Chuck Baldwin @ MindSay 
The Myth of the Two-Party System 
Every election year, the only two people the media ever wants to talk about are the two major party candidates. The Democrats push out yet another rich martini-swilling progressive while the Republicans yell "next" and present the next rich scary-looking old man in line.
During the primaries, each candidate becomes a champion of their party's values. The Democrats are all super-liberal and super-progressive, promising vast sweeping social reforms and government programs galore. The Republicans are all real conservatives, ready to bring this country back to a smaller government and more open market. Then, the primaries end, the candidates are chosen, and both start sounding a lot more like each other. We have John McCain being an environmentalist, and Barack Obama citing "safety of the American people" when he votes to give the government more warrant-less wiretapping powers. Before you know it, Obama will be an Iraq War supporter.
It's clear that the worst time to determine a politician's loyalties is an election year. Pandering to every voter interest possible inevitably leads to contradiction and policy "flip-flopping." What's also clear is that when no one is trying to garner votes, the party lines are substantially blurred. The Republicans and Democrats work essentially as one party in the "off season." As a result, nothing ever changes.
People do recognize this. Many do not get involved in politics, citing "they're all the same" as the reason. So why is it, election after election, these same people pick the person they hate over the person they really hate? Why don't they vote for a third-party candidate?
The reason is because people love to be right, and too often, voters will vote for who they think will win rather than who they like. Voting for a third party candidate is seen as throwing a vote away, or worse yet, giving it to the enemy. Many cite Ralph Nader's 2000 campaign as an example. Nader is blamed for Gore's defeat because those making the claim assume that if Nader wasn't running, all of his votes would have gone to Gore. Many of them probably would have, but there is also one other important fact: Gore won the popular vote in Florida and thus the 2000 election. It was the supreme court that made the determination that Bush won. Nader's votes wouldn't have tipped the scales because they were already tipped in Gore's favor.
But even if that sentiment was true, it was the sentiment itself that made it so. It's not impossible for a third party candidate to win an election. Ross Perot, and independent candidate, actually polled as the winner in the 1992 presidential elections for a short time. Perhaps if he hadn't dropped out of the race, we would have had 8 years of President Perot in the 90's.
Many are fed up with the one political party that masquerades as two come election time, but are still drawn to vote for it when the crucial moment comes. Some may be genuinely fooled (yet again) by campaign rhetoric, but the vast majority I feel continue voting for the same corrupt system because they get caught up in the black-and-white, us-vs-them mentality. To them, they may not like the candidate they're voting for, but they really hate the other candidate. They feel the risk is too great to vote third party. The problem is, once again, that voting for a major party because you don't believe a third party candidate can win is precisely why third party candidates don't win.
I was a victim of the same reasoning. As an Obama supporter, I began to excuse more and more minor shifts in direction he exhibited. When the controversy over FISA started, I adopted a "wait and see" attitude. Obama promised us he was different. He wasn't just another politician, and he was true to his ideals. I trusted his words against FISA (including those against telecom immunity) meant that when given the opportunity to act against it, he would do so.
When Obama had the chance to seize that opportunity, he changed his mind, and instead supported the FISA bill in the end. That's when I realized that he is, in fact, just another Republi-crat. Now that he's not courting the left wing, his politics are diving strictly to the center, where he believes he will get more votes. Now he's starting to talk about safety, and how great of a reason it is to give the government unprecedented spying abilities and let large corporations off the hook for violating the law.
On the conservative side, McCain has long been a disappointment to conservatives. His record as a conservative is paltry at best, and often throws in with Democrats in order to propose very liberal (to the conservatives anyway) legislation.
As I thought about these things, I realized that there is a battle between two political wills in this country, but not between the two that most people think. No, the battle is between the Republi-crat establishment and the minor party rebellion. These parties, whether it be the Libertarian, Green, or Constitution Party are the only ones that are advocating real, sweeping change. You want an interesting debate? I would much rather see Ralph Nader go up against Bob Barr than watch Barack Obama and John McCain pretend to disagree with each other. I know where Nader and Barr stand. They actually have sharply different ideas on how to run this country. There are more issues at stake than just pro-war vs. anti-war.
To anyone reading this who is reading this, who is fed up with Obama and disappointed by McCain, I beg you to seriously consider your political alternatives. Really think about what the purpose of an election is, and above all, remember that in order for a third party candidate to really win this time, it takes your, yes your vote. Ignore the polls, ignore the media. They're bought and paid for by the political institution. They'll ignore Barr, Nader, McKinney, or Baldwin no matter what the polls show. Sure, they throw the rebels a bone once in a while, but the vast majority of their time is on the candidates who are part of the system. I'm proud that I'll be voting this November for Ralph Nader, because I know I'll be voting for real hope and real change from someone that has actually changed things for the better. I hope you can feel the same way when you pull the lever this November, regardless of who your candidate is.
Every election year, the only two people the media ever wants to talk about are the two major party candidates. The Democrats push out yet another rich martini-swilling progressive while the Republicans yell "next" and present the next rich scary-looking old man in line. During the primaries, each candidate becomes a champion of their party's values. The Democrats are all super-liberal and super-progressive, promising vast sweeping social reforms and government programs galore. The Republicans are all real conservatives, ready to bring this country back to a smaller government and more open market. Then, the primaries end, the candidates are chosen, and both start sounding a lot more like each other. We have John McCain being an environmentalist, and Barack Obama citing "safety of the American people" when he votes to give the government more warrant-less wiretapping powers. Before you know it, Obama will be an Iraq War supporter.
It's clear that the worst time to determine a politician's loyalties is an election year. Pandering to every voter interest possible inevitably leads to contradiction and policy "flip-flopping." What's also clear is that when no one is trying to garner votes, the party lines are substantially blurred. The Republicans and Democrats work essentially as one party in the "off season." As a result, nothing ever changes.
People do recognize this. Many do not get involved in politics, citing "they're all the same" as the reason. So why is it, election after election, these same people pick the person they hate over the person they really hate? Why don't they vote for a third-party candidate?
The reason is because people love to be right, and too often, voters will vote for who they think will win rather than who they like. Voting for a third party candidate is seen as throwing a vote away, or worse yet, giving it to the enemy. Many cite Ralph Nader's 2000 campaign as an example. Nader is blamed for Gore's defeat because those making the claim assume that if Nader wasn't running, all of his votes would have gone to Gore. Many of them probably would have, but there is also one other important fact: Gore won the popular vote in Florida and thus the 2000 election. It was the supreme court that made the determination that Bush won. Nader's votes wouldn't have tipped the scales because they were already tipped in Gore's favor.
But even if that sentiment was true, it was the sentiment itself that made it so. It's not impossible for a third party candidate to win an election. Ross Perot, and independent candidate, actually polled as the winner in the 1992 presidential elections for a short time. Perhaps if he hadn't dropped out of the race, we would have had 8 years of President Perot in the 90's.
Many are fed up with the one political party that masquerades as two come election time, but are still drawn to vote for it when the crucial moment comes. Some may be genuinely fooled (yet again) by campaign rhetoric, but the vast majority I feel continue voting for the same corrupt system because they get caught up in the black-and-white, us-vs-them mentality. To them, they may not like the candidate they're voting for, but they really hate the other candidate. They feel the risk is too great to vote third party. The problem is, once again, that voting for a major party because you don't believe a third party candidate can win is precisely why third party candidates don't win.
I was a victim of the same reasoning. As an Obama supporter, I began to excuse more and more minor shifts in direction he exhibited. When the controversy over FISA started, I adopted a "wait and see" attitude. Obama promised us he was different. He wasn't just another politician, and he was true to his ideals. I trusted his words against FISA (including those against telecom immunity) meant that when given the opportunity to act against it, he would do so.
When Obama had the chance to seize that opportunity, he changed his mind, and instead supported the FISA bill in the end. That's when I realized that he is, in fact, just another Republi-crat. Now that he's not courting the left wing, his politics are diving strictly to the center, where he believes he will get more votes. Now he's starting to talk about safety, and how great of a reason it is to give the government unprecedented spying abilities and let large corporations off the hook for violating the law.
On the conservative side, McCain has long been a disappointment to conservatives. His record as a conservative is paltry at best, and often throws in with Democrats in order to propose very liberal (to the conservatives anyway) legislation.
As I thought about these things, I realized that there is a battle between two political wills in this country, but not between the two that most people think. No, the battle is between the Republi-crat establishment and the minor party rebellion. These parties, whether it be the Libertarian, Green, or Constitution Party are the only ones that are advocating real, sweeping change. You want an interesting debate? I would much rather see Ralph Nader go up against Bob Barr than watch Barack Obama and John McCain pretend to disagree with each other. I know where Nader and Barr stand. They actually have sharply different ideas on how to run this country. There are more issues at stake than just pro-war vs. anti-war.
To anyone reading this who is reading this, who is fed up with Obama and disappointed by McCain, I beg you to seriously consider your political alternatives. Really think about what the purpose of an election is, and above all, remember that in order for a third party candidate to really win this time, it takes your, yes your vote. Ignore the polls, ignore the media. They're bought and paid for by the political institution. They'll ignore Barr, Nader, McKinney, or Baldwin no matter what the polls show. Sure, they throw the rebels a bone once in a while, but the vast majority of their time is on the candidates who are part of the system. I'm proud that I'll be voting this November for Ralph Nader, because I know I'll be voting for real hope and real change from someone that has actually changed things for the better. I hope you can feel the same way when you pull the lever this November, regardless of who your candidate is.
Minor Party Round-Up
I was going to make a post about the recent decision of the Democratic National Committee to seat all the delegates of Michigan and Florida with half-votes, but I am growing extremely tired of this ridiculousness, especially with the Clinton campaign. Every week I'm plagued by Clinton supporters on CNN, sporting new and ever-more complicated "Hillarithmetic" in order to bend the numbers in a way that suits her. Watching the DNC hearings today made me want to be on that panel so I could say "I think we all need to acknowledge the elephant in the room. The only reason we are here today is because Hillary Clinton fell behind in February. If she was ahead, then none of you Clinton supporters would be here to demand all your votes be counted. So let's stop trying to put up the facade that this is about democracy and unity. This is Hillary Clinton throwing a temper tantrum."
But, I wasn't in the room, so the voice of common sense was tragically absent. At any rate, I'm tired of this bickering as the Democratic Party slips further and further away from my desire to vote for them. So, I thought it might be a little bit of fun to have a nice breakdown of the presidential candidates you don't see on the news.
Bob Barr
Name: Robert Laurence "Bob" Barr, Jr.
Age: 59
Birthplace: Iowa City, IA
Nominating Party: Libertarian
Career History: Represented Georgia's 7th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995-2003 as a Republican.
Running Mate: Wayne Allen Root
Quote: "A man faithful to the constitution doesn't stop criticizing presidents when the letter after their names change"
Recently named as the Libertarian Party's nominee, Mr. Barr is a recent convert to the party. As a Republican in the House of Representatives, he supported the War on Drugs, the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act, and authored the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act which made same-sex marriages illegal in all states. However, he is most known for his roles in the Waco hearings and the Clinton impeachment.
Since leaving congress in 2003, Barr has become a vocal opponent of the Bush administration. During the 2004 election, he publicly endorsed the Libertarian candidate. In 2006, he announced that he himself was a "card-carrying libertarian," and has been working to undo many of the old laws he himself proposed and authored.
Barr opposes the Iraq War, gun control, abortion, and nationalized health care. He supports a restoration of Habeas Corpus for all prisoners of the U.S., strict border control, and strong national defense.
Chuck Baldwin
Name: Charles "Chuck" Baldwin
Age: 56
Birthplace: LaPorte, IN
Nominating Party: Constitution
Career History: Pastor of the Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, FL; Radio host
Running Mate: Darrell Castle
Quote: "...thousands of principled people will not be bullied into voting for the 'evil of two lessers' being shoved down our throats by the two major parties."
Baldwin was also a Republican at one time, aiding the Reagan and Bush campaigns in Florida. However, after deeming the 2000 Bush/Cheney ticket to be "too liberal," he broke with the Republican Party.
Early in 2008, Baldwin was a strong supporter of the Ron Paul campaign, writing many favorable columns including one entitled "Conservative Republicans Have Only One Choice." He is strongly anti-abortion, supporting congressman Paul's bill to overturn Roe vs. Wade and rule that unborn fetuses and persons under the law. His other stances also mirror that of the Texas congressman, though he is overtly religious in his campaigning.
Ralph Nader
Name: Ralph Nader
Age: 74
Birthplace: Winsted, CT
Nominating Party: none (Independent)
Career History: Green Party nominee for president in 1996 and 2000. Reform Party endorsed in 2004. Many years of consumer advocacy
Running Mate: Matt Gonzalez
Quote: "For almost seventy years the life insurance industry has been a smug sacred cow feeding the public a steady line of sacred bull."
Ralph Nader became famous for his 1965 book Unsafe At Any Speed, a scathing criticism of the safety flaws in the Chevrolet Corvair and other models sold by General Motors Corporation. The book eventually led to the passing of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act in 1966.
Nader first ran for president thirty years later in 1996 as the nominee from the Green Party and garnered 0.71% of the popular vote. In 2000, he experienced greater success, getting on the ballot in 44 states, but with only 2.74% of the popular vote failed to garner federal public funding for the Green Party in the next election and become a viable to threat to any other candidate. There was, however, some backlash regarding his 2000 campaign. Some detractors claim that his campaign pulled just enough votes away from Al Gore to cause his loss, though others are quick to point out that Gore still won the popular vote, and it was ultimately the supreme court's decision anyway.
Nader's key issues include an initiative to fight corporate interests in Washington. He also promotes a single-payer national health care system, an end to the definition of a corporation being a "legal person," and a tax on carbon polluters and wall street speculation.
Cynthia McKinney
Name: Cynthia McKinney
Age: 53
Birthplace: Atlanta, GA
Nominating Party: Green
Career History: Represented Georgia's 4th/11th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1993-2003, and 2005-2007 as a Democrat
Running Mate: None currently chosen
Quote: "Eight generations of African-Americans are still waiting to achieve their rights - compensation and restitution for the hundreds of years during which they were bought and sold on the market."
McKinney was the first African-American woman to represent Georgia in the U.S. House of Representatives. Though it seemed like her position in the House was entrenched, in 2002, she was defeated by challenger Denise Majette. It is claimed that this was a result of new laws allowing Republican voters to cross-over into the Democratic congressional election, skewing the results as revenge for her anti-Bush sentiment. She won her seat back in 2004. She won again in 2006, but with less than 50% of the vote, forcing her and her challenger into a run-off.
McKinney supports abortion rights as well as stem cell research. Additionally, her campaign promotes social welfare programs, stating that the funds for such programs are being "misallocated." She supports affirmative action, medical marijuana legalization, regulation of gas and electricity prices, and a repeal of NAFTA.
Brian Moore
Name: Brian Patrick Moore
Age: 64
Birthplace: Oakland, CA
Nominating Party: Socialist
Career History: Member of the Washington DC Advisory Neighborhood Commission
Running Mate: Stewart Alexander
Quote: "...the two party political system, and our capitalistic economic system, are not addressing nor are they resolving the problems domestically nor internationally."
Moore holds a Master's Degree in Public Administration from Arizona State University. He has also worked in the Peace Corps and in the HMO/Managed care industry for over 20 years.
Moore's platform calls for an end to the Iraq War, withdraw of all American troops from abroad, cutting the U.S. military budget by 50%, public ownership of all natural resources, national health care, and an increase of health and safety regulation in the American workforce. He opposes fur trade, corporate farming, nuclear power, and private ownership of the internet infrastructure.
But, I wasn't in the room, so the voice of common sense was tragically absent. At any rate, I'm tired of this bickering as the Democratic Party slips further and further away from my desire to vote for them. So, I thought it might be a little bit of fun to have a nice breakdown of the presidential candidates you don't see on the news.
Bob Barr
Name: Robert Laurence "Bob" Barr, Jr. Age: 59
Birthplace: Iowa City, IA
Nominating Party: Libertarian
Career History: Represented Georgia's 7th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995-2003 as a Republican.
Running Mate: Wayne Allen Root
Quote: "A man faithful to the constitution doesn't stop criticizing presidents when the letter after their names change"
Recently named as the Libertarian Party's nominee, Mr. Barr is a recent convert to the party. As a Republican in the House of Representatives, he supported the War on Drugs, the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act, and authored the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act which made same-sex marriages illegal in all states. However, he is most known for his roles in the Waco hearings and the Clinton impeachment.
Since leaving congress in 2003, Barr has become a vocal opponent of the Bush administration. During the 2004 election, he publicly endorsed the Libertarian candidate. In 2006, he announced that he himself was a "card-carrying libertarian," and has been working to undo many of the old laws he himself proposed and authored.
Barr opposes the Iraq War, gun control, abortion, and nationalized health care. He supports a restoration of Habeas Corpus for all prisoners of the U.S., strict border control, and strong national defense.
Chuck Baldwin
Name: Charles "Chuck" Baldwin Age: 56
Birthplace: LaPorte, IN
Nominating Party: Constitution
Career History: Pastor of the Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, FL; Radio host
Running Mate: Darrell Castle
Quote: "...thousands of principled people will not be bullied into voting for the 'evil of two lessers' being shoved down our throats by the two major parties."
Baldwin was also a Republican at one time, aiding the Reagan and Bush campaigns in Florida. However, after deeming the 2000 Bush/Cheney ticket to be "too liberal," he broke with the Republican Party.
Early in 2008, Baldwin was a strong supporter of the Ron Paul campaign, writing many favorable columns including one entitled "Conservative Republicans Have Only One Choice." He is strongly anti-abortion, supporting congressman Paul's bill to overturn Roe vs. Wade and rule that unborn fetuses and persons under the law. His other stances also mirror that of the Texas congressman, though he is overtly religious in his campaigning.
Ralph Nader
Name: Ralph Nader Age: 74
Birthplace: Winsted, CT
Nominating Party: none (Independent)
Career History: Green Party nominee for president in 1996 and 2000. Reform Party endorsed in 2004. Many years of consumer advocacy
Running Mate: Matt Gonzalez
Quote: "For almost seventy years the life insurance industry has been a smug sacred cow feeding the public a steady line of sacred bull."
Ralph Nader became famous for his 1965 book Unsafe At Any Speed, a scathing criticism of the safety flaws in the Chevrolet Corvair and other models sold by General Motors Corporation. The book eventually led to the passing of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act in 1966.
Nader first ran for president thirty years later in 1996 as the nominee from the Green Party and garnered 0.71% of the popular vote. In 2000, he experienced greater success, getting on the ballot in 44 states, but with only 2.74% of the popular vote failed to garner federal public funding for the Green Party in the next election and become a viable to threat to any other candidate. There was, however, some backlash regarding his 2000 campaign. Some detractors claim that his campaign pulled just enough votes away from Al Gore to cause his loss, though others are quick to point out that Gore still won the popular vote, and it was ultimately the supreme court's decision anyway.
Nader's key issues include an initiative to fight corporate interests in Washington. He also promotes a single-payer national health care system, an end to the definition of a corporation being a "legal person," and a tax on carbon polluters and wall street speculation.
Cynthia McKinney
Name: Cynthia McKinney Age: 53
Birthplace: Atlanta, GA
Nominating Party: Green
Career History: Represented Georgia's 4th/11th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1993-2003, and 2005-2007 as a Democrat
Running Mate: None currently chosen
Quote: "Eight generations of African-Americans are still waiting to achieve their rights - compensation and restitution for the hundreds of years during which they were bought and sold on the market."
McKinney was the first African-American woman to represent Georgia in the U.S. House of Representatives. Though it seemed like her position in the House was entrenched, in 2002, she was defeated by challenger Denise Majette. It is claimed that this was a result of new laws allowing Republican voters to cross-over into the Democratic congressional election, skewing the results as revenge for her anti-Bush sentiment. She won her seat back in 2004. She won again in 2006, but with less than 50% of the vote, forcing her and her challenger into a run-off.
McKinney supports abortion rights as well as stem cell research. Additionally, her campaign promotes social welfare programs, stating that the funds for such programs are being "misallocated." She supports affirmative action, medical marijuana legalization, regulation of gas and electricity prices, and a repeal of NAFTA.
Brian Moore
Name: Brian Patrick Moore Age: 64
Birthplace: Oakland, CA
Nominating Party: Socialist
Career History: Member of the Washington DC Advisory Neighborhood Commission
Running Mate: Stewart Alexander
Quote: "...the two party political system, and our capitalistic economic system, are not addressing nor are they resolving the problems domestically nor internationally."
Moore holds a Master's Degree in Public Administration from Arizona State University. He has also worked in the Peace Corps and in the HMO/Managed care industry for over 20 years.
Moore's platform calls for an end to the Iraq War, withdraw of all American troops from abroad, cutting the U.S. military budget by 50%, public ownership of all natural resources, national health care, and an increase of health and safety regulation in the American workforce. He opposes fur trade, corporate farming, nuclear power, and private ownership of the internet infrastructure.
Quick Links
Latest Comment
Re: I Left - you're right...there's more in the next blog.
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy
