Comments on: Fusion and Unity in ThirdPartyLand http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/ Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:37:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: Yosemite1967 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381752 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 19:19:16 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381752 On the subject of a merger between the LP and the CP, it should only happen if the LP starts acknowledging, as the founders did and as the CP does, that our rights come from God. As long as we fail to recognize the true source of our rights, they're up for grabs. On the subject of a merger between the LP and the CP, it should only happen if the LP starts acknowledging, as the founders did and as the CP does, that our rights come from God. As long as we fail to recognize the true source of our rights, they’re up for grabs.

]]> by: Robert Milnes http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381745 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 19:12:00 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381745 Every little bit counts & helps. Green endorsement of LP ticket gets it on D.C. , which it cannot now(no LP affiliate). 3 electoral votes & about 1/2 million votes possible. & maybe W.Va. OK is very difficult & in litigation. Every little bit counts & helps. Green endorsement of LP ticket gets it on D.C. , which it cannot now(no LP affiliate). 3 electoral votes & about 1/2 million votes possible. & maybe W.Va. OK is very difficult & in litigation.

]]> by: Robert Milnes http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381729 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:57:15 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381729 Evidently the other fusion candidates went by the same thing I did. LP bylaws-it is LP only. Now, whether after getting the LP nom, one can seek the nom. of another party additionally, I'm not sure. I doubt it. Ask Tom Knapp. Evidently the other fusion candidates went by the same thing I did. LP bylaws-it is LP only. Now, whether after getting the LP nom, one can seek the nom. of another party additionally, I’m not sure. I doubt it. Ask Tom Knapp.

]]> by: Robert Milnes http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381722 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:52:56 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381722 Mike Indiana, yes, I'm sensitive about this proposal. It is the culmination of years of bitter loser experience. Then you came along & stuck in a fork & declared it done! Things are going bad enough without such sort of declaration of impossibility. Getting the GP to endorse the LP ticket is all that is necessary. With the quoted green resolution & the honor system of first come (to ballot) first served for greens & libs, the friendly competition should get all ballots taken. Jay Matthews, this proposal is on my campaign website. "What ...gave you this idea?" Well, on looking at how massive the problem is & longstanding, the solution is probably going to be a whopper! So I didn't let any possible solution go without consideration. Mike Indiana, yes, I’m sensitive about this proposal. It is the culmination of years of bitter loser experience. Then you came along & stuck in a fork & declared it done! Things are going bad enough without such sort of declaration of impossibility. Getting the GP to endorse the LP ticket is all that is necessary. With the quoted green resolution & the honor system of first come (to ballot) first served for greens & libs, the friendly competition should get all ballots taken. Jay Matthews, this proposal is on my campaign website. “What …gave you this idea?” Well, on looking at how massive the problem is & longstanding, the solution is probably going to be a whopper! So I didn’t let any possible solution go without consideration.

]]> by: Mike Indiana http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381693 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:18:36 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381693 Robert: "Mike Indiana, what are you a government agent?" Yes Robert I'm a government agent, I've been sent to keep an eye on you, and your heavenly inspired progressive alliance.” One of the reasons "Third Parties" remain third parties and your progressive alliance idea can only be a theory is because of the way you reacted to my comment. Rather then accept criticism or defend your case, you relied on the holier than thou if you don't agree your just stupid/government agent defense. While my previous post was based in fact (Greens have no Libertarians on their primary ballots) the party has stated it's intension to run all out (even passed a Resolution) using the election to promote the reforms of ranked voting (i.e., instant runoff voting and proportional representation). http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/08/26/green-party-national-committee-passes-run-full-out-resolution/ your post on the other hand was based in sarcastic slander. In debate as in politics the goal is to get people to see an issue from your perspective and ultimately agree with you, (Not piss people off and make enemies, by acting superior). My post simply pointed out that structural obstacles prevent a “progressive alliance” with the GP, thus it will not work (at least not in 2008) because the GP doesn't want it. It might surprise you to know in theory I agree with the “progressive alliance” idea, hell I'd like to see it happen, but wanting something and it being so are two different things. Furthermore if it were to happen it would more likely be either the LP or GP with numerous one state parties (Liberty Union, VT Progressive, Independent Party of Delaware). While I did not write my last post to prove you were nowhere near qualified to be U.S. president, you none the less proved this on your own. To be elected president of a nation of some 300 million people you need a little bit thicker skin. Oh, by the way "In one sense. Qualification to be President boils down to who gets the most electoral votes" - getting electoral votes in no way has anything to do with being qualified, it has to due with the process of being elected. Robert:
“Mike Indiana, what are you a government agent?”

Yes Robert I’m a government agent, I’ve been sent to keep an eye on you, and your heavenly inspired progressive alliance.”

One of the reasons “Third Parties” remain third parties and your progressive alliance idea can only be a theory is because of the way you reacted to my comment. Rather then accept criticism or defend your case, you relied on the holier than thou if you don’t agree your just stupid/government agent defense. While my previous post was based in fact (Greens have no Libertarians on their primary ballots) the party has stated it’s intension to run all out (even passed a Resolution) using the election to promote the reforms of ranked voting (i.e., instant runoff voting and proportional representation).
http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/08/26/green-party-national-committee-passes-run-full-out-resolution/

your post on the other hand was based in sarcastic slander. In debate as in politics the goal is to get people to see an issue from your perspective and ultimately agree with you, (Not piss people off and make enemies, by acting superior). My post simply pointed out that structural obstacles prevent a “progressive alliance” with the GP, thus it will not work (at least not in 2008) because the GP doesn’t want it. It might surprise you to know in theory I agree with the “progressive alliance” idea, hell I’d like to see it happen, but wanting something and it being so are two different things. Furthermore if it were to happen it would more likely be either the LP or GP with numerous one state parties (Liberty Union, VT Progressive, Independent Party of Delaware). While I did not write my last post to prove you were nowhere near qualified to be U.S. president, you none the less proved this on your own. To be elected president of a nation of some 300 million people you need a little bit thicker skin.

Oh, by the way
“In one sense. Qualification to be President boils down to who gets the most electoral votes” – getting electoral votes in no way has anything to do with being qualified, it has to due with the process of being elected.

]]> by: Jay Matthews http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381393 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 12:34:24 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381393 Robert, something you've never commented on regardless of how often it's been mentioned is your proposal for a eugenics program for Native American. What twisted MST-3000 movie gave you this idea? Robert, something you’ve never commented on regardless of how often it’s been mentioned is your proposal for a eugenics program for Native American. What twisted MST-3000 movie gave you this idea?

]]> by: Robert Milnes http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381268 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:26:01 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381268 Mike Indiana, what are you a government agent? I already stated my reason was that I cannot be a candidate on LP & any other party. Some other method of getting green endorsement of the LP ticket will have to be found. Mike Indiana, what are you a government agent? I already stated my reason was that I cannot be a candidate on LP & any other party. Some other method of getting green endorsement of the LP ticket will have to be found.

]]> by: Mike Indiana http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381098 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 07:32:22 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381098 Since the GP didn't place any of the "Lib" Candidate's seeking a Fusion campaign (Jingozian, Imperato (who is delusional), or Milnes) on their primary ballots and the National Committee issued a statement pledging to run all out in 2008. It's fair to say the "progressive alliance" - Fusion idea is dead in the water. Since the GP didn’t place any of the “Lib” Candidate’s seeking a Fusion campaign (Jingozian, Imperato (who is delusional), or Milnes) on their primary ballots and the National Committee issued a statement pledging to run all out in 2008. It’s fair to say the “progressive alliance” – Fusion idea is dead in the water.

]]> by: Robert Milnes http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381092 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 07:30:37 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-381092 Jay Matthews, I bet Greens & libs will vote for one or the other depending on ballot if it is the only way they can win significantly. Yes, I've tried to communicate with green brass. Not much has come of it. Greg gerritt was pretty pessimistic. Jay Matthews, I bet Greens & libs will vote for one or the other depending on ballot if it is the only way they can win significantly. Yes, I’ve tried to communicate with green brass. Not much has come of it. Greg gerritt was pretty pessimistic.

]]> by: Jay Matthews http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380988 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:26:02 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380988 "The LP p should be a left lib, not a right lib like RP." What it is and what you think it should be are completely different. "The only fusion involved is a consequence of the necessity of green endorsement of LP ticket." Greens will not vote Lib any more than Libs will vote for a GP candidate. These two platforms are very different. Have you sent this idea to the Green Party brass and if so what was their response? “The LP p should be a left lib, not a right lib like RP.”

What it is and what you think it should be are completely different.

“The only fusion involved is a consequence of the necessity of green endorsement of LP ticket.”

Greens will not vote Lib any more than Libs will vote for a GP candidate. These two platforms are very different.

Have you sent this idea to the Green Party brass and if so what was their response?

]]> by: Robert Milnes http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380969 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:02:37 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380969 Zeleni, For myself, I'm not talking about green/lib fusion. Rather cooperation in not splitting the vote. Each would retain their identity. The only fusion involved is a consequence of the necessity of green endorsement of LP ticket. This is to get near 100% ballot access for it as possible. & please exclude Ron Paul from such discussions involving my version of progressive alliance strategy. The LP p should be a left lib, not a right lib like RP. Zeleni, For myself, I’m not talking about green/lib fusion. Rather cooperation in not splitting the vote. Each would retain their identity. The only fusion involved is a consequence of the necessity of green endorsement of LP ticket. This is to get near 100% ballot access for it as possible. & please exclude Ron Paul from such discussions involving my version of progressive alliance strategy. The LP p should be a left lib, not a right lib like RP.

]]> by: Zeleni http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380863 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 02:39:58 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380863 There are many reasons why the Greens wouldn't want to fuse with Ron Paul or the Libertarians. Though we are in agreement with the war and civil liberties, Paul and the Libertarians are weak on the environment. The libertarian response to many environmental concerns is that with strong property rights, you wouldn't be able to pollute into your neighbors yard. To fight problems such as global warming requires the government to get involved. I don't understand how the libertarian position can effectively mitigate global warming. Paul doesn't accept climate change as a fact, even though the vast majority of scientists agree that it's a manmade problem. He's an OBGYN by training. He doesn't decide what's happening with our climate, and the climatologists don't decide whether a woman's pregnant. The environment, while it is not the only issue of concern to Greens, is a very significant focus for many of us. This is a huge stumbling block in any sort of fusion between the two parties. Not to mention single payer health care. Both parties have strong, consistent values. Why should either one want to sacrifice these values for political expediency? Why not just merge ourselves with the two corporate parties? There are many reasons why the Greens wouldn’t want to fuse with Ron Paul or the Libertarians. Though we are in agreement with the war and civil liberties, Paul and the Libertarians are weak on the environment. The libertarian response to many environmental concerns is that with strong property rights, you wouldn’t be able to pollute into your neighbors yard. To fight problems such as global warming requires the government to get involved. I don’t understand how the libertarian position can effectively mitigate global warming.

Paul doesn’t accept climate change as a fact, even though the vast majority of scientists agree that it’s a manmade problem. He’s an OBGYN by training. He doesn’t decide what’s happening with our climate, and the climatologists don’t decide whether a woman’s pregnant.

The environment, while it is not the only issue of concern to Greens, is a very significant focus for many of us. This is a huge stumbling block in any sort of fusion between the two parties. Not to mention single payer health care.

Both parties have strong, consistent values. Why should either one want to sacrifice these values for political expediency? Why not just merge ourselves with the two corporate parties?

]]> by: david http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380550 Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:03:00 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380550 We normally look at politicis in a left vs. right framework some times establishment vs. anti-establishment or populist framework is more accurate lense to view things through. Paul is gathering support from anti-establishment populist types both right and left. The question in coalitions like those being discussed is which issues are most important to the voters the issues that pull them on left right axis or the populist establishment axis. We normally look at politicis in a left vs. right framework some times establishment vs. anti-establishment or populist framework is more accurate lense to view things through. Paul is gathering support from anti-establishment populist types both right and left. The question in coalitions like those being discussed is which issues are most important to the voters the issues that pull them on left right axis or the populist establishment axis.

]]> by: Google Yahoo http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380513 Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:42:15 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380513 Preston, please explain re: McCain. Preston, please explain re: McCain.

]]> by: Robert Capozzi http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380487 Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:04:29 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/11/fusion-and-unity-in-thirdpartyland/#comment-380487 I toy with the idea that an "upper left" Libertarian-type party could do extremely well in the current environment. That would mean a foreshortening of the LP's penchant for long term solutions for more practical incremental steps. It would also mean that one or both of the major parties schisms. The LP has peeled away Bob Barr, and at one point, Ron Paul. Were Paul to come back to the LP, a Paul/Barr ticket has some credibility nationally. If the LP is to step up, however, it needs to become more flexible. Even Ron Paul is now acknowledging that there are few absolutes in life. A big issue that requires a more thoughtful, flexible positioning is on abortion, and I say that as a pro-choicer. -Bob I toy with the idea that an “upper left” Libertarian-type party could do extremely well in the current environment. That would mean a foreshortening of the LP’s penchant for long term solutions for more practical incremental steps. It would also mean that one or both of the major parties schisms. The LP has peeled away Bob Barr, and at one point, Ron Paul. Were Paul to come back to the LP, a Paul/Barr ticket has some credibility nationally.

If the LP is to step up, however, it needs to become more flexible. Even Ron Paul is now acknowledging that there are few absolutes in life. A big issue that requires a more thoughtful, flexible positioning is on abortion, and I say that as a pro-choicer.

-Bob

]]>