Is the Conservative-GOP Marriage Over?

Really the trouble is both parties exist to win elections. I do like the article. Maybe it is time, or past time, for a good thrid party chalenge. In my mind both parties have taken the voters too much for granted

I'm all for a Third Party.  How about a Fiscally Conservative/Socially Liberal Party?  Not sure of what they could be named ... Jeet Kun Do of Politico ;)

I have wondered for quite some time just how a Third Party could work.  I would go for a party that was somewhere between between Fiscally Conservative/Moderate, and Socially Liberal.

I think being fully Fiscally Conservative is too much in the direction that the right now has it.  I believe you have to prime the pump at times, to make it work.  And yes, that means using the dreaded "S" word... Stimulus.

What I have thought is to take the right-most eighteen percent... and the left-most perhaps seven percent... and let them each have their own sandbox... or litter box, as the case may be.  Take the remaining seventy-five percent and start a Centrist Party... and see where it goes.

By the way... I used the 18% and 7% numbers, because I think there are more extremists on the right than on the left... although each end of the political spectrum definitely has those who are "over-the-edge."

I would also be curious as to what percentages each of you would put in those two categories... the extreme right or the extreme left.

If somehow there could be a Third Party:  Could anyone or everyone come up with some suggestions of perhaps five people... less if need be... who you would see running for President and Vice-President of this newly-formed Centrist Party ? 

Also, perhaps who would be the Majority Leader of this new Centrist Party in the Senate, and who would you have be the Speaker of the House ?

A 3rd party?

That would be interesting!

Maybe we would have more balance and ability to work together vs. the divisiveness we now have. 

It's like the establishment is losing control over it's subjects in both parties. I believe the majority of us are Liberterians and just don't know it. We want government to leave us alone and only take what it needs from us to protect us from other countries and other people.

Would love to see 3 or 4 parties in place that are actually electable.  Having only 2 choices just makes it the lesser of 2 evils most of the time. 

Fiscally conservative and socially liberal. What a novel idea. Remember Bill Clinton? NY has had a few governors that fit that description from both parties. Our last two mayors were both liberal Republicans.

In his first year our new governor balanced the state budget with no new taxes or tax increases, passed sweeping pension reform and legalized gay marriage.

Just like real estate all politics is LOCAL.

I would love to see a 3rd party.  It would be very hard to establish.  They would need a great idea for the people to grasp onto.  but one of the other two parties would grab it as soon as it became popular.  It has happened down through the ages.

Third parties don't work.  It splits such that a winner does not need to win!  (A la Clinton, twice)

That said, Shirley is very late to this party.  Rush has been saying that for over a year.

Karl:  I never thought of it that way, but you are correct.  How about... "fiscally realistic ?" I also think that there can easily be times when the government must be run... outside it's means... by which I mean "borrowing."

And no... your description of "fiscally conservative"... is simply downright mean.  Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should stay.

I would love to see just what impact removing the $100,600 ceiling, or whatever the ceiling is, on Social Security Withholding... and allow it to have no ceiling whatsoever.

Jay... to the degree that a Third Party contributed to Clinton being elected, I am very thankful for that.  It is most unfortunate that Ron Paul did not run as a third party candidate in both 2000 and 2004.

Hi Karen Anne!  I hope you are doing well.  Call me!

As to Clinton, I found him and still find him to be a cartoon.  And it's unfortunate.  He had a lot to offer, but was so very sophomoric it was/is embarrassing.  According to a friend of mine on the Secret Service, he was more juvenile than people realize!  Hillary sure did.  She was an enabler, and for sure still is.  It find it all very sad.  No sarcasm at all.  I really do.

Turns out Gore was a wolf in sheep's clothing!

People like that, in the public eye, and doing that sort of thing, are megalomaniacal and narcissistic beyond belief.

Karl, I think Gore did win in 2000. Both the popular vote and the "chad" re-count in Florida. Bush was selected by "activist judges" not elected by the people.

Jay... and Dick Cheney WASN'T megalomaniacal and narcissistic ?  Dick Cheney.  Still alive... still a criminal.

And Mitchell, the right complains about liberal "activist" judges.  You can't get much more "activist" than by forcing the "installation" of a President... as they did in 2000.  My heart aches when I think of all the horrible things that happened during the Cheney/Bush pResidency that may not have happened if Gore's election had not been derailed by the conservative activist Supreme Court Justices.  And hell... Clarence Thomas should never have been on the Court in the first place.