats so there will be no Perot equivalent and they represent too broad a spectrum on social issues to make it happen. A Mitch Daniels type would never run on the TP ticket.
On the left, I simply don’t think there are enough disaffecteds to gather any substantial quantity of votes.
I’d put the over/under on votes gathered by a single third party at around 5%, double digits is unthinkable.
Steve, the number of disaffecteds on the far-left can be seen pretty consistently in the Kucinich-for-President and Nader-for-President votes. It stays pretty steady around 2%.
If you restrict your analysis to college campuses, however, you can approach majority and even consensus.
BS
NOBODY has fought harder for healthcare reform than President Obama. NOBODY has risked more to help the working class people in this country than President Obama and Franklin Roosevelt. No President in six decades has had more political opposition to Everything he was elected to accomplish than President Obama. As long as these reactionary IDIOTS hold our country hostage to their brain dead idea of government this crap will continue. But I can promises you this, if these idiots are successful and our old people start dying because of poverty or lack of care, there will be a rise up of people and it won’t be innocent little children in their sights.
SteveInCH,
5% – ? Unless someone or something unforeseen comes along, I’ll take the under.
So would I tidbits but Michael was putting Perot’s 17% on the table ; )
Mister Silverstein:
What you’ll probably witness, if anything (no, the current antics of the GOP don’t predict everything) is that the Dems will remain the main party in and of government, while the GOP will revert largely to the party defending the taxpayers in the decades to come, those who will face ever higher tax burdens as a smaller fraction of the population (while the Dems will remain the party of entitlements, and “on the side” of the ever-growing fraction of the population that benefits from entitlements).
There’s no telling yet if the changes the GOP is bringing to the states (more than to the U.S. House of Representatives) is but a temporary phenomenon (as in the House).
lol
At 35%, there is plenty of room for Higher Taxes. The GOP are far from hero’s for “holding the line” on taxes increases. They just have nothing left to debate about. Rather they hide their heads in the sand instead of facing facts. Single mindedness has it’s downfalls.
Taxes will be raised, I am certain of it.
Allen,
That’s news to your fellow far lefties who consider him and his efforts a corporate (insurer) sell-out.
Many others want more of what you want — something like “Single-Payer” [sic; who's the payer?] or Medicare for All.
Conyers’s bill (now HR 676) has long been known. (I’ve referred to numerous details in it several times.)
http://www.johnconyers.com/healthcare
And in addition to other lefty-leaning play-pen stuff like American Medical Student Association, have you never encountered Physicians for a National Health Program, associated with Marcia Angell, or oft-quoted Steffie Woolhandler during 2009-10? (The Cambridge crowd, also associated with the blatantly leftist New England Journal of Medicine, etc.)
http://www.pnhp.org/
“C’mon, man!”
“I don’t see a third party candidate coming. There are two “disaffected” groups right now, TP folks and the far left.”
I have to say, my guess is the most of the center is also alienated as least at much, if not more.
No third party candidate.
Both sides have core voting groups in the low 30% of the electorate. These are the people that walk into a voting booth and select by letter, not name. This leaves 30%-40% of voters that might actually consider a third party. Add in the massive amount of special interest spending that will be dumped into marketing for 2012, you can then widdle away another 20% of that 40% that believe what they see on TV.
We would need to see a massive influx of new voters. This would require a national calamity. Not enough Americans vote.
We hear this every four years. Every four years it fizzles.
Then we hear it again four years later.
“I don’t think I have misjudged you, however, especially in light of your continuing pattern of personal attacks and abuse towards literally everyone who disagrees with you about anything.”
Logan, you love the fiction, I’ll give you that. Again (and apologies to others here) your (now beloved) “personal attacks”, “abuse”, and “hatred” are almost always nothing more than people disagreeing with you. I get along with 90% of TMV’ers just fine thanks. There are only a very few who I consider unwilling to think beyond their dogma, but perhaps only one other who comes close to inflating and distorting reactions the way you do – but even he doesn’t indulge a persecution complex. Do whatever you like with this information, I expect it to go in one ear and out the other since all the other attempts people have made here in the way of constructive criticism have also been ignored.
OK, back to your regularly scheduled program…
“We hear this every four years. Every four years it fizzles.”
Every time that I think things have finally gotten bad enough for people to want off of the merry-go-round, I’m once again proven wrong.
Well, it’s marginally or obliquely related, but some reform is at least being sought — take a look at the new proposed Congressional districts (and Assembly and State Senate districts) for California.
It is seen as increasing the number of Democrats, but at the same time making several districts competitive for once.
http://static1.firedoglake.com/39/files/2011/06/calnew.jpg
official site (select desired map at top)
http://swdb.berkeley.edu/gis/gis2011/
and it’s much better than the current:
(LEFT side, below)
http://bdistricting.com/CA/20090523_111549/CA_ba.png