Comments on: Will An Open Marketplace Produce Consensus?

By: Jay Manifold

Jay Manifold — Sat, 03 Jun 2006 21:33:50 +0000

I see several problems with this:
High legal/regulatory barriers to running for office as an independent or 3rd-party candidate. Likely cost of ballot access alone for a new 3rd-party presidential candidate nationwide would be on the close order of $10 million (it cost Perot $7M). You cannot, repeat, cannot, just start up a new political party like opening a lemonade stand on the street in front of your house.
Gerrymandered congressional districts (which is why I think there is almost no chance of a Dem takeover of the House this year; if few seats change hands, consider this demonstrated to be a nearly insurmountable obstacle).
Size difference between online and offline subcultures. Bloggers, political ones in particular, seem to think that everybody’s as interested in politics as they are. News flash: the rest of the world is not very much like the blogosphere. At all. And it’s much bigger.
To be blunt, attachment disorders among many members of the online subculture. It’s easy to sound determined in an e-mail. But anything that requires getting out from behind a computer keyboard simply wipes out the vast majority of these people. See the behavior of Dean’s supporters during the Iowa caucuses in ‘04. Numerous accounts noted how they would walk into the room, look around, and just sit down, unable to approach or interact with anyone.
In fact, why not just say it? Two words: Howard Dean. Not the President of the United States in this universe. There’s a reason.
Poor candidate quality. Challengers must be motivated, competent, and running for vulnerable seats. If all three conditions are satisfied, they have a good (though less than 50-50) chance of victory. If any of the three conditions is not satisfied, the likelihood of victory drops to 1-2%.
The Libertarian Party is another example of the difficulties involved. For a while it was pretty good at getting ballot access and at electing people to local, non-partisan positions. It experienced a modest upsurge in the early ’90s but lost considerable support to the Perot phenomenon and was pretty much wrecked by the idiotic Harry Browne campaigns of ‘96 and ‘00. Much of its core constituency, such as it is, has now abandoned it due to the irrelevance of isolationism in the wake of 9/11.

By: Ken Hawley

Ken Hawley — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:51:09 +0000

Unfortunately, their poll reveals much about their particular slant on the issues.
- from their site –
Which issue do you want to debate first at Unity08.com?:
Global terrorism
National debt
Dependence on foreign oil
Public education
Health care
Situation in Iraq
Other (post comment)
–
Several interesting implanted axioms there, from the term “Global Terrorism” to that scare word “Dependence”.

Is this the Euston Manifesto for America? It’s clearly a big-D Democrat, left of center view.

By: Don

Don — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:16:31 +0000

Unfortunately history tells us that there is a third alternative. The same Harris �trust� poll which places the executive at 28% and Congress [along with journalists] at 10%, places the military at 47%. It certainly appears to be the one public institution that is willing to clean its own house. Hugh Hewitt mentioned in passing a few days ago on his blog that he is going to read up on the passions, politics, and power towards the end of the Roman Republic. While history doesn�t exactly repeat itself, human behavior is consistent. Think about it, who do we turn to when all other organs of government fail? Which governmental organization has been responsible for the establishment of two solid democracies in the 20th Century and now appears to be doing the same in this one. Jefferson�s warning in the Declaration of Independence goes unheeded – ��That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. �

When does the unthinkable become thinkable? We may yet see played out in our lifetime:

�CASCA -
Why, there was a crown offered him: and being
offered him, he put it by with the back of his hand,
thus; and then the people fell a-shouting.
BRUTUS -
What was the second noise for?
CASCA -
Why, for that too.
CASSIUS -
They shouted thrice: what was the last cry for?
CASCA -
Why, for that too.
BRUTUS -
Was the crown offered him thrice?
CASCA -
Ay, marry, was’t, and he put it by thrice, every
time gentler than other, and at every putting-by
mine honest neighbours shouted.� Julius Caesar, Act 1. Scene II, William Shakespeare

By: ed in texas

ed in texas — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:30:54 +0000

Has anyone noticed the timeline of Bush’s ‘deviation’ from core conserative issues?
Every time the left produces some new oddness, Bush feels safe moving his agenda lateraly. Like maybe it’s linked…
(irony. or not. could be.)

By: Robert Schwartz

Robert Schwartz — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 04:34:19 +0000

I have neither forgotten nor forgiven Hamilton Jerdan (his pronunciation). Reading that name made me run for a safe place to gag in.