We need a centrist party (1 Viewer)

[independentusa]

What this country needs is not a Dem, GOP, lib, or independent party, it needs a party that takes in the people in the center. I have always thought that there are about thirty percent of the population that is the far right, about 15 percent on the far left and about 55 percent in the middle. We need a party made up of the 55 percent in the middle who can force real governance from our government. It would end the constant swing from the left to the right and stabilize our government. It would make things better for our businesses as they would know what the government is doing for the long run and great for people as they could plan their futures and their retirement without having to worry about the constant changes being made by the present parties.

 

[FieldTheorist]

What this country needs is not a Dem, GOP, lib, or independent party, it needs a party that takes in the people in the center.

Okay, I'll bite. What defines these "centrists"? What are their isssues? What policies do they unify around?

I have always thought that there are about thirty percent of the population that is the far right, about 15 percent on the far left and about 55 percent in the middle.

Any evidence for this statement?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Really? What is the "centrists" party position on the 2A, the mortgage interest deduction or public labor unions?

 

[joG]

What this country needs is not a Dem, GOP, lib, or independent party, it needs a party that takes in the people in the center. I have always thought that there are about thirty percent of the population that is the far right, about 15 percent on the far left and about 55 percent in the middle. We need a party made up of the 55 percent in the middle who can force real governance from our government. It would end the constant swing from the left to the right and stabilize our government. It would make things better for our businesses as they would know what the government is doing for the long run and great for people as they could plan their futures and their retirement without having to worry about the constant changes being made by the present parties.

You think? In the States both parties have people that are quite far left and others that are far right. Both parties have lots of centrists.. i don't really see that that requires correction. But hey! It's a free country and I won't hold it against you, should you found a party.

 

[independentusa]

First, the statement I made about who was on the right and left is what I thought from being interested in politics for over 50 years. But to answer your question, I have no proof. And as far as the exact policies, that is not as important as stabilizing policies so that they don't change every time one party or the other take control of our government. Look at what is happening right now. Eight years of ACA out and ACHA possibly in. Huge changes to take place in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which if made will change back if the Dems take control. First we go to more regs and now less regs and then possibly back to more if the Dems retake control. How is business supposed to make long term plans. Maybe that is why businesses in the USA are only interested in the next quarter and year. And how can someone plan retirement with the changes being made by the GOP presently in power with the chance that after the next election the Dems might change it back. We need more stability. With the present party set up do you actually think it will happen?

 

[VanceMack]

I think the term 'Centrist' is really just guilt free democrats.

I consider myself a Kennedy Democrat. Good luck in today's politics finding or even creating a party that will ethically stand. I became a card carrying Libertarian back in 2003. I stopped going to caucus meetings back in 2008 when I tried to suggest they abandon the drug platform and focus on the things that are truly relate able from a Libertarian perspective and to nominate serious candidates and was told I wasnt a 'real' Libertarian. This last election may well have tolled the death knell for my membership in that party.

The political parties all have one thing in common. They suck.

 

[ttwtt78640]

First, the statement I made about who was on the right and left is what I thought from being interested in politics for over 50 years. But to answer your question, I have no proof. And as far as the exact policies, that is not as important as stabilizing policies so that they don't change every time one party or the other take control of our government. Look at what is happening right now. Eight years of ACA out and ACHA possibly in. Huge changes to take place in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which if made will change back if the Dems take control. First we go to more regs and now less regs and then possibly back to more if the Dems retake control. How is business supposed to make long term plans. Maybe that is why businesses in the USA are only interested in the next quarter and year. And how can someone plan retirement with the changes being made by the GOP presently in power with the chance that after the next election the Dems might change it back. We need more stability. With the present party set up do you actually think it will happen?

Are you saying that the "centrist" party platform is for no change? If elected, as your "centrist" candidate then I promise never to propose changes and to vote against (veto?) any changes at all.

 

[independentusa]

No, It means you change as things become necessary by circumstances, but you don't have the absolute breaks we have been seeing the past few years. And the policies should reflect not only the needs of the country, but also more the will of the majority, rather than he who can put up the most money and buy the party. Now I am not against gun ownership at all, but a majority of people, even of gun owners, want universal background checks. It will never happen because the far right has so much control over the GOP that they will never allow such a bill to be passed. And the far left wants to ban guns altogether which would violate the constitution and they control the present Dems. So with the push from both ends of the spectrum what we get is crazies allowed to own guns.

 

[Ontologuy]

What this country needs is not a Dem, GOP, lib, or independent party, it needs a party that takes in the people in the center. I have always thought that there are about thirty percent of the population that is the far right, about 15 percent on the far left and about 55 percent in the middle. We need a party made up of the 55 percent in the middle who can force real governance from our government. It would end the constant swing from the left to the right and stabilize our government. It would make things better for our businesses as they would know what the government is doing for the long run and great for people as they could plan their futures and their retirement without having to worry about the constant changes being made by the present parties.

I have posted throughout the years of the benefits of a centrist party.

I have found that actively it's really about 10% left-wing Democrats and 10% right-wing Republicans. But these 20% own the media megaphones, and thus they suck in votes from the great majority who are thus forced to choose between the lesser of two evils.

The great majority is centrist, and quite a number of them are just too jaded to be interested after decades of disgust with left-wing Democrats and right-wing Republicans.

Even after factoring out the many millions with IQs too low to participate, we're still left with about two-thirds of Americans who could be happy with a centrist, pragmatic problem-solving presence in government.

The goal of governing in the U.S. must be to serve Americans, to create constitutionally acceptable conditions for promoting the general economic welfare of American citizens, and to provide for the common defense of American citizens.

The left-wing Democrats have lost sight of this, being run by Multi-Cultural Internationalists as they are. They have a compulsion to strengthen the economics of other nations' people at the economic expense of American citizens.

The right-wing Republicans have also lost sight of this, being run by Corporate Global Expansionists as they are. The have a compulsion to strengthen international corporate conglomerates, again, at the economic expense of American citizens.

So it's not surprising that homelessness is currently at an all-time high, that poverty continues to grow as the middle-class shrinks in America, as the buying power of the average income continues to decrease. Yet the outgoing (left-wing Democrat) President says all was rosy when he left .. and the incoming (right-wing Republican) President says he'll fix everything but is finding out the non-centrist Congress won't let him ... . Business as usual in left-v.-right America.

The majority of Americans would stand behind a centrist party. Sure, centrists wouldn't be as media glitzy and titillating as leftists and rightists. But I think most Americans are tired of the kind of headlines made by the likes of the Hillary Clintons and Donald trumps they're so tired of enduring.

Life in all aspects of America would be saner if a centrist party was in charge.

That's why I supported the Powerful American Political Alliance. It really is a request for centrist sanity.

 

[Henrin]

Really? What is the "centrists" party position on the 2A, the mortgage interest deduction or public labor unions?

A better question would be what would their views be once the country moves in one direction or another. The idea seems more like a slow moving train slowly but surely going where the tide leads. Going off the cliff fast or slow doesn't much matter as you're be dead on impact regardless.

 

[Helix]

i'll agree that only having two choices sucks. addressing our binary political system is going to be a problem, though, because it's basically encoded into the nation's DNA.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No, It means you change as things become necessary by circumstances, but you don't have the absolute breaks we have been seeing the past few years. And the policies should reflect not only the needs of the country, but also more the will of the majority, rather than he who can put up the most money and buy the party. Now I am not against gun ownership at all, but a majority of people, even of gun owners, want universal background checks. It will never happen because the far right has so much control over the GOP that they will never allow such a bill to be passed. And the far left wants to ban guns altogether which would violate the constitution and they control the present Dems. So with the push from both ends of the spectrum what we get is crazies allowed to own guns.

There is no way to implement "universal" background checks without a "universal" ID (or a dated police permission slip) containing one's 2A status, a complete (national?) gun registration system or pretending that a mandate for all "legal" private gun transfers (all other transfers are then federal crimes?) to use (or become?) a FFL is going to work.

What is your "centrist" universal background check proposal and how do you know who "legally" bought, sold, rented, loaned or borrowed a given gun and when?

 

[independentusa]

Actually the universal ID would be a good idea. You could use it for universal background checks for sure but there is something better you could use it for. It would make getting illegals to leave the country much easier. All you would need is the ID and national thumb print data base. then if anyone wants a job, rent or buy a house or place to live, have a bank account, get a driver's license, or just about anything you would have to show your id and put your thumb on a print reader and if they matched, you could do all i have mentioned. If not, you couldn't. Anyone violating the laws by allowing any of the things I mentioned would be imprisoned. So with no job, and no place to live, all the illegals would leave of their own accord. Simple and cheap.

 

[Mak Marceau]

It's a democracy, so how could it be possible that the leaders don't represent the people? The people is at the far right in my book: They don't care about anything but their wealth.