Center Party USA

[M]

On another thread, I forget which, I mentione the idea of a centrist party in the United States. Not a party that eternally sought compromise and bent to the public's demands,  but one that truly believed in the ideals of the Center, which embodies the best of Americandemocracy.Members ofthe party would be drawn from both current major parties, and there would be a lively debate on most issues within the party. Founding members include Joe Lieberman, John McCain, Evan Bayh, Rudi Giuliani, Arnold Schwarzenegger, John Breaux, and Arlen Specter. The GOP commits much more strongly to the ideals of conservatism (the McClintock GOP) and the dems remaining are quite liberal.

Who on this forum would join this party? Who in public life would join this party? What would this party's official stance be on key issues? How would it do electorally? Who would win the next open Presidential election (say 2008)? What would the party's name be? What would this party's animal be? Would they develop a good three letter acronym? And so on.

[Demrepdan]

I would sure as hell join this party. And I think it should be called the Democratic-Republican Party....as there once was from 1800-1828.

I'm not sure what the party animal should be....something that illustrates the party's CENTRIST thoughts....hmm....I dunno...

Hopefully this party would do well nationally....vote for the Democratic-Republican Party!! GO DEMREPS!!!

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

In the near term, it's doubtful.  In the long term, it could be likely.  I don't think its possible to start from elements inside the two major parties though.

The closest we've seen to a centrist party in our lifetimes was the rise of Ross Perot.  Perot's movement was based on centrist "common-sense" principles.  It didn't come from the two major parties, but instead created mostly new activists.  Any new centrist party would have to start with new activists, and build into the moderate wings of the major parties.  Then the new party would have to try to get beyond an inevitable fight between the early-adopters and the former Democrats and Republicans.

Even though I am ideologically moderate, I am fanatically partisan.  Many moderate Democrats are the same way.  It would be extremely difficult for moderates to jump ship because if it didn't work out, they'd be dead politically and that would only hurt the "moderate movement".  I support the Republican Party... so I don't want moderates going to a new party, I want all moderates in the GOP!

Someday, our generation will get up off its respective asses and vote.  It may come gradually as a result of growth, or it may come all at once as a result of events.  Either way, our peers will be looking for a choice that matches their vision and values.

I devote myself every day to trying to make my Party compatible with the overall desires and dreams of my generation.  We are a generation that believes in balancing fiscal responsibility with social justice.  Tax cuts and tolerance.  The "old politics" is out of balance.  It encourages hypocrasy, corruption, injustice, and seems to cater only to the demographic of disgruntled residents of nursing homes and assisted living facilities.  As the Democrat Party is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the AARP, The Republican Party is much closer to breaking away from the "old politics"... but if we lose one step forward, it will mean 10 steps backwards.  We are so close, yet so far away.

If we should fail in our mission, then the future nation will have no choice but to turn away from us - and a new party would become necessary.  The party would not just be centrist, but libertarian as well.  It's number one issue would most likely be the sky-rocketing defecit.  It would promote fiscal, social, moral, and ethical responsibility.  Because the partisans of the major parties would not be involved in its creation - it would develop its own identity rather than being a combination of the two major parties.

[Gustaf]

I would vote for it, but I don' think it will happen anytime soon.

[YRABNNRM]

I would possibly join it. I think that Partisianship has become a problem in the USA and we need people who can reach across the aisle and work with members of other parties to achieve whats right for the country instead of doing what fits partylines and what makes polls go up . One of the major reasons I like McCain.

McCain 2008!

[12th Doctor]

I was born a Democrat, raised a Democrat, became a Republican and I'm gonna die a Republican dammit!  

[© tweed]

How about 7 parties:

Socialist Party USA (leftist fringe group)
Progressive democratic Party (left-wing, like the ted Kennedy Party)
National Democratic Party (like the Dems today)
Centrist Independent Party (center-right)
Public Conservative Party (like the current GOP)
Christian Conservative Party (John Ashcroft, Roy Moore, etc.)
National Fascist Party (right-wing fringe group)

Abreviations are: SPUSA, PDP, NDP, CIP, PCP, CCP, NFP.
Here are the 2004 nominees for president:

SPUSA: Dennis Kucnich (Ohio)
PDP: Howard Dean (Vermont)
NDP: John Kerry (Massachusetts)
CIP: John McCain (Arizona)
PCP: George W. Bush (Texas)
CCP: Roy Moore (Alabama)
NFP: Howard Phillips (Virginia)

The SPUSA and the NFP would win no states.  CCP nominee Roy Moore wins Alabama and Mississippi, and Howard dean takes Vermont.  The rest of the states are divided between Kerry, McCain, and Bush.

What do you think?

[7,052,770]

I think at least 6 of those candidates would receive some electoral votes.  I'll make a map an post it here.

Hmmm, my map is not loading . . .

[12th Doctor]

How about 7 parties:

Socialist Party USA (leftist fringe group)
Progressive democratic Party (left-wing, like the ted Kennedy Party)
National Democratic Party (like the Dems today)
Centrist Independent Party (center-right)
Public Conservative Party (like the current GOP)
Christian Conservative Party (John Ashcroft, Roy Moore, etc.)
National Fascist Party (right-wing fringe group)

Abreviations are: SPUSA, PDP, NDP, CIP, PCP, CCP, NFP.
Here are the 2004 nominees for president:

SPUSA: Dennis Kucnich (Ohio)
PDP: Howard Dean (Vermont)
NDP: John Kerry (Massachusetts)
CIP: John McCain (Arizona)
PCP: George W. Bush (Texas)
CCP: Roy Moore (Alabama)
NFP: Howard Phillips (Virginia)

The SPUSA and the NFP would win no states.  CCP nominee Roy Moore wins Alabama and Mississippi, and Howard dean takes Vermont.  The rest of the states are divided between Kerry, McCain, and Bush.

What do you think?

I think you should flip Dean and Kerry.

[Huckleberry Finn]

How about 7 parties:

Socialist Party USA (leftist fringe group)
Progressive democratic Party (left-wing, like the ted Kennedy Party)
National Democratic Party (like the Dems today)
Centrist Independent Party (center-right)
Public Conservative Party (like the current GOP)
Christian Conservative Party (John Ashcroft, Roy Moore, etc.)
National Fascist Party (right-wing fringe group)

Abreviations are: SPUSA, PDP, NDP, CIP, PCP, CCP, NFP.
Here are the 2004 nominees for president:

SPUSA: Dennis Kucnich (Ohio)
PDP: Howard Dean (Vermont)
NDP: John Kerry (Massachusetts)
CIP: John McCain (Arizona)
PCP: George W. Bush (Texas)
CCP: Roy Moore (Alabama)
NFP: Howard Phillips (Virginia)

The SPUSA and the NFP would win no states.  CCP nominee Roy Moore wins Alabama and Mississippi, and Howard dean takes Vermont.  The rest of the states are divided between Kerry, McCain, and Bush.

What do you think?

This kind of party system could be possible under different kind election system like d'Hondt method, which is in use in Finland and many other countries. USA current model makes it impossible.

I found this article about Finnish/d'Hondt method
http://virtual.finland.fi/elections/electionsystem.html

Shortly:

Finland is divided into 15 electoral districts. The number of representatives from each electoral district depends on the number of Finnish citizens resident in the district.

Proportionality and calculating the result of the election
Proportionality means that each party elects members to Parliament in proportion to the number of votes received by that party in each electoral district.

Thus proportionality concerns only a single electoral district, not the entire country. Although there is no minimum number of votes, there is in practice a threshold. For a party to elect a candidate to Parliament, it must obtain some 3-4% of the votes in the largest electoral districts and 10-12% in the smallest.

[Huckleberry Finn]

And National Fascist Party sounds too bold. It would be better for fascists themselves to be only under National Party.

[© tweed]

Here's the OnTheIssues graphs of the 7 candidates:

Dennis Kucinich (S-OH):



Howard Dean (PD-VT):



John Kerry (ND-MA):



John McCain (CI-AZ):



George W. Bush (PC-TX):



Roy Moore (CC-AL): Unavailable

Howard Phillips (NF-VA):

[12th Doctor]

Here's the OnTheIssues graphs of the 7 candidates:

Dennis Kucinich (S-OH):



Howard Dean (PD-VT):



John Kerry (ND-MA):



John McCain (CI-AZ):



George W. Bush (PC-TX):



Roy Moore (CC-AL): Unavailable

Howard Phillips (NF-VA):

I think that Kerry is at least one grid to the left of Dean.  I think that they put Kerry there only because he voted for the war.

[© tweed]

I didn't make the graphs, don't pick on me

[Huckleberry Finn]

Miamiu's sevenpartysystem: support distribution in congressional election with d'Hondt's method.

SPUSA 5%
PDP 10%
NDP 25%
CIP 15%
PCP 25%
CCP 15%
NFP 5%

It is also possible that under multiparty system Afro-American civil right movement would have developed as party in 60's.

I can also see "Hispanic Party" promoting language rights of Spanish speaking population.

[12th Doctor]

I didn't make the graphs, don't pick on me

I know.  I'm not.  that's why I said "they".

[Filuwaúrdjan]

How about this for a multi-party system?

Socialist Party USA
Democratic Party
Progressive Party
Republican Party

[12th Doctor]

Miamiu's sevenpartysystem: support distribution in congressional election with d'Hondt's method.

SPUSA 5%
PDP 10%
NDP 25%
CIP 15%
PCP 25%
CCP 15%
NFP 5%

It is also possible that under multiparty system Afro-American civil right movement would have developed as party in 60's.

I can also see "Hispanic Party" promoting language rights of Spanish speaking population.

Exactly.  That's why I thank God we don't have a multiple party system.

[Gustaf]

Miamiu's sevenpartysystem: support distribution in congressional election with d'Hondt's method.

SPUSA 5%
PDP 10%
NDP 25%
CIP 15%
PCP 25%
CCP 15%
NFP 5%

It is also possible that under multiparty system Afro-American civil right movement would have developed as party in 60's.

I can also see "Hispanic Party" promoting language rights of Spanish speaking population.

Exactly.  That's why I thank God we don't have a multiple party system.

I think language parties aren't that common out-side of Finland...

[7,052,770]

'

I can't make my map work . . .

Anyhow, I have:

Socialist--Dennis Kucinich/Al Sharpton....17
Progressive Democratic--John Kerry/Howard Dean....101
National Democratic--John Edwards/Wesley Clark....135
Centrist Independent--John McCain/Joe Lieberman....192
Public Conservative--George W. Bush/Dick Cheney....174
Christian Conservative--Roy Moore/John Ashcroft....67
Constitution--Howard Phillips/J. Curtis Frazier....5

For this to happen, I gave each state 1 EV for every 500,000 people (plus 2) and added Puetro Rico (why not)  States over 15 I gave proportional allocation, and states under 15 were winner take all.

And my map wont work . . .

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

I think its VERY difficult to determine electoral votes with so many parties especially under a winner-take-all system.  I've made an attempt at gauging support in different states for these parties instead.  I've omitted the SP and NP as I do not believe that these would be serious parties even under this sort of system.  Each party would have "home base states" with its strongest roots of ideological support.

Progressive Democrats: (Massachusetts/California)


National Democrats (Arkansas/New York)


Centrist Independents: (Arizona/New Hampshire)


Public Conservatives: (Texas/Indiana)


Christian Conservatives (Alabama/Utah)

[Gustaf]

I think its VERY difficult to determine electoral votes with so many parties especially under a winner-take-all system.  I've made an attempt at gauging support in different states for these parties instead.  I've omitted the SP and NP as I do not believe that these would be serious parties even under this sort of system.

Progressive Democrats:


National Democrats


Centrist Independents:


Public Conservatives:


Christian Conservatives

You failed...your maps don't work...

[KEmperor]

I can also see "Hispanic Party" promoting language rights of Spanish speaking population.

Language rights?  What does that mean?  Spanish speaking immigrants have the right to speak their language all they want.

[© tweed]

I will soon make a thread assigning the senators to one of the 7 parties.  

I will now register as a progressive democrat

[© tweed]

Made the senators.