• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Forward Party

seayakin

Graduate Poster
seayakin
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
1,441
I'm surpised nothing is out on this forum but there is a new centrist party. Maybe I'm being overly hopeful but it seems it would impact the Republicans more. This an effort of Andrew Yang, Christine Todd Whitman and others.

Forward Party Website
 
Last edited:
"Centrist" party. A bunch of wannabe celebrities trying to make corporate shilling look cool.
 
Two premises they state in explanation are so obviously false that it's difficult to believe they are really this dumb instead of just lying.

One such premise is that there's an "extreme left" somewhere out there which actually believes/wants the things these people accuse them of, which just happen entirely by coincidence to be routine Republican false accusations.

The other is that what voters who don't like either of the two parties want is something between them, not something outside them.
 
I guess the "Troll Party Who's Only Job is to Pull the cord on the back of the Progressives Who Only Live on Twitter" party was too big to feet on the tshirts.
 
Delvo said:
Two premises they state in explanation are so obviously false that it's difficult to believe they are really this dumb instead of just lying.

One such premise is that there's an "extreme left" somewhere out there which actually believes/wants the things these people accuse them of, which just happen entirely by coincidence to be routine Republican false accusations.
Click to expand...

There are. There are straight up communists in this country.
 
seayakin said:
I'm surpised nothing is out on this forum but there is a new centrist party. Maybe I'm being overly hopeful but it seems it would impact the Republicans more. This an effort of Andrew Yang, Christine Todd Whitman and others.

Forward Party Website
Click to expand...

That website is so vague and esoteric you’d think it was a William Gibson novel.
 
Delvo said:
Two premises they state in explanation are so obviously false that it's difficult to believe they are really this dumb instead of just lying.

One such premise is that there's an "extreme left" somewhere out there which actually believes/wants the things these people accuse them of, which just happen entirely by coincidence to be routine Republican false accusations.

The other is that what voters who don't like either of the two parties want is something between them, not something outside them.
Click to expand...

It's funny how all of these supposed third parties are still trying to work within the A or B political system we have.

I also like how they are going straight to a national election and convention instead of doing the leg work of getting candidates elected in local elections. Ya, they should totally be taken seriously.
 
The system of having:

a) constituencies electing just one bloke or blokette
b) only a senator per state per election
c) an electoral college with the corrupt rule of who they win gets all the state votes –with the exception of Maine and ... North Dakota?–

carries the inescapable consecuence of a polarized political scene with no institutional room for third parties in a state level.

That is not to say that independent candidates are not viable in a local level or that the polarizing political Maniqueism must necessary involve the same pair all accross the 50+1.

And that's where the opportunity lies in such an antidemocratic system: a new party created in a couple of states that patiently and impecably works until it wins and then starts expanding nationwide. If such new party should exist it could be in power in as little as three or four ... decades.

Other things won't do. That ridiculous pact of states voting in the electoral college for the candidate that wins the popular vote won't do.

And a culture that tolerates a clown that says that AIDS is not a real illness, climate change doesn't exist, Muslims in NJ were cheering as the Twin Towers fell and the presidencial candidate was not a natural born citizen, and yet he's elected president years later, to then recommend to drink chemical disinfectant and dangerously flirt with monsieur coup d'etat in order to keep power and still remains as a strong candidate for the presidential elections is not going to give a chance to such new parties, unfit for improvement as it is.

And to prove that ungentlemanly and non-charitable behaviours prevail all accross the board, I'm sure this thread will soon be flooded by posts below the belt claiming that Mr. Wang, Mr. Abble and Ms. IVM are not worthy.

[No English spell checker on this device, while the Spanish one permanently interferes]
 
I would quite like a viable third party to happen. I'm doubtful about this particular one because their website, in addition to being terribly designed, is utterly vague about what their actual platform is. I don't want to read generalizations and sound bytes, I want to see a bullet point list of actual policy positions. Granted the regular parties also indulge in waffle and vagueness and meaningless generalizations, but we know from their history what they actually want and try to do. A new party needs to state things, clearly, up front.

I suggest the formation of a different new party, to be called the Practical Party, where we list in plain language what we actually want to happen. Preferable in an Excel spreadsheet with columns that can be filtered on keywords! C'mon, where are my practical people at? Do you have a To Do list? Do you have several To Do lists? Do you have master list of lists? And you color-code entries? Then you may be a Practical Party person!
 
I agree with much has been said. However, I still take it as a positive that they are trying to form a 3rd party. Assuming Yang would run under the third party in 2024, would he pull more democratic or republican voters? If Christine Todd Whitman ran I could see more Republican voters being pulled but I'm guessing as others have pointed out, Yang probably has a lot of his ego invested this and won't let things go without his say.
 
Just took a look at their website. Seems like not only bull ****, but unimaginative bull ****. Basically saying "yeah man, well take care of the problems, cause we're different! Just put us in power and don't worry your pretty little heads too much"
 
I'm reminded of an episode of a "Good Times" in which a local politician running for reelection responded to every question about the issues with "I have very definite opinions about that. Very definite opinions."
 
TragicMonkey said:
I would quite like a viable third party to happen. I'm doubtful about this particular one because their website, in addition to being terribly designed, is utterly vague about what their actual platform is. I don't want to read generalizations and sound bytes, I want to see a bullet point list of actual policy positions. Granted the regular parties also indulge in waffle and vagueness and meaningless generalizations, but we know from their history what they actually want and try to do. A new party needs to state things, clearly, up front.

I suggest the formation of a different new party, to be called the Practical Party, where we list in plain language what we actually want to happen. Preferable in an Excel spreadsheet with columns that can be filtered on keywords! C'mon, where are my practical people at? Do you have a To Do list? Do you have several To Do lists? Do you have master list of lists? And you color-code entries? Then you may be a Practical Party person!
Click to expand...

I'm certainly a Practical Party person!
However, I'm going to remain in the Cry If I Want To Party.
 
How well do you think a third party would do if the platform was just the highest rated polled position on every issue?
 
Thermal said:
Abysmally. No one would trust them, unless they had a track record of fighting for principled action.
Click to expand...


It would also rely on the opinions of the population being more homogeneous than they are. If you adopt the most popular opinions on Issue A, Issue B, and Issue C, you'll run into various permutations of "I like their views on Issue A, but I hate their views on Issue B and Issue C, so I'm not going to vote for them." 75% of the population may support each issue, but it's not necessarily the same 75% for each of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom