Mark West
Response to John Hawkins' "3 reasons why a successful third party wouldn't solve anything"
By Mark West
Read John Hawkin's Article:
3 Reasons Why A Successful Third Party Wouldn't Solve Anything
Then read my response to his article below:
Dear Mr. Hawkins,
Your article fails the logic test because you base your conclusions on faulty assumptions.
Assumption #1: Third Parties want to replace either the Democrat or Republican Party.
FALSE: Third Parties want to be exactly what the title implies...an alternative, not a replacement. Most people involved in third parties want the opportunity to represent viewpoints that neither the Democrat or GOP represent adequately.
Assumption #2: Third Parties have equal access to the political domain.
FALSE: Third Parties are hampered and stymied by regulations, rules, and groups that didn't exist when the Dems and GOP took over America. Interesting how all the Presidential debate rules changed after Ross Perot's impact. It is next to impossible for a Third Party to organize because of the stringent laws and regulations that prevent such from occurring.
Assumption #3: Third Party involvement in political process would increase Democrat numbers in Congress.
FALSE: Third Party support comes from the growing pool of independent voters, who, if given the choice, would support more third parties so inevitably you would see an increase in Third Party candidates in Congress. The American people by-and-large desire an alternate.
Personally, I would love to see as many parties as possible involved in government. This would create a couple of scenarios that would be best for the Republic.
Scenario #1: Gridlock. The American people would actually have the opportunity to digest what Congress was doing because it would take TIME to build the necessary coalitions for passage.
Scenario #2: Cooperation. Coalitions would be necessary to get major bills passed so it would encourage a cooperation between those of various viewpoints to compromise and work together to really, actually, try to do what is best for America as a whole rather than a right-wing or left-wing lobby that is funded by the same group of elitist oligarchs that are interested in the destruction of the Republic.
Your article fails because your assumptions are faulty.
Restoring the Republic,
Mark "True Patriot" West
http://dtatp.blogtownhall.com
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/West
http://www.youtube.com/MarkTruePatriotWest
http://rantingpatriot.blip.tv
© Mark West
July 22, 2009
Read John Hawkin's Article:
3 Reasons Why A Successful Third Party Wouldn't Solve Anything
Then read my response to his article below:
Dear Mr. Hawkins,
Your article fails the logic test because you base your conclusions on faulty assumptions.
Assumption #1: Third Parties want to replace either the Democrat or Republican Party.
FALSE: Third Parties want to be exactly what the title implies...an alternative, not a replacement. Most people involved in third parties want the opportunity to represent viewpoints that neither the Democrat or GOP represent adequately.
Assumption #2: Third Parties have equal access to the political domain.
FALSE: Third Parties are hampered and stymied by regulations, rules, and groups that didn't exist when the Dems and GOP took over America. Interesting how all the Presidential debate rules changed after Ross Perot's impact. It is next to impossible for a Third Party to organize because of the stringent laws and regulations that prevent such from occurring.
Assumption #3: Third Party involvement in political process would increase Democrat numbers in Congress.
FALSE: Third Party support comes from the growing pool of independent voters, who, if given the choice, would support more third parties so inevitably you would see an increase in Third Party candidates in Congress. The American people by-and-large desire an alternate.
Personally, I would love to see as many parties as possible involved in government. This would create a couple of scenarios that would be best for the Republic.
Scenario #1: Gridlock. The American people would actually have the opportunity to digest what Congress was doing because it would take TIME to build the necessary coalitions for passage.
Scenario #2: Cooperation. Coalitions would be necessary to get major bills passed so it would encourage a cooperation between those of various viewpoints to compromise and work together to really, actually, try to do what is best for America as a whole rather than a right-wing or left-wing lobby that is funded by the same group of elitist oligarchs that are interested in the destruction of the Republic.
Your article fails because your assumptions are faulty.
Restoring the Republic,
Mark "True Patriot" West
http://dtatp.blogtownhall.com
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/West
http://www.youtube.com/MarkTruePatriotWest
http://rantingpatriot.blip.tv
© Mark West
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
