Thread: Divided party?
View Single Post
  #4  
Old 03-20-2010, 12:07 AM
RadioActiveRich's Avatar
RadioActiveRich RadioActiveRich is offline
Heavyweight Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 13
Default Hostile takeover time

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twoller View Post
In California, it has been reported here at SOS that %20 of registered voters are "Decline to State". That number is getting bigger, not smaller. The divisions in the state are not just among Republicans or Democrats. Until the Republicans and the Democrats step away from the "two party system", the voters, increasingly, are going to step away from them.
I am not sure what your purpose in saying this is, so I may well agree with you, but there is no such thing as a two party system. We can create, register, and give rise to as many parties as we like. And the Dems and Repubs may benefit from the lack of an alternative to their nonsense, but they are not responsible for being the only two parties. The people responsible are those who fail at creating any meaningful and sustained progress in the "third" parties. Look at it this way, if you total up those who do not vote with those who are unaffiliated or "decline to state" and both the Dems and Repubs would be dwarfed. What we need is not a third party. The way I see it, the Dems and Repubs are tied for second. What we need is a FIRST party. But unless and until the AIP, Constitution, Tea Party, and whoever else can get their act together, we should make the best use of the only semi-Conservative party we got. Afterall, its how the Whigs became the Republicans in the first place.... Hostile takeover time.
__________________
---------------------------------------------
RadioActive Rich
http://www.twitter.com/RadioActiveRich
http://www.twitter.com/ConservAlliance
http://www.RadioActiveBlog.com
http://www.ConservativeAlliance.org

(Formerly FoothillPages.com and Mac on the old SOS)

--------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote