The self-proclaimed “base”, that minority of the Republican Party which demands its way in every issue or else, is now talking about forming a breakaway party. It just goes to prove that old saying, ‘those who don’t learn from History, are doomed to make dumb mistakes, which they will not learn from nor even acknowledge, but blame on someone else’. Or something like that.
Throughout American History, political groups have tried hard to coalesce into national parties. Only twice in 225 years has a group managed to create a substantial political party with staying power, and in both of those cases the new party did not merely join the existing order, but forced out an existing but weak predecessor. At various times, indignation or simple anger has driven popularity for a new party, but never to the point of turning national control over to that fad. Perhaps the best example would be Teddy Roosevelt’s “Bull Moose” run for the Presidency in 1912. Roosevelt was more than slightly irked at Taft, whom he felt had betrayed the party’s trust. When the GOP chose Taft’s position ahead of Teddy’s, he chose to create his own party and run that way. This was a factor in Woodrow Wilson’s election in 1912. I mention this, because in TR’s case at least, the man was properly qualified and competent for the job, something I never believed about Jon Anderson in 1980, Ross Perot in 1992, or Ralph Nader in 2000.
But about ‘third-party’ politics. The most notable “successes” for third-party candidates is a small portion of the Popular Vote for President. While there are some independents who have made it to Congress over the years, in the past generation no one makes it unless they are a Republican or a Democrat. Not that I like either party 100% from their behavior in office, but one has to be realistic. And so, while I understand the mood, suggesting a ‘third party’ is simply how the delusional would help give power to the Democrats, whose responsibility with such control has been well-documented, enough to make me seriously question the sanity of anyone who would suggest it with a straight face.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Bush loses California 50th Congressional District!
News flash, Varones;
Bush wasn't running in that race.
My entire adult voting life I voted Libertarian -- until 2000. Beginning with that election I started to vote Republican.
Perhaps it was maturity, perhaps awakening political wisdom/pragmatism, who knows? I can tell you that reflecting on the damage that 2 Ross Perot attempts inflicted on this country must not happen again.
The 3rd-part self-deluders need to read your post and other political history. If the dems were a rational alternative I could understand the 3rd-party protest vote....but they're not, and it's a bad thing.
Distasteful as it may be, we must continue to send Republicans back to the halls of power and work to root out the bad ones in the primaries.
Neal Boortz, a nationaly syndicated talk radio host, out of Atlanta, is a devout Libertarian, but always votes Republican in national elections.
You don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and eat it, just because your hungry and the last egg was too small. Unless of course your a child having a temper tantrum.
My greatest fear about 2008, up until now, was that McCain was going to be miffed that he could not get his "turn" at the GOP nomination and launch a 3rd party run that would give us President Hillary on a tin platter.
Now, it is that the "My Way 100% of the Time on Every Issue or the Highway" faction on the right will be stupid enough to kill their own cause out of spite and doom us to Dem control of all 3 branches by 2008!
Hey, boneheads: Wake the hell up!
You think the RINOs are bad???
How do you think your pet issues are going to fare under the reign of the loons from the far left who have co-opted what used to be the Democrat party???
Talk about obstinate morons! My, God!!!
Of course, out of pride and stubborness, they will not only ignore this plea but insult me for having the audacity to write it, just watch.
Bush/RINO "Bootlicker" accusation in 5...4...3...2...1...
I think we're seeing the rump of a GOP that is happier complaing than governing, seeing how easy it is for the librulz to carp, whine and complain without having to have a plan to govern. The grass must be greener.
I was rather hoping to see the Demorats split ... a Marxist/Green party. But, alas, the stupid wing of the GOP is intent to destroy it before the Democrats destroy themselves. What a shame.
Varones ... can you explain how Bush lost the 50th Congressional District if a Republican beats a Democrat? Your post is sort of a non-sequitur. The good news is that if Bilbray wins, then the first 'bellweather' election shows there won't be a Democrat sea-change.
But then who are we kidding? It will only be important if Busby wins ... being a Democrat means you get to ingore bad news.
"Pet issues?"
Border security is a pet issue?
Fiscal responsibility is a pet issue?
These Republicans are so far from the values that got them elected in the first place that you can't recognize them.
Varones:
Three months ago the sky was falling because of port security, but today $850,000,000.00 dollars that was set asside to beef up security, was pulled out of port security and used to fund Katrina relief and Iraq. Three months from now the new catastrophe will be here and no one will care about boarder security. It's not that the problems are solved. It's that people finaly realize that they were not nearly as tremendous as the news led everyone to believe.
Reminds me of a line from a Nora Jones song - "Half an ince of water, and you think your going to drown".
SO will these rump - end tantrum throwing republicans be happy when Ginsberg retires and is replaced by another liberal - left judge? If two Justices retire and are replaces by SOuter clones? THose are UNCORRECTABLE mistakes. 20 year mistakes. Are 20 years of another souter - or of two more Souters - worth it for the sake of a snit fit over whatever issue?
Ryan
Post a Comment