Need for Third Party Reaches New High

Need for Third Party Reaches New High

Posted in the Junction City Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Third Party Solution

Junction City, KS

#1 Oct 12, 2013
"There's one thing that people in both parties can agree on: a third party is needed, a new Gallup poll shows.

Sixty percent of Americans said a third party is needed to represent their interests, which is the highest Gallup has measured in the 10-year history of posing the question. Only 26 percent of those surveyed believe the Democratic and Republican parties do good enough job representing Americans.

Democrats and Republicans appeared to equally see the need for having a third party. About half of the Democrats and half of the Republicans surveyed held that view."

http://politix.topix.com/homepage/8387-poll-m...

"In U.S., Perceived Need for Third Party Reaches New High

(Only)Twenty-six percent believe Democratic and Republican parties do adequate job

PRINCETON, NJ -- Amid the government shutdown, 60% of Americans say the Democratic and Republicans parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. That is the highest Gallup has measured in the 10-year history of this question. A new low of 26% believe the two major parties adequately represent Americans."

"Republicans, Democrats Equally Likely to See Need for Third Party

Republicans (52%) and Democrats (49%) are similar in their perceptions that a third party is needed. In fact, this marks the first time that a majority of either party's supporters have said a third party is needed."

"Given the inability of the Republican and Democratic parties to agree on the most basic of government functions -- passing an annual budget to pay for federal programs -- it is perhaps not surprising that the percentage of Americans who believe a third party is needed has never been higher."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perceived-n...
transplant

Junction City, KS

#2 Oct 12, 2013
The government of the United Kingdom has 8 political parties represented in the House of Commons and the European Parliament. Thatís the biggest reason why they are able to smoothly run their government without this bullsht, 50/50 split.

Conservative and Unionist Party
Liberal Democrats Party
Labour Party
Democratic Unionist Party
Scottish National Party
Sinn Fein
Plaid Cymru Party of Wales
Green Party of England and Wales

Represented only in the European Parliament and awaiting admission into the UK House of Commons are:

Social Democrat and Labor Party
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
Respect Party

There are also the UK Independence Party; the Ulster Unionist Party; the British National Party; which are all represented in the European Parliament.

There are 14 represented political parties, each with itís own set of priorities BUT each willing to negotiate and work together for the common good.

The entire United Kingdom is smaller than the state of Oregon and has a population the size of California and Texas combined.

It's amazing that the people of the US think they cab efficiently and effectively run a country of nearly 314 Million people on a two party system.

No wonder the US political system is so screwed up.
Washington

Junction City, KS

#3 Oct 12, 2013
"Third Party?" Such folly! Any political party, no matter the intent or origin, will ultimately exist only to serve itself, at the expense of our citizens, and our government.

Even a fire burning in a fireplace, if left unchecked, will end up burning down the house it was meant to warm.

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/junction-city...
K State Grad

Paducah, KY

#4 Oct 13, 2013
transplant wrote:
The government of the United Kingdom has 8 political parties represented in the House of Commons and the European Parliament. Thatís the biggest reason why they are able to smoothly run their government without this bullsht, 50/50 split.
Conservative and Unionist Party
Liberal Democrats Party
Labour Party
Democratic Unionist Party
Scottish National Party
Sinn Fein
Plaid Cymru Party of Wales
Green Party of England and Wales
Represented only in the European Parliament and awaiting admission into the UK House of Commons are:
Social Democrat and Labor Party
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
Respect Party
There are also the UK Independence Party; the Ulster Unionist Party; the British National Party; which are all represented in the European Parliament.
There are 14 represented political parties, each with itís own set of priorities BUT each willing to negotiate and work together for the common good.
The entire United Kingdom is smaller than the state of Oregon and has a population the size of California and Texas combined.
It's amazing that the people of the US think they cab efficiently and effectively run a country of nearly 314 Million people on a two party system.
No wonder the US political system is so screwed up.
Parliamentary systems with a multitude of parties do not always work so well. Examples: Italy. The Italians are famous for political dysfunction. Israel: The Israelis have an all powerful one-house parliament and about 20 parties. Because no party has a majority, the two largest parties (which hate each other's guts) have to form coaltion governments with the small parties from the far fringes. As a result the tiny number of extremists get a far bigger say in the running of the country than they would in a smoothly functioning two party system.
smh

Junction City, KS

#5 Oct 13, 2013
K State Grad wrote:
<quoted text>
Parliamentary systems with a multitude of parties do not always work so well. Examples: Italy. The Italians are famous for political dysfunction. Israel: The Israelis have an all powerful one-house parliament and about 20 parties. Because no party has a majority, the two largest parties (which hate each other's guts) have to form coaltion governments with the small parties from the far fringes. As a result the tiny number of extremists get a far bigger say in the running of the country than they would in a smoothly functioning two party system.
With the current turmoil in DC and the constant gridlock do you consider the US system of government a smoothly functioning two party system?
outsider

Junction City, KS

#6 Oct 13, 2013
smh wrote:
<quoted text>
With the current turmoil in DC and the constant gridlock do you consider the US system of government a smoothly functioning two party system?
Not at all , right now. This ship will right itself , as it has countless times before. Left and right radicals will lose steam as both parties move towards the center. In time , things will work themselves back from dysfunction to pragmatic productivity . Social change and demographics will be the driving forces.
K State Grad

Paducah, KY

#7 Oct 14, 2013
outsider wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all , right now. This ship will right itself , as it has countless times before. Left and right radicals will lose steam as both parties move towards the center. In time , things will work themselves back from dysfunction to pragmatic productivity . Social change and demographics will be the driving forces.
Right now our two party sytem is not working. The moderate elements of both parties might move toward the center, but I don't see much evidence or chance of that happening.

To get an idea of what might be happening look to history - the 1850s. I think the Republican Party is going the way of the Whigs. It is dying. When it does another party will arise to take its place. For time it may be a confusion of two or more remnant parties, just like happened with the Whigs before the Republicans got it together in 1860. The final Republican bustup may look something like the breakup of the Democrats in 1860, too. With the rise of a Center Party from the moderate wing of the Republicans, the Tea Party radicals will become a fringe third party for a while then go the route of all third parties. Their radical libertarian and Christian Reconstrutionist elements will go back to the impotent lunatic fringes of politics and the followers will drift into the rank and file of the two major parties. The Democrats could also see a shift in following as the "Blue Dog" conservative Democrats leave and join the new Center Party.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#8 Oct 14, 2013
smh wrote:
<quoted text>
With the current turmoil in DC and the constant gridlock do you consider the US system of government a smoothly functioning two party system?
It would be if people who are not crazy controlled the republican Party.
K State Grad

Eddyville, KY

#9 Oct 15, 2013
The Kangaroo wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be if people who are not crazy controlled the republican Party.
The Democrats are somewhat to blame for the polarization, too. A few years ago the Democratic party's left wing pretty much froze its moderate "Blue Dog" wing out of the nominating and policy making process, just like the right wing seized control of the Republicans. That is basically how the South went from being Democratic to Republican. The conservative (and I use that word in its old definition, not the new one)"Blue Dog" Democrats were pushed out, so they drifted into the Republicans' camp. In most places it was a generational thing, too. The Democratic old guard at the local level held on to power too long. The old local Democratic Boss Hoggs didn't make room for the generation that is now about 50-65 years old when they were in their 20s, so they went across the street to the Republicans. And the Democrats still have that problem in the South and other rural areas. Their liberal wing is still too far left for most people in rural areas to accept, and it isn't doing much to accommodate them.
The Professor

Manhattan, KS

#10 Oct 15, 2013
K State Grad, you make a good about about the Democratic side of things. For example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zell_Miller

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#11 Oct 15, 2013
K State Grad wrote:
<quoted text>
The Democrats are somewhat to blame for the polarization, too. A few years ago the Democratic party's left wing pretty much froze its moderate "Blue Dog" wing out of the nominating and policy making process, just like the right wing seized control of the Republicans. That is basically how the South went from being Democratic to Republican. The conservative (and I use that word in its old definition, not the new one)"Blue Dog" Democrats were pushed out, so they drifted into the Republicans' camp. In most places it was a generational thing, too. The Democratic old guard at the local level held on to power too long. The old local Democratic Boss Hoggs didn't make room for the generation that is now about 50-65 years old when they were in their 20s, so they went across the street to the Republicans. And the Democrats still have that problem in the South and other rural areas. Their liberal wing is still too far left for most people in rural areas to accept, and it isn't doing much to accommodate them.
That's fair enough. I've supported Blue Dogs and related conservadems like the most recent previous two Democrsatic Presidents myself. I can accept moderation on economic and foreign policy issues. Rolling back the clock on human progress, though, is a no go.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#12 Oct 15, 2013
The Professor wrote:
K State Grad, you make a good about about the Democratic side of things. For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zell_Miller
I used to like Miller, but his going for Bush over Kerry was bad - he was used as a hatchetman just like John Connally was. And his views on the hot button social issues are at best described as unenlightened.

It's funny: in Texas, we used to have a lot of right-wingers in the Democratic Party. By now, most of 'em have died or switched. I was friends with one who was pretty far right of center but he hated most rich people even more than leftys do. He said they ought to have a big party for 'em at the country club and then throw a bomb in the room. No lie.
You Idiot

Junction City, KS

#13 Oct 15, 2013
The Professor wrote:
K State Grad, you make a good about about the Democratic side of things. For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zell_Miller
Make a good WHAT? Professors don't write like that, except on Gilligan's Island.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#14 Oct 15, 2013
You Idiot wrote:
<quoted text>
Make a good WHAT? Professors don't write like that, except on Gilligan's Island.
See? Real professors get colleagues to proofread - professional documents, that is. Topix is as far away from that as Jerry is to a decent human being. If this is his diversion, leave him be. At least his posts are interesting at times.
The Professor

Manhattan, KS

#15 Oct 15, 2013
True. I meant to say, "K State Grad, you make a good point about the Democratic side of things."

Apparently, Jerry/Bob isn't happy unless someone is wallowing in the same hatred he is. Ho hum.

Meanwhile... back on topic... I thought this was a pretty interesting point:

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/junction-city...

Think about it: What exactly is the purpose of a political party? It's supposed to bring together people who share the same or similar views on things. I think 100, 150 years ago, this was important. Candidates weren't able to travel as far, or as frequently. It was easier at the ballot box to just vote for whomever was on your team.

Today, with highways, jet travel, and the Internet, do we really need a political party to tell us what a candidate believes? Wouldn't YouTube and blogs and text messages accomplish that, almost instantaneously?

I think "Washington" is on to something. We don't need a third party--we need independent, moderate individuals who can think for themselves.

Since: Sep 11

Andover, KS

#16 Oct 15, 2013
The Professor wrote:
True. I meant to say, "K State Grad, you make a good point about the Democratic side of things."
Apparently, Jerry/Bob isn't happy unless someone is wallowing in the same hatred he is. Ho hum.
Meanwhile... back on topic... I thought this was a pretty interesting point:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/junction-city...
Think about it: What exactly is the purpose of a political party? It's supposed to bring together people who share the same or similar views on things. I think 100, 150 years ago, this was important. Candidates weren't able to travel as far, or as frequently. It was easier at the ballot box to just vote for whomever was on your team.
Today, with highways, jet travel, and the Internet, do we really need a political party to tell us what a candidate believes? Wouldn't YouTube and blogs and text messages accomplish that, almost instantaneously?
I think "Washington" is on to something. We don't need a third party--we need independent, moderate individuals who can think for themselves.
Amen. Or Hear, hear, whichever suits you
K State Grad

Eddyville, KY

#17 Oct 15, 2013
The Professor wrote:
I think "Washington" is on to something. We don't need a third party--we need independent, moderate individuals who can think for themselves.
The real problem, the root of all evil, in American politics is money. In most other countries they do not spend the huge amounts on election campaigns that we do. With the Citizens United decision, the Supreme Court opened our elections up to a "the best politcians money can buy" system. And let's face it, one half of all Americans have an IQ of 100 or below. They are influenced by the snazziest advertisement or the one that is repeated over and over and over the most times.
George Carlin

Junction City, KS

#18 Oct 16, 2013
K State Grad wrote:
<quoted text>
And let's face it, one half of all Americans have an IQ of 100 or below.
" The average person is pretty f*cking stupid . Think about it.... HALF of the population is more stupid than that ! "

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#19 Oct 19, 2013
K State Grad wrote:
<quoted text>
The real problem, the root of all evil, in American politics is money. In most other countries they do not spend the huge amounts on election campaigns that we do. With the Citizens United decision, the Supreme Court opened our elections up to a "the best politcians money can buy" system. And let's face it, one half of all Americans have an IQ of 100 or below. They are influenced by the snazziest advertisement or the one that is repeated over and over and over the most times.
Have you ever seen Mitch McConnell's ad from when he was first elected to the Senate, beating incumbent Democrat Walter "Dee" Huddelston? It featured trackers with hound dogs searching for Huddleston as if he was an escaped prisoner. As many members of Congress miss a lot of votes, it was misleading. His vote-missing was hardly remarkable. Yet it resonated with voters, who, then as now, distrust Washington politicians. McConnell won narrowly.
K State Grad

Paducah, KY

#20 Oct 20, 2013
The Kangaroo wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you ever seen Mitch McConnell's ad from when he was first elected to the Senate, beating incumbent Democrat Walter "Dee" Huddelston? It featured trackers with hound dogs searching for Huddleston as if he was an escaped prisoner. As many members of Congress miss a lot of votes, it was misleading. His vote-missing was hardly remarkable. Yet it resonated with voters, who, then as now, distrust Washington politicians. McConnell won narrowly.
Oh, yes. But the bloodhound ads were mild compared to the "Ditch Mitch" blitz that the Tea Partier Matt Bevin is waging in the Republican primary. The Tea Party seems to have fixated on the Olmsted Lock and Dam earmarked funding, and is using it to attack McConnell in the eastern coal mining counties. It is, after all, in the other end of the state. Thus McConnell is "doing nothing for coal or eastern Kentucky." They don't mention that by far the largest single item, in both tonnage and money value that passes through the two 100-year old locks that it will replace is coal from eastern Kentucky. The Teabaggers know that the majority of people in the hills are too dumb to look far enough afield to see that. Same way that the western Kentucky Teabaggers were when the protested the stimulus money for the Eggner's Ferry Bridge over Tennessee River / Kentucky Lake. "A barge tow hit it and knock it down! Ha! Alarmist nonsense!" Then...

http://matchbin-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/publi...

And you know what? The local Teabaggers didn't learn a damn thing from the DELTA MARINER hit!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Junction City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The proposed new JCHS building (Feb '17) 7 hr Tired Taxpayer 70
Anyone know Dustin? Hes a fedex driver? 17 hr bluebonnets85 1
Group Homes for "troubled teens" (May '12) Wed LikeBoo 8
JC's Very Own soxxyladies Sep 19 soxxyladies 1
Keep a Word -- Drop a Word Game (Mar '10) Sep 15 Hatti_Hollerand 5,858
Who Do You Support For Kansas Governor In 2018 Sep 15 you are childish 9
One Nice Thing About Junction City Sep 13 JCKS Blues 17

Junction City Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Junction City Mortgages