Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jan 24, 2007 in Politics | 9 comments

Fusion Ticket 2008

The brand new publication “The Politico” starts its second day featuring a creative article Fusion Is the Ticket for 2008 that argues for the timeliness of a cross party ticket. There is a strong voter pull from the Center that a clever ticket could capitalize upon. This is the intention Unity08

There are lively arguments for and against this kind of approach. But it is being considered much more seriously by credible political operatives. Whether it happens or not it is refreshing to see prominent discussions about making our political system more responsive.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2007 The Moderate Voice
  • I don’t think “Fusion” here refers to cuisine!

  • BeYourGuest

    Historically, no candidate from a third party has been elected president. So, we have two parties. That’s it. Nobody has to love it, but everybody ought to face it.

    Third party candidates just take votes away from those two candidates. They take your vote from the electable candidate you most agree with, thus helping to elect the candidate you most disagree with.

  • “But it is being considered much more seriously by credible political operatives.”

    Sure. Lieberman buddy McCain is thinking about it as an insurance if he loses in the primary. So, you might as well call Unity08 the ‘US for McCain party just in case’. But is this credible? Maybe for ‘credible’ pundits like Tom Firedman, Chris Mathews and the like. Ha!

  • “Historically, no candidate from a third party has been elected president.”

    Exactly! So this is probably just a sham designed to ruin the election for one of the real parties. I can only hope that Unity08 will lean more right than left…

  • “Exactly!”
    On second thought, I’m not so sure. Have to look into history books. I seem to remember there ws a time in the 19th century when…

  • Daniel CAZ Greenberg

    I’m disappointed that the Tories haven’t put up a ticket yet. The pro-Colonies lobby needs a voice!

  • BeYourGuest


    If you’re thinking of Lincoln as a third party candidate, I’d be interested to hear the argument.

    The Republican Party was founded in 1854, ran a presidential candidate in 1856 and won, with Lincoln, in 1860. The original Republicans hoped to gather some smaller parties–third parties–as well as disaffected Democrats. The main smaller parties were the Free Soilers, Know Nothings, and Whigs. The Republican Party became the institution that gathered third party types together into one larger political party that would be able to present to the voters exactly what third party types dislike: A lesser of two evils.

  • Upinsmoke

    Does anyone remember GWB allowing the Cia chief (George Tenet) to remain at his post after GWB took over for Bill Clinton? You know he was a democrat and yet Bush asked that he remain at the job.

    Then 9/11. Then Iraq.

    According to a report by veteran investigative journalist Bob Woodward in his book Plan of Attack, Tenet privately lent his personal authority to the intelligence reports about Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) in Iraq. At a meeting on December 12, 2002 he is said to have assured the President that the evidence against Saddam amounted to a “slam dunk case,” although Tenet has refused to confirm that he said this.

    So for all you conspiracy theorists. Heres a good one for you. A democrat actually encouraged the PRESIDENT to go after IRAQ then in the middle of it all resigns and leaves the president holding the bag.

    Cool. Gotta love politics. This is a pretty good example of why it would be really hard for a Democrat and republican to head a political ticket.

  • “You know he was a democrat”

    George Tenet??? That’s news to me. You know that he started his carreer as Senater staffer wotking for republican Senator John Heinz, do you? And that Clinton chose him as Director after another candidate was blocked by the republicans? And that Tenet got an unanimous vote for confirmation? Well, I don’t know what Tenet’s registration as voter says, but I think it’s more probable it says reopublican or independent than democratic.

    BYG: I was thinking of 1824 because I remembered reading something about John Quincy Adams candidating for a new party, but I wasn’t aware that the Federalists already had dropped out then and the Democratic Republican party hadn’t split yet.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :