Thee New Party

"Ain't nothing in the middle of the road except a dead armadillo." This saying means to say that a moderate political view is not tenable because it doesn't get people excited. Not only does it not get people excited, but also, it doesn't accomplish anything. It doesn't accomplish anything because it has nothing to stand for. Or does it? A traditionally moderate view is luke-warm, tepid, uninspiring. It does not say, "This is what we need to accomplish and here is why." That's the problem with Moderate political views. However, there is another type of Moderate thinking which is focused, goal-oriented, and inspiring. The main difference is issues. Which issues? Instead of taking the middle ground on the existing issues (gun control, civil rights, the environment, the 3 G's: God, Guns, Gays; etc.) -- instead, an inspiring Moderate political view proposes NEW issues. There an infinite number of ways to think an issue, not just two. More importa

What does a Moderate view even look like? What is a Political Moderate? Where can I find one? Does such a thing actually exist? In fact, the answer is yes -- they do exist. And the truth is that they are the silent majority. The truth is that the vast majority of American hold political views that are less extreme than the talking points reflected in the mainline political talking points. The average voter does not think, "Oh yeah, we really need to go along with what these people are saying in the political debates." But rather the average voter thinks: "What a bunch of nonsense. Are you kidding me? These people can't be serious." What is your Moderate view, and how do you express it? How can I describe the form of water? What does a politically Moderate View look like? What is the shape of water? I can't provide a perfect description, but here are some general observations: 1) Less talk more rock. Actions speak louder than words. 2) Less about what needs t

Ideally, multiple viable Third Parties should compete for power and influence. By introducing not just one, but multiple moderate parties into the political system, we may hope to decentralize power and distribute influence to different segments over the course of time. The ultimate goal should not be to centralize power into a new Third Party, but rather to decentralize power into multiple new Third Parties (eg Fourth Parties, Fifth Parties, etc.). This provides the philosophical benefit of continued decentralization. Additionally, from a pragmatic perspective, we may think of Third Parties as cannibalizing votes, either from Republicans or from Democrats. In order for a Third Party to thrive, a Fourth Party is required to offset cannibalization. That is to say, Thee New Party is moderate, but leans left. Therefore it cannibalizes liberal votes. However, Thee Other Party is moderate, and leans right, thereby cannibalizing conservative votes. In this way a balance is achieved, and both

The main reason why Third Parties have failed is because they have been too extreme in their ideologies. In order for a Third Party to thrive, it needs to be MODERATE, not extreme. The reason why the Green Party can never get an edge in elections is because it is even more liberal that the Democratic Party. The Libertarian Party fails to win elections for the same reason. What is needed is not a new party that is more intense than the existing parties. But rather, a Third Party alternative needs to be more MODERATE.

The basic idea here is to promote the possibility of thinking about things with clarity and understanding. We are here to think about things in a clear manner. Our goal should be understanding. How can I understand better? What is it really about?