And what about the Falcon Party, which one here suggests should be graced by the CP and AIP joining in with them?
I was under the impression that the Falcon Party was more “libertarian” in nature, but I could be wrong. I only just took a cursory look at their web site an hour ago, rushing up against check out time at a hotel.
What are/would be the differences that would prevent the three parties (CP, AIP, FP) from forming a practical coalition or affiliating together to a degree significant to get some Constitutionalists elected to some House and Senate seats in 2012, 2014, 2016?
My position is this. A two party system is still the most stable, and the United States should not sink turn into something like a parliamentary system. But we citizens have been the ones keeping the same two parties in power—the two that should both be dumped (IMHO).
The Republicans are now (as someone has said) Democrat-Lite, evidenced ever more clearly from the way it ran this last campaign, scaredie-cat approach to Obama’s proposed policies, to bailouts, scaredie-cat immigration policy, fear of genuine tax reform, too many Colin Powell-types, etc. Yes, we have two Democratic Parties (both in Constitutional disguise). And it is ushering in a president that makes every world socialist dance with glee.
I have little hope that a third party, or even a coalition of several, could elect a president within the next twenty years. I do believe that a third party Constitutional/Conservative/Patriotic effort, perhaps a concerted effort of the CP, AIP, and FP could possibly take several House seats, and perhaps even a Senate seat in the very near future.
What would several “alternative” house seat wins accomplish. It would send the message to the American electorate and to the reigning Demopub Party, that the anointing of the current order can be removed; the current “two” parties can be replaced with two others.
I have many friends in the political arena (Republicans or former Republicans), a couple who have actually held offices in state legislatures in years gone by, who supported Chuck Baldwin and the CP. I've yet to speak directly with anyone I know who supported Alan Keys and AIP.
The fact that some (Republicans or former Republicans) who have served in state legislative seats and know government at that level is encouraging to me, but it is not enough. State legislators do not get very much press unless they are involved in scandal.
Still, it seems that a concerted effort of the CP, AIP, and FP could put many good people in office at state legislator level. Of course, one or two Governorships would shake things up as well, or is that too hopeful.
Loyalty to the Republican Party is getting us . . . well, the likes of Obama, and Congressional leadership the likes of Reid and Palms, and that's about all.
At the very least, the CP, AIP, and FP, without abandoning their own thrid party aspirations should openly and honestly, without subterfuge, but with open declaration, put concerted pressure on the Republican Party, and especially its leadership. The CP, AIP, and FP should look up the snouts of the RP leadership and tell them that they will be going after young, bright, Constitutionally minded Republicans.
If I were in any leadership position with the CP, AIP, or FP, I would be forming regular contact with the best and brightest of the Republicans (elected officials, appointed officials, party officials) who have Constitutional leanings. I wouldn't do this in a corner; not hiding — not secretively. And I would tell the heads of the RP exactly what I am doing.
I would be going after them. I would be openly encouraging them, saying, “Look, if you are hampered by your party leadership, if they are trying to get you to hush up or keep your views tailored to the democrat-leaning leadership or the Rhinos, then stand up, come out, and become a leader in a party that has a like mind and heart.
Conservatism and Constitutionalism is not dead. But the Republican Party is dead. Let's encourage their Constitutional-leaning bright ones not to join it in the grave yard. Is a resurrection possible for the Republican Party? Resurrections are quite difficult to perform, you know.
It's been five months now, and I can't recall all the details. However, two planks on which there was complete disagreement between Keyes and the CP platform dealt with immigration and with support for the UN. In general, Keyes was much more willing to sacrifice American sovereignty than was the CP.
I think the contrast between what the CP did and what the Libertarian Party did is instructive. Both were presented with the opportunity to nominate a "big name," if they would abandon their principles. The Libertarians did that and lost anyway. Now there is much name-calling among the Libertarians. The CP didn't do that, and while it lost, it retained its integrity. I think we made the right decision.