A New National Political Party is Needed

Set aside any Obama euphoria you feel. The other of import news is that third-party presidential campaigners had a suffering screening this year, totaling just over one percentage of the expansive sum with 1.5 million ballots nationwide, compared to some 123 million ballots for Barack Obama and Toilet McCain.

It couldn't be clearer that Americans are not willing to voice their political discontentment by vote for third-party presidential candidates. The two-party duopoly and plutocracy is completely dominant. The United States misses the political competition that bes in other western democracies. Without existent political competition there is deficient political choice.

A cardinal job is that for many years, 3rd political parties have got not offered presidential campaigners that gaining control the attending and committedness of even a modest fraction of Americans, unlike Toilet Ross Perot (8.4 percentage in 1996 and 18.9 percentage in 1992), and John Sherwood Anderson (6.6 percentage in 1980).

This year, among the four most important third-party presidential candidates, Ralph Nader without a national political party did the best with 685,426 ballots or 0.54 percentage of the expansive sum (a small better than in 2004 with 0.4 percentage but much worse than in 2000 running play as a Green Party campaigner with 2.7 percent). He was followed by British Shilling Barr the Libertarian Party campaigner with 503,981 ballots or 0.4 percentage of the sum (typical of all Libertarian campaigners in recent elections, including Bokkos Alice Paul in 1988), followed by Chow James Baldwin of the Fundamental Law Party with just 181,266 ballots or 0.1 percent, and then Artemis McKinney of the Green Party with lone 148,546 ballots or 0.1 percent.

Showing the job of ballot access, engineered by the two major parties, is that there were only 15 states where all four were on the ballot. In all but one, Nader received more than ballots than the other three third-party candidates. In four states only one of the four campaigners was on the ballot; in one state none of them were (Oklahoma).

Nader's best state was Golden State with 81,434 votes, as it was for McKinney's with 28,624 votes. James Baldwin was not on the ballot there. Alan Keyes received 30,787 ballots in California. Barr's best state was Lone-Star State with 56,398 votes. None of the other three were on the ballot there. In his place state of Empire State Of The South where he had been a Representative Barr received 28,420 ballots (and none of the other three were on the ballot). Baldwin's best state was Wolverine State with 14, 973 votes. Nader was not on the ballot there.

In unit of ammunition numbers, Barack Obama raised $639 million or about $10 per vote, and Toilet McCain raised $360 million or $6 per vote, compared to Ralph Nader with $4 million and $6 per vote, British Shilling Barr with about $1 million or $2 per vote, and Artemis McKinney with lone about $118,000 or less than $1 per vote. Money matters, but the ability of the two-party duopoly to maintain third-party presidential campaigners out of nationally televised arguments substances more for mass media attention, money and votes.

It must also be noted that there were infinite congressional races with third-party and independent candidates, but none were able to win office, with lone a very few stretch the 20 percentage level. That third-party candidates can win local authorities business offices intends small because political political party association at that degree is overshadowed by personal qualifications.

I state that current third-party activistics should acknowledge defeat, close down their unsuccessful parties, and move on. Unlike so much of American history, current third-parties no longer play a important function in American political relation or even in affecting public policies. They have got shown their inability to matter.

We necessitate a new, vivacious political political political party that could convey many billions of American dissidents, progressive tenses and conservatives, and especially chronic non-voters, together behind a relatively simple party platform focused on structural, authorities system reforms (not merely political change). Examples include: replacing the Electoral College with the popular ballot for president, restoring the balance between United States United States Congress and the presidency, eliminating the corrupting influence of particular involvement money from politics, preventing the president to utilize sign language statements to invalidate laws passed by Congress.

What would unify people is a shared precedence for revitalizing American democracy. It should position itself as a populist option and opposition to the two-party plutocracy. It should define itself as against the corporate and other particular involvements on the left and right that usage money to corrupt our political system. Possible names: Patriotic Party, United Party or National Party. With Seth Thomas Thomas Jefferson as its Negro spiritual laminitis it should seek the political revolution he said was needed periodically.

Here is what helps. Despite considerable enthusiasm for Barack Obama, there is widespread sadness with both the Democratic and Republican Parties. One indicant is that so electors register as independents. Asset there have always been a chorus of negative positions about the two-party system. In one matter-of-fact sense this is the ideal clip to make a new party. Why? Because of the unbelievable loss of stature of the Republican Party. Why not visualize a new political party that could replace the Republican Party on the national phase and supply a crisp option to the Democratic Party? In other words, we don't necessitate a new 3rd political political party as much as we necessitate a new major party.