StubbornFacts
Stubborn Facts
Stubborn Facts

Navigation

User login

Subscribe via RSS

Resources

The latest from our partner, the PoliGazette

Blog Roll

Work within the system

Submitted by Simon on Wed, 01/30/2008 - 7:12pm

Ruth Anne says:

A little reminder: Prior to Barry Goldwater's revolution within the party, the party had a different flavor. Reagan continued that trend and some Reagan democrats stayed.

Steve Forbes ran on tax reform and helped make that an issue in the party.

Tom Tancredo was a one-issue guy: and he beamed at one of the debates that "they're all trying to out-Tancredo Tancredo" in reference to the border-tightening one upmanship.

Also this season, Ron Paul, within the context of the existing party, got several chances to advance fiscal conservatism, making government smaller and less intrusive in citizen's lives and a humble foreign policy. He advanced the libertarian wing of the party a good deal.

Pat Buchanan, on the other hand, left the party and went off into irrelevance and a dismal showing in the--what was it?--Constitution Party.

You advance your ideas by working within your party for change. You convince enough people [and it's mathematically easier to win primaries in a party than as a third party] because of the soundness of your ideas and selling it to the voters who show up.

I'm not sure that Forbes made tax reform an issue beyond his own view of how it should be done (it goes back at least to Goldwater and probably beyond) but beyond that, it can't be repeated often enough. Third parties don't work in America unless they aim to (and do) quickly and permanently displace the second party.

Third parties don't succeed

Third parties don't succeed at winning elections for themselves. They quite often "work" in terms of swaying elections, however, as the last two decades shows quite clearly.

Although they succeed in

Although they succeed in swaying elections against the interests of the people who are (sincerely) backing the third party. Thus Nader gave his supporters Bush and Perot gave his supporters Clinton.

You bet. Pointing this out

You bet. Pointing this out to third-party supporters will get you nowhere, of course. :-)

I think people who support a

I think people who support a third party though are taking a longer view-thinking that even if they throw the election to the party that is furthest from their ideology, then eventually the party that was their natural base will move toward their preferred position.

I think third parties form when you get a mixture of people like that (I think Nader himself expressed that this was his motivation in 2000, didn't he?), along with those who feel that voting is some sort of exercise of conscience (so they have to find a choice they can pick without reservations), plus naive (mostly young) voters who actually don't realize that the third party doesn't have a chance.

But is that idea any

But is that idea any different to the one I expressed doubt about here?

Recent comments

Advertisements
StubbornFacts.us does not endorse the content of any advertisement

Featured Movie

Syndicate

Syndicate content

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 1 guest online.