Time to vote for Independents/3rd Parties? (1 Viewer)

[Jucon]

Do you think we need more Independent/3rd party Senators and Congressmen?

Why or why not? And if so, how many and from which parties?

 

[Black_Zawisza]

I think it'd be great if neoconservatism and liberalism didn't have a monopoly on American politics. I'd be more pleased with libertarian-minded ones running for office, but I'm just being biased there. =P

 

[samsmart]

Do you think we need more Independent/3rd party Senators and Congressmen?

Why or why not? And if so, how many and from which parties?

I think what we need is 1) a better voting system to allow for the election of 3rd party officials ( Duverger's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) and 2) a better system for popular initiatives so that the people can better directly affect lawmaking in this country.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Most of the third parties I tend to see on the ballot are either extreme right (constitutionalist, libertarian) or extreme left (green). If I could find a third party that was more centrist, I would consider it.

 

[Jucon]

I think it'd be great if neoconservatism and liberalism didn't have a monopoly on American politics.

This is basically why I'm asking. I for one am getting sick of these games the Republicans and Democrats have been playing with the American people's futures over the years. They have such conflicting views that it is difficult to agree on much. I think more independents/3rd parties would keep both parties in check. Neither party should ever have enough votes to pass what ever they want.

I don't even care which parties get elected... Independents, Libertarians, Tea Party, Green Party,... There needs to be more diversity in Washington.

 

[Ikari]

Most of the third parties I tend to see on the ballot are either extreme right (constitutionalist, libertarian) or extreme left (green). If I could find a third party that was more centrist, I would consider it.

Libertarianism is actually not an extreme right political philosophy. On the 1-D scale of left/right (what you seem to be using), libertarianism is actually more in the middle of what we would currently call left/right politics.

 

[VanceMack]

I think what we need is 1) a better voting system to allow for the election of 3rd party officials ( Duverger's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) and 2) a better system for popular initiatives so that the people can better directly affect lawmaking in this country.

So basically a return to states rights...

 

[Redress]

None of the third parties represent my beliefs as well as the democratic party, so no.

 

[digsbe]

None of the third parties represent my beliefs as well as the democratic party, so no.

I'm of a similar pursuation. Except there is no party at all that fits within my beliefs. To be honest, I'll be stuck voting Republican when Democrats are in power, and voting Democrat when Republicans are in power :lol: If there was an independent that viewed things the same way I did I would vote for him, but such a politician has never come along.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Libertarianism is actually not an extreme right political philosophy. On the 1-D scale of left/right (what you seem to be using), libertarianism is actually more in the middle of what we would currently call left/right politics.

Right wing philosophy is not a line, its more of a grouping of several smaller philosophies such as regan conservatives, goldwater conservatives, neoconservatives, etc. What those groups tend to have most in common is a point of view on finances (lower taxes, government does less stuff). However, few go so far as to want to go back to a gold standard, get rid of the fed, have basically no government (not anarchy), etc. In that vein I tend to see libertarian as more of a conservative philosophy.

In social stuff, conservative philosophies can be all over the map and the various subphilosophies tend to have less cohesion over all. So libertarianism, being more liberal on those matters does not really matter as much.

 

[Hoplite]

Having more third parties adds in a new political problem.

Take the UK as an example. Their parliamentary system sometimes suffers because there are several different major factions in play and these factions often make and break alliances on certain issues and the focus is often on infighting between different groups.

More political groups often means more fighting and dealing for allies rather than focusing on issues. A deadlock is also a more frequent occurrence on issues

Not saying that third parties are bad, just that they have their own political hangups and are not a magic cure for political gridlock.

 

[Ikari]

Right wing philosophy is not a line, its more of a grouping of several smaller philosophies such as regan conservatives, goldwater conservatives, neoconservatives, etc. What those groups tend to have most in common is a point of view on finances (lower taxes, government does less stuff). However, few go so far as to want to go back to a gold standard, get rid of the fed, have basically no government (not anarchy), etc. In that vein I tend to see libertarian as more of a conservative philosophy.

In social stuff, conservative philosophies can be all over the map and the various subphilosophies tend to have less cohesion over all. So libertarianism, being more liberal on those matters does not really matter as much.

Actually it does since you're using some left/right reasoning you've allowed for no other axis. Thus in the 1-D mapping of Libertarianism onto the left/right plane, it would fall well more center. I think you wanting to say it's far right wing is due only to preconceived notions on your part.

 

[Mensch]

I think it'd be great if neoconservatism and liberalism didn't have a monopoly on American politics. I'd be more pleased with libertarian-minded ones running for office, but I'm just being biased there. =P

As a fellow libertarian, I feel sort of offended that you would actually use the word "liberalism" to define today's American fundamentalist democrat. I believe "liberals" should stop calling themselves "liberal" because it shows that they don't even know what the term implies. If an American "liberal" democrat were to go to Europe and champion for "liberal" policies, he would be humiliated by all the finger-pointing and ridicule. In Europe, the "liberals" are the minority in politics. They're the dead parties of tories and other "anti-union," pro-free trade, minimalist libertarian. A libertarian in this country best defines the classical liberals of Europe. We should take the term "liberal" back!

 

[Slartibartfast]

Actually it does since you're using some left/right reasoning you've allowed for no other axis. Thus in the 1-D mapping of Libertarianism onto the left/right plane, it would fall well more center. I think you wanting to say it's far right wing is due only to preconceived notions on your part.

I think 1 axis is plenty.

Not a scientific poll, but there is also this. http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/poll-5283-left-right-folks.html

 

[Ikari]

I think 1 axis is plenty.

Not a scientific poll, but there is also this. Libertarians: which do you identify with more, the Left or Right? - View Poll Results

Then there you have it, libertarianism is more central on that mapping.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Then there you have it, libertarianism is more central on that mapping.

Wait, what, can you not read the poll? its 22 to 7 in favor of the right.

Besides I already posted to the point of the whole 1 vs 2 axis thing. So far you have not given a decent reason why libertarians would be more in the center.

 

[Ikari]

Wait, what, can you not read the poll? its 22 to 7 in favor of the right.

Besides I already posted to the point of the whole 1 vs 2 axis thing. So far you have not given a decent reason why libertarians would be more in the center.

That's choosing which side you most agree with. Many libertarians may find themselves agreeing more with the right than left; but that doesn't mean they are an extreme right-wing philosophy. Libertarianism is in fact classical liberalism. There are issues on both sides of the isle that libertarians can agree with. I suppose you can say that statistically we may be more right of center than anything else. But it's not a strict right wing philosophy. On the extremes of the right side lies authoritative/fascist types of governorship, of which libertarians would never agree with. Because of this fact, on the 1-D metric, libertarianism would find itself in between right and left wing more centric since it contains ideals which are held in common with both sides.

 

[Slartibartfast]

That's choosing which side you most agree with.

Exactly!

Many libertarians may find themselves agreeing more with the right than left; but that doesn't mean they are an extreme right-wing philosophy.

Again, conservativism is a cluster of ideologies. However, the libertarian philosophy has many beliefs that I consider to be extreme.

Libertarianism is in fact classical liberalism.

The history lesson does not contribute to any greater point.

There are issues on both sides of the isle that libertarians can agree with.

Libertarians tend to share more of their philosophy with conservatives. Often liberals and libertarians might find themselves on the same side of an argument for different reasons. This does not mean that they are the same.

I suppose you can say that statistically we may be more right of center than anything else

.

Exactly.

But it's not a strict right wing philosophy.

You yourself stated twice why it is.

On the extremes of the right side lies authoritative/fascist types of governorship, of which libertarians would never agree with. Because of this fact, on the 1-D metric, libertarianism would find itself in between right and left wing more centric since it contains ideals which are held in common with both sides.

I don't think the 2d metric is useful. But again, you guys agree with the right far more than you do with the left. Your own words.

 

[Goshin]

Do you think we need more Independent/3rd party Senators and Congressmen?

Why or why not? And if so, how many and from which parties?

Only if you wish to do so as a protest vote. I've been paying attention to US politics for over thirty years, and it is hard enough for any 3rd party candidate to win an election for dogcatcher, let alone Senator or even Congressman. Most of the "Independents" who are in the Congress are Indi in name only, they're actually affiliated with one of the Big Two one way or another.

I've voted Libertarian or Constitution Pty at times, but not with any expectation of winning: just because the two pragmatic choices were both so utterly morally repulsive to me that I could not bear to put my name to either.

A lot will have to change before any 3rd party can expect to wield real political power in the US.

 

[Ikari]

Exactly!

Do you honestly not understand the implications of that? It's not saying we're extreme right wing because we may agree on average more with the "right" than the "left". You can ask a group of people if they prefer up or down more, and they may answer that they like up more. That doesn't make them extreme up. You're making a logical fallacy by trying to say because libertarians may agree with the right more than they are extreme right. It doesn't logically follow.

Again, conservativism is a cluster of ideologies. However, the libertarian philosophy has many beliefs that I consider to be extreme.

And there's the "Exactly!". What you consider. This designation of libertarians as "extreme right wing" is based on your personal preferences and biases. Nothing more.

The history lesson does not contribute to any greater point.

It indeed does, since libertarianism still holds true to classical liberalism as a political philosophy. It's not extreme left or right.

Libertarians tend to share more of their philosophy with conservatives. Often liberals and libertarians might find themselves on the same side of an argument for different reasons. This does not mean that they are the same.

Nor does it mean that we are extreme right. It means that on average we may have a slight preference for the right over the left. It doesn't mean we never agree with the left. Nor does it mean that we are extreme right. Jesus, it's called statistics, learn it.

Exactly.

Yes, at best, you can say we're right of center. That is not extreme right.

You yourself stated twice why it is.

No I didn't. You made logical fallacies and followed your own biases to get yourself to that outcome. Libertarianism is not a strict "right-wing" philosophy. We in fact differ on many accounts with the right wing. And we cannot follow the extremes of right wing philosophy which tends to adopt authoritative of fascist governments. Hence, libertarianism cannot be extreme right.

I don't think the 2d metric is useful. But again, you guys agree with the right far more than you do with the left. Your own words.

Just because you don't think a 2nd metric is necessary doesn't mean that it's not. You're trying to place people into preconceived boxes without allowing for proper identification of personal political philosophies or overall political platforms of a party.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Do you honestly not understand the implications of that? It's not saying we're extreme right wing because we may agree on average more with the "right" than the "left". You can ask a group of people if they prefer up or down more, and they may answer that they like up more. That doesn't make them extreme up. You're making a logical fallacy by trying to say because libertarians may agree with the right more than they are extreme right. It doesn't logically follow.

Them agreeing with the right more than the left is why I consider them right wing. The extreme part comes later. You are confusing two points and thinking that they are the same.

And there's the "Exactly!". What you consider. This designation of libertarians as "extreme right wing" is based on your personal preferences and biases. Nothing more.

Of course. Whether a person thinks something is extreme is largely an opinion. I see no problem there. But I think you misunderstood, you guys are not extreme conservatives, you guys are just extreme and happen to have more in common with conservatives, enough that you are essentially a conservative philosophy with a bit of weird mixed in ( only wanting private roads, etc). The extremism and the conservativism are separate functions that junction (I like rhyming )

It indeed does, since libertarianism still holds true to classical liberalism as a political philosophy. It's not extreme left or right.

Blah blah blah

Nor does it mean that we are extreme right. It means that on average we may have a slight preference for the right over the left. It doesn't mean we never agree with the left. Nor does it mean that we are extreme right. Jesus, it's called statistics, learn it.

Because something is similar does not mean it is the same. Like I posted, liberals and libertarians tend to agree on some social stances for completely different reasons, so any correlation there is moot.

Yes, at best, you can say we're right of center. That is not extreme right.

Weird stuff like wanting to get rid of paper money is pretty extreme. :shrug: But again, its an opinion thing.

No I didn't. You made logical fallacies and followed your own biases to get yourself to that outcome. Libertarianism is not a strict "right-wing" philosophy. We in fact differ on many accounts with the right wing. And we cannot follow the extremes of right wing philosophy which tends to adopt authoritative of fascist governments. Hence, libertarianism cannot be extreme right.

Ahh authoritative stuff. Thats why libertarians and liberals might find themselves on the same side of stuff, but for different reasons. That was part of my point. You cannot say you have much in common with liberals if you agree on stuff for completely different reasons.

Just because you don't think a 2nd metric is necessary doesn't mean that it's not. You're trying to place people into preconceived boxes without allowing for proper identification of personal political philosophies or overall political platforms of a party.

We will agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

No.

Time to vote the Democrats out of office. They've done enough damage over the last 60 years. Time to put them in the dustbin of history, where the trash can complain about the smell.

Then, if the replacement Republicans aren't smart enough to swing to the right where they have to be, replace them.

But the FIRST priority MUST be depowering the Messiah and derailing his evil agenda.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

We should take the term "liberal" back!

No, it's tainted. Let the socialists keep it.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

You yourself stated twice why it is [a strict right wing philosophy]

Then again, libertarianism is NOT a strict right wing philosophy.

Socialism and "liberalism" and "progressivism" and whatever name the anti-American left has coined to hide behind weed IS an extreme left wing philosophy, and as far as those irrational people are concerned, anyone that opposes anything they want is a "right wing extremist".

The reality is that libertarianism is at odds with many right-wing notions.

Right wingers LIKE certain forms of government control and interference. Drugs, for example, are to the right what guns are to the socialist left. But libertarians regard the possession of both drugs and guns by a responsible citizen as their constitutional right to choose.

Many self-proclaimed libertarians are confused and support the "right" of women to murder babies. That moves them well to the left of sane people.

Libertarians do believe that people who earn a living should not be taxed simply to transfer wealth to people who will not earn a living. In the eyes of the extreme left, this makes libertarians "right wing". The extreme left is wrong, the notion that people should not be robbed to support those who will not work is as American as Captain John Smith of Jamestown Colony.

The right wingers want people punished who burn American flags. The libertarians want people punished who burn American flags if they did not own that flag or if that little bit of arson leads to damage to someone else's property.

Libertarians do not oppose same-sex marriage, simply because it's not their business to tell others who they can't marry. The left supports same sex marriage for obscure emotional reasons no one can figure out. The right opposes same sex marriage because they're mired in traditions different from the lefties.

Libertarians can see easily that the government's deficit problem is a spending-too-much problem, not a taxes-are-too-low-on-the-rich problem.

 

[VanceMack]

Only if you wish to do so as a protest vote. I've been paying attention to US politics for over thirty years, and it is hard enough for any 3rd party candidate to win an election for dogcatcher, let alone Senator or even Congressman. Most of the "Independents" who are in the Congress are Indi in name only, they're actually affiliated with one of the Big Two one way or another.

I've voted Libertarian or Constitution Pty at times, but not with any expectation of winning: just because the two pragmatic choices were both so utterly morally repulsive to me that I could not bear to put my name to either.

A lot will have to change before any 3rd party can expect to wield real political power in the US.

Which is why I vote Libertarian. I wont not vote, and I have no illusions of winning...but I'll be damned if I cast my vote with any of the dem or rep slugs. Unfortunatley 3rd parties tend to self destruct when it comes to choosing candidates and platforms.