Comments on: Religious Right Considers Third Party To Run Against Giuliani

By: Volunteer Voters » Mutiny On The Right

Volunteer Voters » Mutiny On The Right — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:23:25 +0000

[...] ALSO: Blue Collar Republican Evangelicals For Mitt Huddleston The Right’s Field The Caucus The Moderate Voice Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...]

By: domajot

domajot — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 11:10:01 +0000

There are a lot of of individuals and groups calling for third parties of various kinds, as no one seems happy with the the cuurrent two parteis we have.

I’m not sure that third parties would solve the state of contentiousness or make anyone happier, though.
Countires with multiple parties don’t seem to solve problems any better, and in some cases more problems are created than solved by this type of system.

Third parties deplete the power of the major parties, but do their really influence policy in a more forceful way? They still need to work by forming coalitions, but those coalitions are often more unstable that the caucuses within the Democratic Party, as an example.

The trend is to look for dramatic shanges in the system, but what is really needed is a change in attittude. If politicians were more willing to vote across party lines on particular issues, the same resutls could be achieved while retaining overall stability.
Changing attitudes is a tall order, but then, those same contentious attitudes would dominate a three or four party Congress.
If there is no core of sensible people interested in working for the good of the coutnry as a whole instead of stridently insisting on their own pet interests prevailing, then it hardly seems to matter how many parties are represented in Congress.

By: ryan

ryan — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 02:43:52 +0000

The chance that religious conservatives would abandon the Republican party sounds like a great opportunity for Republicans in the long-term. The current coalition of social conservatives and fiscal conservatives has proven to be unworkable; the issues at the core of each side’s beliefs don’t overlap, and as a result one side will always dominate the other. Splitting into two parties would allow each to focus on a specific set of issues and allow voters to support whichever side they felt was more representative of their personal beliefs.

As a voter, gay marriage, abortion, and family values aren’t isssues I want the government focused on; instead I’d like a return to sound fiscal policy and competent governing. Others obviously feel differently, but currently neither of us has a single party that reflects how we want government to be run. Splitting those two groups into separate parties seems like it would benefit both.

By: For President Info » Blog Archive » ? for President?

For President Info » Blog Archive » ? for President? — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 02:40:16 +0000

[...] The Moderate Voice: “New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani remains the favorite in polls in the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination sweepstakes — but there are rumblings that his luck could run out. Unlike Arizona Senator John McCain, who has been walking a political tightrope hoping to keep his old supporters and win over old foes — and falling off of the tightrope with politically un-astute statements – Giuliani has been surviving the bumps along the way. But Salon reports that members of the Religious Right intend to blackball Giuliani and if necessary run a third party candidate against him, if he gets the GOP Presidential nomination.” [...]

By: krit

krit — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 02:13:55 +0000

Should the GOP choose to run a social conservative as a third party candidate, they’ll find themselves forced to get used to saying “Madame President” and the “First Laddie”, LOL.

By: DaveA

DaveA — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:48:00 +0000

Sorry, all this talk about the reps being gone for good. So reminescent of dems just a few years ago… I am sure they will re-invent themselves, and that is partly what they are trying to do now in a haphazard and disorganized fashion. To say the reps seem more disorganizaed then the dems is a pretty odd thing, but there it is.

Hopefully the relgious right goes down the tubes. But regardless, I have my popcorn out and am watching a much more “interesting” race than on the dems side, where it seems mor or less static all sewn up.

By: Jim Satterfield

Jim Satterfield — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:21:22 +0000

I just don’t see what they’re worried about. Early polls or no I just don’t see anyone who doesn’t have the “blessing” of those folks winning the Republican primaries.

By: Holly in Cincinnati

Holly in Cincinnati — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 22:18:53 +0000

LET the Religious Right back a candidate from the Constitution Party – it will sink them so badly that they’ll never resurface!

By: harto

harto — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 19:40:42 +0000

Well, I'm sure that all this third party nonsense makes for good copy, but for the SALON writer to have noticed the hyper-secretive meeting of the "Council for National Policy" and have only come away with this Giuliani nonsense is akin to seeing an elephant at the zoo and only having noticed one hair on the trunk. Dick Cheney arrived to kiss the ring, as did Mitt Romney, in one of the most blatant examples of theocracy we've yet seen. Details here. It goes a lot deeper than just some conservative church leaders.

By: superdestroyer

superdestroyer — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 18:48:59 +0000

Since the cance of any Republican candidate winning the Presidency is extremely small, it does not really matter what the religious right does. Also, since the Republican party is becoming irrelevant much faster than anyone has anticipated, it does not matter what the long term consequences are.

Once again, the real question is what will American politics be like with only one functional party? The Democratic Party would like nothing better than to have an irrelevent Republican party around while holding a few seats in Congress and maybe the Senator positions in Alabama or Utah but will that be good for America?