The problem is, you can't just say "now there are two more parties." All the money that the RNC and DNC have will make it impossible for the little guys to ever make a real difference. You need quality candidates for the new parties and some rich folks backing them to ever make a difference. God Bless America.

(01-21-2016 09:42 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 04:16 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  The parties have drifted apart enough that we need another party, a centrist one. Usually each party's candidates will claim to be more centrist during the election, to get some independent votes, and then regress back to their real ideas when elected. I don't even see that now. They're too far apart to even claim centrism. You either go farther left, or farther right, then you've had to before. Anyway, that's what it looks like to me.

Need 2 more parties. Conservative, Libertarian, Moderate, Liberal. Force congress to form alliances with other parties based on ideology instead of party.

I'd give my left nut to see Gary Johnson included on the debate stage, regardless of election result. Well thought-out, common sense answers. No fiery class warfare rambling or calling everyone a "loser" or mocking reporters' disabilities.

(01-22-2016 08:37 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 09:42 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 04:16 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  The parties have drifted apart enough that we need another party, a centrist one. Usually each party's candidates will claim to be more centrist during the election, to get some independent votes, and then regress back to their real ideas when elected. I don't even see that now. They're too far apart to even claim centrism. You either go farther left, or farther right, then you've had to before. Anyway, that's what it looks like to me.

Need 2 more parties. Conservative, Libertarian, Moderate, Liberal. Force congress to form alliances with other parties based on ideology instead of party.

I'd give my left nut to see Gary Johnson included on the debate stage, regardless of election result. Well thought-out, common sense answers. No fiery class warfare rambling or calling everyone a "loser" or mocking reporters' disabilities.

The libertarians need a strong candidate. Johnson, like Rand Paul, comes across as weak and someone like Trump eats those types for breakfast. I would certainly consider voting libertarian depending on the GOP candidate if they could find someone that could win. Johnson ain't that guy.

(01-22-2016 08:31 AM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  The problem is, you can't just say "now there are two more parties." All the money that the RNC and DNC have will make it impossible for the little guys to ever make a real difference. You need quality candidates for the new parties and some rich folks backing them to ever make a difference. God Bless America.

The two party system makes us a lot more governable that most countries. Europeans have a mess with their multi-party system. Israel is hostage to one issue extremist parties because of their system.

Now Britain basically has a 3 party system. That isn't too bad. Canada has a 3 party system + the Quebec independence party.

Of course Britain's parties are like our Socialists, Democrats and the Democrats of the 50s. Canada's NDP is very socialist, their liberals are like leftist Democrats and their conservatives are like Rockefeller Republicans.

(01-22-2016 08:52 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(01-22-2016 08:37 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 09:42 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(01-21-2016 04:16 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  The parties have drifted apart enough that we need another party, a centrist one. Usually each party's candidates will claim to be more centrist during the election, to get some independent votes, and then regress back to their real ideas when elected. I don't even see that now. They're too far apart to even claim centrism. You either go farther left, or farther right, then you've had to before. Anyway, that's what it looks like to me.

Need 2 more parties. Conservative, Libertarian, Moderate, Liberal. Force congress to form alliances with other parties based on ideology instead of party.

I'd give my left nut to see Gary Johnson included on the debate stage, regardless of election result. Well thought-out, common sense answers. No fiery class warfare rambling or calling everyone a "loser" or mocking reporters' disabilities.

The libertarians need a strong candidate. Johnson, like Rand Paul, comes across as weak and someone like Trump eats those types for breakfast. I would certainly consider voting libertarian depending on the GOP candidate if they could find someone that could win. Johnson ain't that guy.

It's true that Johnson is too mild-mannered against the likes of Trump's and Sanders' bravado. He'd be rather dry and avoid soundbite cliches and zingers, thereby turning off viewers salivating for WWF type bouts. But where he'd "lose" in pure volume, he'd "win" in common sense answers and rebuttals to Trump/Sanders' wildest statements.

What Johnson also brings to the LP - as opposed to most of his LP predecessors - is a proven track record of governance. A successful two-term governor of NM who enjoyed solid approval ratings (in a state that leans blue, no less). Despite many people's stereotypes of libertarians, no fire departments or town libraries were gutted, no law of the jungle anarchy in the streets of Albuquerque.