Forum Post: Eradicate political polarity
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 4, 2011, 1:49 a.m. EST by etterdc
(39)
from Boulder, CO
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It's great that a purpose is beginning to develop from this movement, but it needs to be more finite and needs to be aimed at something much bigger. This is truly a movement of the people, so let us unite not simply to create awareness, but to create tangible change. This movement must morph into a new political party that represents the true American majority.
Eradicating Political Polarity
(http://detters2cents.wordpress.com/2011/10/03/eradicating-political-polarity/).
Please read, please share, and please help the dialogue grow...
Simple. Put together a petition to ban all lobbying. And vote out the politicians who won't go along with it.
Call it The American Party. Take the word BACK from the right-wing conservatives who do not represent all of America and raise the meaning to the ideals we believe in (Bill of Rights).
I agree with the treatise but until we fix the system, a third party will have absolutely no choice but to solicit special interests for funds; otherwise any third party will fail. That is the dysfunction of our current system. We must first get the money out of politics. If that makes sense, check out Dylan Ratigan's movement at www.getmoneyout.com. (I have no affiliation, just think he is onto something.)
I agree that we need to end the powerful influence of special interests groups. But why would a third party have to rely on special interests? Is it really necessary to spend millions on campaigning, or are those millions spent to appease the special interests that support our politicians? Moreover, why couldn't this party gain support and awareness in similar fashion to how this movement is gaining support and popularity - i.e. social media, like-minded individuals sharing information and supporting something they believe in? I'm not proposing that a third party join in the tactics of caving to special interest groups, so their lack of involvement would be OK. And currently, special interests have so much clout because they fuel a battle between democrats and republicans whose policies are aimed at pleasing them. If a third party emerged who didn't appease them, and that party gained power, it would greatly limit the desire for special interests to spend millions because it wouldn't buy them what they wanted.
And as for the link, I support this in part. Some industries really do need government support - the medical industry (not the pharmaceutical industry - big difference btwn the two) for instance - and social well-fare programs rely on the government providing large amounts of support. However, I would love to read more details about his plan. Right now his site kind of just says what it's trying to do, not how it plans to do it.
exactly.....specially this part: "but until we fix the system, a third party will have absolutely no choice but to solicit special interests for funds; otherwise any third party will fail. That is the dysfunction of our current system."