New "Forward" Party: a third party in America that might actually work?

[Bomb#20]

Looking at that list of parties you do not seem to have any fun parties.
You sceptics need to get creative.
For decades the UK had the Monster Raving Loony Party with Lord Screaming Sutch as its head.
In Australia we have had the Party, Party Party and the Sun Ripened Tomato Party.

Think a bold and catchy name.

Rhinoceros Party of Canada

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

There are LOTS of parties in the US, always referred to as 'third parties' basically because who could keep track of all the parties and which are active, which are viable, which are relevant, etc. Here's the wiki:

List of political parties in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Looking at that list of parties you do not seem to have any fun parties.
You sceptics need to get creative.
For decades the UK had the Monster Raving Loony Party with Lord Screaming Sutch as its head.
In Australia we have had the Party, Party Party and the Sun Ripened Tomato Party.

Think a bold and catchy name.

In the U.S., the GOP has become the Monster Raving Loony Party.

 

[Toni]

There are LOTS of parties in the US, always referred to as 'third parties' basically because who could keep track of all the parties and which are active, which are viable, which are relevant, etc. Here's the wiki:

List of political parties in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Looking at that list of parties you do not seem to have any fun parties.
You sceptics need to get creative.
For decades the UK had the Monster Raving Loony Party with Lord Screaming Sutch as its head.
In Australia we have had the Party, Party Party and the Sun Ripened Tomato Party.

Think a bold and catchy name.

In the U.S., the GOP has become the Monster Raving Loony Party.

It has indeed.

 

[Terrell]

Third parties don't work in the U.S. They at most end up being a spoiler & resented by whichever party they more closely align with. We'd need some form of parlimentary system with a proportional representation for any party that break a minimum percentage for there to be a viable 3rd party.

 

[Elixir]

Third parties don't work in the U.S. They at most end up being a spoiler & resented by whichever party they more closely align with. We'd need some form of parlimentary system with a proportional representation for any party that break a minimum percentage for there to be a viable 3rd party.

The model is the "Tea Party". Now they own the GOP.

 

[Rhea]

I don’t have any respect for a “new” party that wants to parachute in to the CEO spot.

Grassroots. Local offices. County offices. State offices.

THEN you can make a federal plan. Until then, it’s just vanity and it destroys your own aims.

 

[Bronzeage]

For all practical purposes, there's no such thing as a third party. Any political system which has an executive elected by a general vote will evolve into a two party system.

That is not true. The real reason why third parties are not viable is the "first past the post" system with single member districts in state legislatures and House of Representatives. A proportional system, where a minor party would get the seats commensurate with their share of votes would make minor parties viable, even if they would not (at least not regularly) challenge for chief executive.

This system would be a great improvement over what we have now, but also over the parliamentary system. In a parliamentary system, the executive is elected by the legislative. That means the government can ram through everything they want as long as the legislators stay on board. If the government fails in passing a major law, the government usually collapses.
On the other hand in the US, president is independently elected, but the chambers of the Congress are controlled by either his party or the other one. If he does not control both chambers, there can be paralysis.

Enter proportional representation in the House, with independently elected president (push through popular vote since we are reforming the system). It would be very unlikely under that system that either party would control the House outright. So the president is unlikely to have his party control the House - he will have to deal with minor parties to pass legislation or get stuff approved - but neither will one party be able to block everything.
There will be a knock-on effect. The parties will now be viable to have actual power and influence and voting for them in House elections will no longer be a wasted vote. So they will get more support, more money and could challenge things like Senate seats, governorships and - if both parties put forward unpopular candidates like they did in 2016 - even the presidency.

In US politics, anyone who can't find a comfortable seat in either of the main parties is relegated to the "I'd rather be right than exercise any influence over anything" party.

That is true. But it has to do with the medieval FPTP/single member district system rather than electing the president independently.

Proportional representation would not make a difference in a system with an executive elected by general vote. Political grid lock is just as likely, leading larger parties to form alliances with smaller, but more extreme parties. This leads to what we see in Israel, where large parties form an alliance with a small conservative religious party who in return demands traffic lights be turned off on the Sabbath.

There can only be one executive, so we won't see President who is 46% Democrat, 32% Republican, 8% Green, and 4% Libertarian.

 

[Derec]

Proportional representation would not make a difference in a system with an executive elected by general vote.

I disagree.

This leads to what we see in Israel, where large parties form an alliance with a small conservative religious party who in return demands traffic lights be turned off on the Sabbath.

Wrong. Israel has a parliamentary system, with the prime minister elected by the Knesset. That problem could be avoided I think by electing the executive independently.

There can only be one executive, so we won't see President who is 46% Democrat, 32% Republican, 8% Green, and 4% Libertarian.

Of course not. But a proportional legislature would mean that smaller parties would be established in the political landscape. House could well be 10% Libertarian and 12% Green or whatever.
That means that say under Biden you neither have a Dem nor GOP majority in the House. Neither a rubber stamp nor a blockade.
And unlike a parliamentary system, you do not need a coalition to form the executive, so the minor parties would have no reason to be bound to either of the major parties.

 

[Derec]

The model is the "Tea Party". Now they own the GOP.

And DSA is trying to do the same with the Dems.

 

[Derec]

In the U.S., the GOP has become the Monster Raving Loony Party.

Not the "Standing at the Back Dressed Stupidly and Looking Stupid Party"?

 

[Hermit]

Do you really think that there is a secret group of millions of Americans who are left of AOC and Bush?

I don't. That only means there is nobody to the left of AOC and Bush. It does not mean there is a political left in the US. The leftmost limit of the US's political spectrum is somewhat right right of centre. This is why you have nightmarishly expensive health and tertiary education costs, mostly paid for by individual consumers rather than government funds. Look at the Nordic countries (and to a lesser degree Australia, New Zealand and some European countries) if you want to see left of centre policies.

 

[Elixir]

The model is the "Tea Party". Now they own the GOP.

And DSA is trying to do the same with the Dems.

They're not doing a very good job; I never heard of them. I did march/demonstrate with SDS back in the day, but you probably never heard of them. But they did get the attention of the mainstream Democrats at the time...

 

[Harry Bosch]

Do you really think that there is a secret group of millions of Americans who are left of AOC and Bush?

I don't. That only means there is nobody to the left of AOC and Bush. It does not mean there is a political left in the US. The leftmost limit of the US's political spectrum is somewhat right right of centre. This is why you have nightmarishly expensive health and tertiary education costs, mostly paid for by individual consumers rather than government funds. Look at the Nordic countries (and to a lesser degree Australia, New Zealand and some European countries) if you want to see left of centre policies.

Actually there are Americans who would fit your definition of the left. However, they are just smaller in number and percentage than in other countries. That means that to make their vote count and be impactful, that they must be in a larger group. Or a larger "tent". The right is very homogeneous. I've always thought it would be easy to run as a republican. All that you have to do is stress lowering taxes, stop abortion, gun rights and then religion and you're in. The party to the left of republicans is a very large tent with numerous nuanced beliefs. It's difficult to keep the left together. This is why third parties almost always hurt the "left" more than the right in the US.

 

[Hermit]

Do you really think that there is a secret group of millions of Americans who are left of AOC and Bush?

I don't. That only means there is nobody to the left of AOC and Bush. It does not mean there is a political left in the US. The leftmost limit of the US's political spectrum is somewhat right right of centre. This is why you have nightmarishly expensive health and tertiary education costs, mostly paid for by individual consumers rather than government funds. Look at the Nordic countries (and to a lesser degree Australia, New Zealand and some European countries) if you want to see left of centre policies.

Actually there are Americans who would fit your definition of the left. However, they are just smaller in number and percentage than in other countries.

Correct

That means that to make their vote count and be impactful, that they must be in a larger group.

Yes, they must, but there is no larger group. This is why there is no left of centre in US politics.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Andrew Yang (UBI and Human-Centered Capitalism) and Rank-Choice Voting? May be too foreign for your average voter that doesn't much want to pay attention to politics. Not Yang. Not Forward.
Lotsa people love to think of themselves as middle class, even those of us who ain't. So the Middle Class Party and someone who doesn't come across as a space alien who doesn't understand humor.

 

[Bronzeage]

Proportional representation would not make a difference in a system with an executive elected by general vote.

I disagree.

This leads to what we see in Israel, where large parties form an alliance with a small conservative religious party who in return demands traffic lights be turned off on the Sabbath.

Wrong. Israel has a parliamentary system, with the prime minister elected by the Knesset. That problem could be avoided I think by electing the executive independently.

There can only be one executive, so we won't see President who is 46% Democrat, 32% Republican, 8% Green, and 4% Libertarian.

Of course not. But a proportional legislature would mean that smaller parties would be established in the political landscape. House could well be 10% Libertarian and 12% Green or whatever.
That means that say under Biden you neither have a Dem nor GOP majority in the House. Neither a rubber stamp nor a blockade.
And unlike a parliamentary system, you do not need a coalition to form the executive, so the minor parties would have no reason to be bound to either of the major parties.

What is the point of forming a minor party if it has no political influence?

 

[Jayjay]

This leads to what we see in Israel, where large parties form an alliance with a small conservative religious party who in return demands traffic lights be turned off on the Sabbath.

Wrong. Israel has a parliamentary system, with the prime minister elected by the Knesset. That problem could be avoided I think by electing the executive independently.

Isreal tried that briefly in the 90s. It didn't work out for them for some reason.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Proportional representation would not make a difference in a system with an executive elected by general vote. Political grid lock is just as likely, leading larger parties to form alliances with smaller, but more extreme parties. This leads to what we see in Israel, where large parties form an alliance with a small conservative religious party who in return demands traffic lights be turned off on the Sabbath.

There can only be one executive, so we won't see President who is 46% Democrat, 32% Republican, 8% Green, and 4% Libertarian.

I don't think it will make much difference even without said executive.

The alternative is as you say Israel--where the small parties get a very disproportionate share of power. I don't believe there is any real answer.

 

[Tigers!]

There are LOTS of parties in the US, always referred to as 'third parties' basically because who could keep track of all the parties and which are active, which are viable, which are relevant, etc. Here's the wiki:

List of political parties in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Looking at that list of parties you do not seem to have any fun parties.
You sceptics need to get creative.
For decades the UK had the Monster Raving Loony Party with Lord Screaming Sutch as its head.
In Australia we have had the Party, Party Party and the Sun Ripened Tomato Party.

Think a bold and catchy name.

In the U.S., the GOP has become the Monster Raving Loony Party.

It has indeed.

But the GOP is not a fun party, just stupid.

 

[Toni]

There are LOTS of parties in the US, always referred to as 'third parties' basically because who could keep track of all the parties and which are active, which are viable, which are relevant, etc. Here's the wiki:

List of political parties in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Looking at that list of parties you do not seem to have any fun parties.
You sceptics need to get creative.
For decades the UK had the Monster Raving Loony Party with Lord Screaming Sutch as its head.
In Australia we have had the Party, Party Party and the Sun Ripened Tomato Party.

Think a bold and catchy name.

In the U.S., the GOP has become the Monster Raving Loony Party.

It has indeed.

But the GOP is not a fun party, just stupid.

It’s stupid AND dangerous.