Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2014, 01:54:12 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: Bacon King)
| | |-+  Third Party Look: Modern Whigs
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Third Party Look: Modern Whigs  (Read 1847 times)
AltWorlder
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 287


Political Matrix
E: -3.35, S: 3.83

View Profile
« on: August 09, 2008, 09:00:12 pm »
Ignore

These guys.

Quote
ISSUES

The Modern Whig Party relies on common sense. We see the value of independent thinking and the danger of being limited to one distinct ideology. Since 1833, we have carried the mantle of America's middle-of-the-road party.

To get involved or add to our list of issues, send us an email.

Economic Distribution

The Modern Whig philosophy is to empower the states with the resources to handle their unique affairs. The logic is that people in Alabama should not always have to flip the bill for earmarks that occur in New York and vice versa. For example, a senator from Oklahoma is currently using his committee powers to stifle an important transportation project in Virginia. The reality is that the more local one gets, the more in tune with the unique and specific needs of that area. This is why we propose that federal tax dollars be provided to each state in a lump sum every fiscal year based on population. This eliminates the need for most earmarks and pork-barrel spending as the onus will then be on state legislators and governors to allocate funding for issues that they see fit. Of course the federal government will still vote on other special projects and traditionally federal items, but these projects will be more manageable to monitor. In addition, the allocations to the states also provides a better opportunity to balance the federal budget while also forcing local voters to pay more attention to state elected officials.

Iraq and Afghanistan

Many of our members have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and have unique and practical qualifications to express the Modern Whig viewpoint. Iraq obviously was planned and managed very poorly and it is time for drastic but realistic change. We propose pulling our forces out of Iraq except for a relatively small base in the Kurdish area of the country...

Environmental Protection and National Security

Why did we lump the environment with national security? Because eliminating our dependency on foreign oil is a national security issue as it takes away a significant amount of cards from our enemies. For example, cartels are illegal in the US but at the same time, we rely on the OPEC cartel for our oil. Expedited funding and research into viable green technology is part of the answer. It also is a major developing industry where we can make lots of money and create tons of jobs. At the same time, we represent a new generation of "Trustbuster." ...

Immigration

If somebody is in this country illegally, then he or she should be deported if caught. However, it is not realistic in terms of manpower and resources to attempt to hunt illegal immigrants down. We propose the following: Offer illegal immigrants the opportunity for citizenship if they join the military and serve out their initial contractual term honorably. This system already works for green card holders and has been very successful...

In respect to the orderly deportation of other illegal immigrants, we propose the following: A creation of ad-hoc immigration courts. Essentially, highly regarded immigration lawyers in varying parts of the country will be nominated and selected to serve as immigration judges...

China, Foreign Aid and the WTO

...
The Modern Whig Party proposes offering tiered subsidies and tax breaks to U.S. corporations who remove their manufacturing operations from China. The WTO and international treaty justification is based on well-established health and welfare exemptions of rules that normally forbid this type of government intervention...

Israel

The Modern Whig Party supports the two-state solution to this conflict. However, we refuse to support the creation of a terrorist state of Palestine. Israel is a stable democracy and should be treated and respected accordingly...

Church/State Separation

Don't mess with Christmas. While our members range from deeply religious to completely secular, we are realistic. We follow the rule that the government must not fund religious activities. However, the business of forcing Christmas trees and reindeer ornaments off of city hall property is ridiculous. At the same time, government cannot favor one religion over others. So long as all other religions have equal access to display their holiday symbols, we see no problems.

Gay Rights

Each state can determine the extended rights of homosexuals based on their own local values. We do, however, support classifying as a federal hate crime attacks on people based on their perceived sexual orientation. In the end, the sexual orientation of the guy down the street has no bearing on anybody else's life.

Health Care

Recognizing that Viagra is sometimes prescribed to men for other medial reasons such as diabetes and covered by many health plans regardless of the reason, we find it unacceptable that birth control is typically not covered for women. Birth control medication has many other benefits to women besides its primary function. We believe that health insurance companies should include birth control as a regularly covered item and stop forcing millions of women to pay out of pocket

Abortion

Our members are split on this subject just like the rest of the country. But the bottom line is that this one particular issue should not be the sole basis for which political party people affiliate with... It is time to end the trend of having this one issue become a deal breaker. Each state can determine its course of action like any other public health issue that revolves around medical procedures. The federal government should not get involved or regulate such items as the less involvement by the government in our private lives the better.

Affirmative Action

Race-based affirmative action should be eliminated and replaced with an economic criteria for education benefits.

Science and Technology

Exploration is in our blood. Whether it is the brain, the oceans, the wilderness or space, people have always been fascinated by the unknown. Perhaps more importantly, science has a way of bringing people together in a manner that no politician could ever dream. Science also has a way of transforming the economy. The Modern Whig Party supports the privatization of space and continued exploration of our oceans. Taking away the government monopoly and allowing capitalism into the exploration business will exponentially expand our technology base and further the growth of mankind.

They seem to be really pragmatic centrists to me, unlike Ross Perot/Schwarzenegger-type centrists who are basically small government fiscal conservatives that are sane enough to not be libertarians.  What do you think of their ideas?
Logged

Economic score: -3.35
Social score: +3.83

Quote from: metropolitan from Wonkette
alan keyes, mike gravel, cynthia mckinney, ralph nader... such a mess.
maybe it would be better if we just had two big political parties that represent wide swaths of ideology run against each other instead of all these warring parties. if we only had to deal with two parties a winner would have already come out ahead and had a chance to stabilize the financial markets and to prepare to deal with iraq.
Reluctant Republican
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1725


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2008, 09:12:24 pm »
Ignore

Iíve been following the Modern Whigs  a bit. They just hit 10000 members, the majority of them serving in the armed forces. I really am impressed by them. I don't agree with them on Immigration though, I think there should be other options then the military to allow Illegals an opportunity to gain citizenship. I also donít know if I favor rendering any crime as a ďhate crimeĒ, but that is another minor issue. Finally, Iíll have to look into their Health Care plan more. But other then that, I think there a pretty good party, and I hope they can be viable one day nationwide. I believe there focusing all there attention on a State Representative race in 2010, but I donít even know which state this is in. But in any case, I like that strategy. Better then to run mostly paper candidates that donít have  a chance to get more then 3 or 4 percent.

And, on a side note, Iím starting to agree with you about Libertarians. Why I donít have any problems with the likes of Barr, the radicals in the party scare the hell out of me. I actually think Iíd favor socialism(!) over  some of there more ďout thereď ideas.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2008, 09:14:36 pm by Reluctant Republican »Logged

"Alcťe Arobin's manner was so genuine that it often decieved even himself."

"In addition to my other numerous acquaintances, I have one more intimate confidant. . . . My depression is the most faithful mistress I have known- no wonder, then, that I return the love.Ē

― SÝren Kierkegaard
AltWorlder
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 287


Political Matrix
E: -3.35, S: 3.83

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2008, 10:03:02 pm »
Ignore

Well, the thing about Libertarians, even Ron Paul 'libertarians', is that they favor policies that require radical restructuring of American government as we know it.  On the other hand, there are economic conservative/social liberals such as Schwarzenegger out there, or perhaps Giuliani (other than every national security) who kind of fit the libertarian configuration without having necessarily the wacky ideology or policies of actual libertarians.  (I am guessing that's what Ross Perot's Reform Party was all about, though even today I don't understand if his ideology was leftist or rightist.)  All of this is rather "centrist", but I'd argue that it's still heading towards the libertarian config.

This Modern Whig Party, on the other hand, doesn't seem to have the same fetish for small government that Libertarians, libertarians, and people in the libertarianish configuration have.  They seem to stand for moderate, prudent, pragmatic actions, and I like that.  While I believe that big government can certainly be a bad thing, if adequate controls are put in place it needn't necessarily be.
Logged

Economic score: -3.35
Social score: +3.83

Quote from: metropolitan from Wonkette
alan keyes, mike gravel, cynthia mckinney, ralph nader... such a mess.
maybe it would be better if we just had two big political parties that represent wide swaths of ideology run against each other instead of all these warring parties. if we only had to deal with two parties a winner would have already come out ahead and had a chance to stabilize the financial markets and to prepare to deal with iraq.
Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38373
Bangladesh


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2008, 04:20:25 pm »
Ignore

Since 1833?

I lost all respect for them at that sentence.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
Jacobtm
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3054


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2008, 10:17:55 pm »
Ignore

The party name itself conjurs up visions of men in powdered robes wearing those colorful nike's, good luck getting anywhere...
Logged

Why do so many people here cheer on war crimes?
Israel and the United States "killing dozens of civilians with explosives", as you phrase it, has, throughout history, almost always been a good thing.
IDS Attorney General PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22338
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: August 11, 2008, 04:12:11 am »
Ignore

     I actually agree with them on most of the issues that are most important to me. Too bad they're not going anywhere. Sad
Logged

Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10152
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: August 11, 2008, 08:47:11 pm »
Ignore

Shock to say this but if they ever did become a major party, I would join them. I think most of their views. Maybe they might take the GOP places?
Logged
Sensei
senseiofj324
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11760
Panama


Political Matrix
E: -2.45, S: -5.57

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 11, 2008, 10:10:36 pm »
Ignore

Shock to say this but if they ever did become a major party, I would join them. I think most of their views. Maybe they might take the GOP places?
No. It would be shocking if you didn't join the party at one point or another.
Logged

Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38373
Bangladesh


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: August 12, 2008, 02:48:43 pm »
Ignore

The policy on Israel is nonsensical.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10152
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: August 12, 2008, 05:06:45 pm »
Ignore

The policy on Israel is nonsensical.

To you.
Logged
Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38373
Bangladesh


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: August 12, 2008, 05:27:37 pm »
Ignore


No. I mean that it is self-contradictory.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
AltWorlder
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 287


Political Matrix
E: -3.35, S: 3.83

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: August 12, 2008, 05:40:57 pm »
Ignore

Quote
The Modern Whig Party supports the two-state solution to this conflict. However, we refuse to support the creation of a terrorist state of Palestine. Israel is a stable democracy and should be treated and respected accordingly. Israel is very important to not only Jewish members of the party, but also our evangelical members and those who see the situation for what it truly is. We support Israel's right to defend itself from its enemies just as we support the US and our right to defend ourselves. True compromise from both sides is key, although Israel should be permitted to keep its major settlement blocks such as Gush Etzion and Ariel.

I think they're alluding to the fact that they don't like the current PA, or maybe the Hamas government.  In other words they would be in favor of a two-state solution but the Palestinian Arab state would be composed of people who do not exist in reality.  You probably want to check the actual Issues page on their website, not just the shorter blurb I quoted.

Am I the only one who thinks that their Iraq policy makes sense, and is probably a good coldly pragmatic solution?

Quote
Many of our members have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and have unique and practical qualifications to express the Modern Whig viewpoint. Iraq obviously was planned and managed very poorly and it is time for drastic but realistic change. We propose pulling our forces out of Iraq except for a relatively small base in the Kurdish area of the country. Our troops will tell you that unlike the rest of Iraq, the Kurds are prone to democracy and in fact do treat American forces as liberators. To this end, the Kurds deserve our continued protection and in turn, we maintain a base to act upon any contingencies emanating from within Iraq, Syria or Iran. Moreover, the oil industry from Kirkuk can take care of the bills. We then can put real effort and resources into fighting the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Finally, we would continue dialogue and contact with the Pakistani government in hopes that they would finally end this defacto terrorist safe-haven in their country, but in the end, if they fail to act then we will.

I think they're wildly overestimating Kirkuk's oil industry, though.  Not to mention the fact that the Kurds are engaged in (albeit nonviolent) ethnic cleansing.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2008, 05:43:34 pm by AltWorlder »Logged

Economic score: -3.35
Social score: +3.83

Quote from: metropolitan from Wonkette
alan keyes, mike gravel, cynthia mckinney, ralph nader... such a mess.
maybe it would be better if we just had two big political parties that represent wide swaths of ideology run against each other instead of all these warring parties. if we only had to deal with two parties a winner would have already come out ahead and had a chance to stabilize the financial markets and to prepare to deal with iraq.
Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38373
Bangladesh


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: August 12, 2008, 05:42:15 pm »
Ignore

The Iraq policy is fine, but the Israeli policy makes me wonder how much they plan to fark it up.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines