[i]If Romney loses in November, the Republican base will no longer buy the electability argument for an establishment candidate. From the view of the base, the elites will have given away an eminently winnable election. Someone new, from outside of Washington, will be the party’s nominee in 2016.
If Romney wins and does nothing to change the status quo, the economy will falter. He will end up as the second straight one-term president, and the nation will desperately be searching for an authentic outsider in 2016.[/i]
Not sure if the correct word here is disingenuous, or complicit.
The shenanigans (elections fraud) during the primary process is what directly contributed to pulling the air out of Ron Paul’s balloon early on by the establishment.
Not until media figures like Rasmussen begin to accurately report the connections between establishment candidates (from both major parties), big banks, the FED, and how it all really works in wonderland - will anything CHANGE.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?id=N00000286
Good luck
As a dedicated member of the unofficial Tea Party it would please me no end to see both the Democrat and Republican parties go down the tubes.
George Washington was correct about permanent political parties.
They will never give up power willingly. It will have to be taken from them. I just hope it can be accomplished without resorting to use of force. 
I think the Republican Party doubled down on being socially conservative in an attempt to win evangelical votes. We will all pay for it.
I actually think they failed to learn the lesson that people prefer to vote “for” something rather than “against” something.
Like or dislike Gingrich, his Contract with America in 1994 was something to vote for.
What have any of them done for us lately?
I get the idea they think Obama is so bad that an unbathed chimpanzee could beat him.
Big, big mistake.
Hmmm. I do not want to reply with something liberal like, “Avoid the racial innuendo.”
You do understand that in that sentence Obama wasn’t being called anything as it was in reference to a hypothetical candidate that could be run against him right?
Then don’t. Resist the “Everything is Racist” Koolaid.
I’d agree if the GOP had nominated Santorum. Even though he is Catholic, that would be epitome of social conservatism and the evangelical vote. Instead, they nominated Romney, and his Mormon faith is largely considered to be a cult to the Religious Right in the Bible Belt (I live in Charlotte, NC with in-laws in G’ville, SC). Interestingly, none of the Bible Beaters around me seem to care. They all think that Romney’s cult is infinitely better than Obama’s Black Liberation Theology Cult or closet Muslim faith - which ever you happen to believe.
Honestly, I can’t remember the last time that Romney made a significant mention of a social issue such as abortion, gay marriage, etc. He may have positions on those issues, but they are not a centerpiece of his campaign and he seems to do a good job of redirecting every interviewer back to the economy when they stray into the social issue weeds.
Then prepare for Democratic rule for at least a generation. Why? Because our electoral college system of winner-take-all punishes fractured voting blocks.
For example, the liberal progressives are content with the hard left turn that the Democrat Party has taken. The Dems have purged their ranks of Conservative thought over the past 10 years and what remains is the MSNBC faithful who have no desire to form a third party. They can count on at least 40-45% of the popular vote as a base in most national elections, and then focus their efforts on the 15% undecideds who are largely morons. Sure, you see some sniping of Obama from fringe groups such as Code Pink, but the chorus from the establishment left, the media, academia, etc. is harmoniously pushing the Democratic party.
On the other hand, it seems to be the Republicans are composed of 3 loosely aligned camps: conservative, moderate, and libertarian. These 3 camps have largely perfected the art of the circular firing squad. Any modern third party will likely result from a fracture of one or more of these camps. My gut tells me that it would be a portion of the conservative and libertarian wings that separate from the moderate over issues of entitlement and welfare reform. This will guarantee that Dems have a plurality of the vote despite not having a national majority on the issues. If you don’t believe me, take a look at Ross Perot in '92. That little bastard was indirectly responsible for the likes of Ginsberg, Bryer, GLBA, Lewinsky, et al.
I agree with this assessment. But any replacement party for the RNC would need the backing of Christian conservatives. Without us, the RNC would never have come this far. But the RNC has been slapping us in the face for quite some time now with their liberal ideologies and decisions. But as you said, there would be democratic rule for awhile until this new party built up steam and I’m still unsure if that is the best way to go.
Where’s the party for the ‘live and let live’ crew?
It’s either country club GOP/evangelicals or pelosi/reid/obongo.
in other countries…
The two party system is the vehicle by which the people are kept under control.
If you want a viable 3rd Party, it must put forward competant candidates. Simply creating an empty shell 3rd Party because you don’t like the Big Two does not benefit the country. The reason why the Libertarian and Constitutional Party candidates will each get less than 5% of the vote has a lot more to do with their own weaknesses, and a lot less to do with “the system.”
For example, the Constitution Party nominee, Virgil Goode, is a career politician out of SW Virginia. He has made a living out of switching parties for political gain and has never had any real executive experience (i.e. run something). For those hoping for a candidate without ties to special interests, Goode never met a tobacco subsidy that he didn’t like.
Then, there is Gary Johnson who is the Libertarian Party candidate. He actually has an interesting personal story prior to entering politics, and did a respectable job running NM. However, his positions since leaving office make him sound stoned. Nobody believes that he could cut DOD by 46% in 1 year without getting a bunch of service members killed. Next, he goes onto FNC and calls for an assassination team to go into Africa to kill the rebel leader Kony. These positions demonstrate him to be a man that will pander to get elected - just like every other politician.
So, before you go forming a 3rd Party, I suggest that you make sure that you can staff it with something other than GOP flunkies and clowns. Otherwise, get ready for a generation of Obamas.
Y’all made some great points but at the end of the day I place the blame on a non-critical thinking, apathetic public.
I’m voting Constitution Party again. Constitution or Libertarian - SOMETHING’S gotta take the place of the estbalishment sorts, for certain!
It’s the people that suck.
The governments they elect are a reflection of themselves.
Face it: 3/4 of the voting population of this country fucking suck at leaving each-other alone
How can a people keep liberty when they have forgotten what it is?
Same here. Unfortunately, the chances of that happening to either party is pretty slim.
IMHO, until we get the press back under control and we hold them accountable for their biased reporting (on all sides) this will never happen. The so-called media likes to build up one party or another and they tend to convince the sheeple to keep giving either party the funds they need to stay in business.
If America were to stop sending contributions, these parties would eventually cease to exist. JM2CW.
What about those candidates make you think that they are different than any other politician? For example, Virgil Goode (Constitution Party Candidate) is a career politician whose positions and party affiliations flip according to popular opinion. His pockets have been lined by big tobacco and his House votes have followed that cash. Do you really think that he his going to stand on principle?
Now, take a look at this video of Gary Johnson on FNC:
Do you have any problem with his foreign policy regarding military cuts and Joseph Kony? IMHO, Krauthammer embarrassed him on national TV.