Tweet
If you are considering voting for Obama as the lesser of two evils then I respectfully suggest you reconsider exactly how bad the Democratic Party has to be before you abandon support. Please consider the areas below.
Civil Rights – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/09/civil-rights-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Economy – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/10/economy-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Economic Graphs – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/03/02/economic-graphs
Education – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/01/14/education-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Environment – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/08/environment-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Health Care – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/04/03/health-care-under-democraticrepublican-uniparty
Transparency – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/02/27/transparency-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Unions – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/02/05/unions-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
War – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/11/wars-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Whistleblowers – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/09/whistleblowers-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
What does it take to win as a third party progressive? One does not have to occupy the White House to win, though the Democratic and Republican Party as well as the Canadian New Democratic Party started from scratch. When third parties start to win a substantial portion of the vote the main parties adopt out of necessity.
What percentage do we need to gain victories? Remember the attention Perot got when his support went from six to ten percent? The early Progressive Era never had more than 18% of the vote nationally, but look at the changes it caused. Third Parties were largely responsible for banking reform, labor laws, women’s suffrage, direct election of senators, the progressive income tax, and other advances we take for granted today. Further, one progressive does not have to get the total vote. If Stein, Anderson, and the Socialist Candidate together got a combined 5% of the vote, it would be a good basis for change. Ten percent would give us unquestioned power in elections which can be won with less than one percent of the vote.
What worries me is progressives are spending more time and passion destroying each other’s candidates than opposing the duopoly which got us into this mess. This only encourages others to rely on the two party system. I truly get that many – including myself – have had bad experiences with the Green Party. I get that there are reservations about Rocky Anderson’s timing, seeking of America Elects support, and support of a balanced budget. I get that there are reservations about a Socialist Party ever winning anything because of its name. All of those sins and shortcomings, however, fall far short of what the democratic-republican Uniparty has done. (See the above ten articles and 500 references for lots of examples.)
By all means let us discuss why we like our favorite Third Party candidate for president or any other office. Criticism of other third party candidates is certainly appropriate and justified, but please don’t lose perspective and view them as the enemy instead of the two party duopoly. After November 6, 2012, we need to all work together and use the total votes all candidates received as a basis for moving forward. Let us remember and convey the only wasted votes are those for the democratic-republican Uniparty.
29 Comments
This is an extremely important message.
As far as it is possible for us to do, I think it is incumbent upon us to shun the two major parties. That doesn’t mean not voting, because even casting a blank ballot with the message ‘third party’ will signal to someone your disaffection with the present system, and we need to do that. Voting is a right and a privilege, so even if you feel the very system is fraught with error and pillage, this is one way to have your say.
But above all, if there are third party candidates eligible in your district, do support them. They have had a very hard road to get on the ballot. Write someone in, even invalidate your ballot in a very clear manner if that is all you can do, but support those who struggled to restore a wider choice than the one we are given. They deserve that.
And stay aware. If you find discrepancies in this or that third party candidacy other than the one you support, be moderate in your critique. I don’t think either one of the duopoly will wholeheartedly present a faux third party candidate – it is not in either of their interests. They need to look like the ‘main’ folk. Any pretense that ‘supporting so and so will only elect their duopoly opponent’ is spurious. It doesn’t matter even if that does happen, since the result will be the same for the country at large, which ever of the duopoly gets in. The very great need is for their numbers to diminish and ours to grow.
That’s winning.
Woops, recommended.
Just want to add that a criticism I have heard is that third parties are fine and dandy for an election season but fade away after they don’t win. Fair enough. But if the disparate parties can make a dent in the statistics this time around, would it not be a time then for them to get together after the hoohah and form a credible coalition, using perhaps methods now being honed in Occupy of leaderless cooperation and consensus, openness to input from citizens and general ongoing growth, looking ahead to a new way of doing campaigns for future offices.
TarheelDem’s great essay about the Chicago Spring certainly presents the potential, as well as the difficulties, in such a group effort, but I think it is doable.
And then of course also, we might just actually elect some candidates this time around. Aim high!
Excuse me, one more thought. (And then I will shut up.)
We don’t need to backbite one another, because the aim is not just to replace one of the two main parties – it’s to replace BOTH OF THEM.
So, divisions among us as to ideas can be pointed out, but don’t need to be opposed viciously. It will settle out, and there will be divisions. But that’s how politics has worked until money got in and wrecked everything because the money was the final goal. We can fix that. (End of rant.)
Excellent points.
I wish progressives had enough money to make something like this into a tv ad and run it as a public service anouncemnent all across the country.
Recommended.
Could you make all the links working links?
Great post.
I disagree with Juliania’s use of the word “shun” which implies we ignore the Democrats and Republicans because what we need to do is vigorously challenge and expose them but I like her ideas.
A third party candidate of any political stripe getting elected is a pipe dream. Dems and the GOP are to tied to big money to change the landscape. hey pls checkout my column on why Progressives can’t afford to sit it out in November. http://www.ericnewsdaily.blogspot.com
Here are the working links:
Civil Rights – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/09/civil-rights-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Economy – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/10/economy-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Economic Graphs – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/03/02/economic-graphs
Education – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/01/14/education-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Environment – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/08/environment-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Health Care – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/04/03/health-care-under-democraticrepublican-uniparty
Transparency – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/02/27/transparency-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Unions – http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/02/05/unions-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
War – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/11/wars-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Whistleblowers – http://newprogs.org/blog/2011/11/09/whistleblowers-under-democraticrepublican-uni-party
Didn’t go to you blog but I gather it’s same old fear argument we hear every election season.
Aren’t you tired of playing that game. All you are doing is entrenching the very evils I believe you oppose.
Look, at some point you and the rest of us have to bite the bullet. Stop taking the easy path by voting dem. It means we will have to eat more shit but we are eating shit right now anyway. However it might bring about a true liberal party or a dem party that is not merely the touchy feely version of the repub party, but a true populist progressive/liberal party.
[A third party candidate of any political stripe getting elected is a pipe dream.] In this election cycle it probably is far fetched; but that is WHY we need to begin building a good foundation for future third party progressive victories.
We MUST do this because, as you say [Dems and the GOP are to tied to big money to change the landscape.]
So Obviously; from your own logic, third party progressive is the only way forward.
Thanks for playing.
And it everyone believed what you just said, we’d still have the, what, federalists and whigs?? What were the first two parties???
Voting for Obama is voicing your approval for a man to take office who has claimed publicly he can assassinate American citizens with no judicial due process and signed a bill eliminating habeus corpus.
I could go on, but those two are two lines I will not cross for ANY CANDIDATE of ANY PARTY. They are not only un-American, they are completely unacceptable.
And voting for him is de fact giving one’s approval. Unbelievable.
Eric, I have cited 500 footnotes and references showing 4 years of Obama and the democrats are as bad and frequently worse than 8 years of Bush in nine different areas. You have feelings.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
Isaac Asimov
Thanks normanb for straightening the weblinks!
Excellent post, goNPA.
Recommended to the serious attention of everyone at FDL, even those who “believe” they have NO CHOICE but to vote for Barack Obama.
“Winning”, in the critical sense that we must be concerned with, is about changing people’s understanding, not about “taking” the White House … or dominating Congress … it is about putting alternative ideas and possibilities before as many people as are willing to actually think about things, about reality, and where, we, as a society and a nation might really like and NEED to “be”.
Your concerns about squabbling among those who understand, now, is well-founded, and needs to be heard and embraced, goNPA.
DW
Just to be clear, I intend to vote for a third party presidential candidate, (most likely Stein), but I harbor no illusions of actually electing her. Your point about down ticket races forcing the Dems back to the left is well made though it’s not clear that they would take the intended message or react in the desired manner. The President is a different animal though and you never mention the Electoral College, WHICH IS THE BODY THAT ELECTS PRESIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES. The EC hasn’t even got a contingency plan for what happens if nobody manages to reach the magic number of Electors, (currently 270). That would surely make people wake up and take some notice but it isn’t going to get a third party candidate into the White House. Ever. Until the system is changed, the result will either be Democratic, Republican or a miniscule chance that nobody gets the necessary Electoral votes. And until one of the major parties has sufficient numbers, control and motivation to change it, it ain’t gonna happen. It would most likely take nothing short of insurrection to force that kind of change. What happens if no candidate gets 270 Electoral Votes? Runoff? New campaign? I don’t know, it’s never happened before. By all means, vote third party if you can’t bring yourself to vote Obama, (I can’t), but don’t try to convince me that the third party candidate has any chance in Hell of actually winning. Especially when you don’t take the EC into account. I’m not trying to rain on your parade, honestly but no conversation about electing the President of the United States can be accurately discussed without accounting for the College of Electors.
Just sayin’.
Just for a reality check regarding the viability of third party candidates one might want to review the California gubernatorial campaign of Sinclair Lewis in 1934.
Now mind you that Lewis ran as a Democrat and yet the FDR Democrats were out to get him along with the Republicans.
And his great sin? He was a socialist.*
It’s just amazing that some Americans think they still live in a free, democratic society.
*Sinclair Lewis was arrested while giving an address during a rally which was deemed unlawful by the police.
And what was he saying when he was arrested?
He was reading that socialist rag called the first amendment to the Constitution.
Things never change.
The wealthy are always in control.
But don’t tell anyone! It’s a secret!
Interesting take.
So are you suggesting that a 3rd Party candidate is incapable of getting enough votes to qualify for EC votes or just that they will never get them no matter what? That, even if they do qualify for the EC votes that the EC electors will just give those votes to Dems or Repubs anyway?
Don’t get me wrong; I am in no way dillusioned that a third party progressive candidate will get elected in 2012. And I don’t care, I am voting third party progressive anyway.
That said, the reason that it is NOT going to happen is because most people will continue to pick from one of the UniParty. This is a CHOICE that voters will make in the aggregate. It is NOT a foregone conclusion.
And besides, the best thing that can happen to this country is the outright decimation (by the ballot) of the Demcoratic Party….once they are out of the way there will be enough political space for an actual party of the people. Bottom line, it’s all good!
my comment 16 was meant to be in response to Margaret 14
Excellent comment Margaret.
It reminds of the FACT, and it’s still technically a FACT, that we still, today, do NOT get to vote for our President. Technically, we vote for the electors that vote for the President.
And just like you point out there’s no telling what might happen if no one gets enough, (although at that point it is supposed to go to the House IIRC), there is also NOTHING preventing electors from voting for a person other than the one they were supposed to.
In other words, if Obama “wins” on election night by winning enough electoral votes to win 270-268, but come December if two of those Obama electors (say one from Illinois who he pissed off years ago and one from California just for grins) vote for Romney and everyone else votes as they promised, the new President of the United States would be Mitt Romney. And there is nothing anyone could do about it.
I doubt it will happen, but the fact that it can shows how ludicrous the electoral college is IMO. Because technically, THEY elect the President, we don’t.
See OFG’s comment @ 18. There is absolutely nothing that requires the Electors to vote for the person that we, the people he/she represents asked them to vote for. Zero. Zip. Nada. So yes, I’m saying that I don’t believe that it’s likely that there will ever be be a situation in which nobody gets to 270 but I find that infinitely more likely than 270 or more Electors getting behind a third party candidate.
The Green Party will have selected its own electors by the time the electoral college sits.
Strom Thurmond got 39 electoral votes in 1948, and George Wallace got 46 electoral votes in 1968.
If Jill Stein were to get 3 electoral votes, that could be enough to deprive either legacy candidate of a clear majority of electoral votes.
Furthermore, a good showing by Jill Stein (or an otherwise united Alternative) would ensure that, were a legacy candidate to prevail, his popular vote total will be a minority: Less than 50%.
The world is progressing. Maybe the US will too.
Don’t you ever shut up, dear juliania. Much love for you and your reasonable yet piercing insights. Many could learn much from your example and commentary. ((((juliania))))
Agree completely. It’s the difference between short-term and long-term strategy. Can’t always decide on the basis of short-term factors.
Bravo, OFG. It does seem like many are abandoning all pretense of personal moral responsibility, doesn’t it? So disappointing.
It’s not about instant winning, it’s about thinking long-term and planting an acorn now, IMO. We let ourselves (lefties) get too deep into the quicksand to even deserve an instant solution. But a long journey starts with a single step, and supporting a third alternative seems to me to be a good and sensible single step to take right now.
Very good quote realitychecker! I used it to comment in “Boycott the 2012 Presidential Election” at http://my.firedoglake.com/terridi/2012/06/02/boycott-the-2012-presidential-election/
Or, as Ho Chi Minh said in 1945 when agreeing to the restoration of French colonial rule after World War II:
“I’d rather smell French shit for five more years than eat Chinese shit for the rest of my life.”
If enough progressives in states like mine vote third party and throw the Electoral College to Romney, that will only accelerate the collapse of an unjust political and economic system that is doomed anyway, because it doesn’t freakin’ WORK!
I think it is high time to apply old Ho’s axiom here. After all, he DID eventually win.
I read your article. Same old alarmist, be afraid of the Big Bad Republican crap that corporate America and its lackey, the national Democratic Party, want us to believe.
My, and others’, reasons for voting third party are well-known at FDL. Please read them and rediscover hope. Or continue to be a good serf. Your choice.
“would it not be a time then for them to get together after the hoohah and form a credible coalition”
Isn’t this what the democrats and republicans do?
seems to be working very well for their real constituency.
Exactly, I don’t think Jill Stein is crazy enough to think she is going to beat Obama.
Winning is not the point, or even the goal. It’s the means & the process that are paramount now, not the ends.