The third party idea is a fantasy. Remember Betsy Johnson? Let’s imagine, for a moment, the Republicans broke into two parties -- a moderate version and a right wing version. It would immediately lead to a democratic win. Unless you can imagine a political party that is pro-choice, pro gun control, lower taxes, and less government actually holding together, I don’t see it happening in the next 50 years.
As I said in the column, I think a "successful" third party would need to be based on the principles of pro-democracy and good, efficient government - not specific policies. A significant percentage of the electorate is not policy focused. Government that functions well and tries to represent everyone would please them. Still, I admit it's unlikely. And "success" would be electing enough people to Congress to have influence - not winning the presidency.
I agree, we need a movement, not a new party. Here's my idea: I believe we need a Reform Movement. Imagine a document that listed three or four good governance reforms that require a constitutional amendment (term limits, elimination of the filibuster, campaign finance reform, and simplified constitutional amendment process (article 5)). Then have a "reform pledge" that both Democrats and Republicans could sign, that states if elected, they will immediately bring to the floor and vote in favor of these 3 or 4 reforms. So for example, you could be D(Reform) or an R(Reform) in the voter's ballot. The problem with a third party is that requires people to give up their identity. A reform movement would allow people to maintain their party affiliation and vote for systemic change which is what is required to make our government work again.
The third party idea is a fantasy. Remember Betsy Johnson? Let’s imagine, for a moment, the Republicans broke into two parties -- a moderate version and a right wing version. It would immediately lead to a democratic win. Unless you can imagine a political party that is pro-choice, pro gun control, lower taxes, and less government actually holding together, I don’t see it happening in the next 50 years.
As I said in the column, I think a "successful" third party would need to be based on the principles of pro-democracy and good, efficient government - not specific policies. A significant percentage of the electorate is not policy focused. Government that functions well and tries to represent everyone would please them. Still, I admit it's unlikely. And "success" would be electing enough people to Congress to have influence - not winning the presidency.
I agree, we need a movement, not a new party. Here's my idea: I believe we need a Reform Movement. Imagine a document that listed three or four good governance reforms that require a constitutional amendment (term limits, elimination of the filibuster, campaign finance reform, and simplified constitutional amendment process (article 5)). Then have a "reform pledge" that both Democrats and Republicans could sign, that states if elected, they will immediately bring to the floor and vote in favor of these 3 or 4 reforms. So for example, you could be D(Reform) or an R(Reform) in the voter's ballot. The problem with a third party is that requires people to give up their identity. A reform movement would allow people to maintain their party affiliation and vote for systemic change which is what is required to make our government work again.