Thread: An Independent party based on what Americans really WANT

Originally Posted by DJ

Okay, Chexfive, I'm all for the Constitution party--but WHO is willing to run who has a chance to win? I don't care what a party calls itself, it's the name of the one running that matters most. People have to recognize the name of someone they respect. We are running out of time.

I don't think that anyone nameworthy will run on the CP ticket.

Pat Buchanan had name recognition, and federal matching funds when he ran on the Reform Party's ticket, but I think he got less than 1% of the vote. You have to run as an R or a D to get name recognition.

The 08 election is a lost cause. We have to try to strengthen a third party at this point, build it over the next 4 years, and try to run a viable candidacy for 2012. The party creates the name, not the other way around. We have to start building the recognition of the party first, and the names will follow.

Originally Posted by MW

USA_born wrote:

Ron Paul would have taken care of those things. But he was rejected.

I think Paul would have a problem with #3, #5, and #6.

Agreed, MW!
The new party should be a populist party, not a libertarian party.
We need to run a candidate like Lou Dobbs rather than Ron Paul.

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Originally Posted by MW

USA_born wrote:

Ron Paul would have taken care of those things. But he was rejected.

I think Paul would have a problem with #3, #5, and #6.

Agreed, MW!
The new party should be a populist party, not a libertarian party.
We need to run a candidate like Lou Dobbs rather than Ron Paul.

Agree with you guys 100%.

Originally Posted by DJ

I am wondering why an Independent Party could not be organized around the factors that 80% or more of the American people agree on.
1. Get out of NAFTA
2. Get out of Iraq
3. Change the trade agreements to "fair" rather than "free" trade
4. No benefits for illegals
5. Punish illegal employers
6. build the fence
7. English as the national language
8. Proof of citizenship before voting
9. Spend out taxes on creating jobs and our infrastructural needs

There are other things of course, but why are we not seeing a coalition around what Americans say they want? It's apart from one party or another. Wouldn't Americans want a president who wants what we want?
Is ANYTHING being talked about--or we stuck with McCain, Hillary, or Obama?

We have pleny of these . IMO, what we need is a band of Americans to stick to our principles and laws .

We have a good start here and other places if we don't lose site of our main objectives . Close the borders stop the visas to all until we take count . Stop bowing down to radical maniacs who don't assimilate .

Originally Posted by DJ

I voted for Ron Paul (California), but I mean the prospect of creating an Independent Party that would have these planks. Do you think everyone would just marginalize it as the media has done with RP? Maybe more has to happen to generate enough interest. William's last post would be a part of that. Lou Dobbs has been on everyone's mind because he talks about all these problems--but we can't get a straigt answer about his willingness to run.

So far I like Lou and think he is sincere, but after all the lies we have had to bare , I look all gift horses in the mouth .

My concern with lou is his one world loving boss, Ted Turner . I don't think Lou can say or do anything that Teddy boy disagrees with . Teds silence is scairy .

I like Lou But he seems to think the politicians are stupid and don't know what they are doing when they know full well what they are doing.

There are conspiricy theories and then there are conspiricies!

I've never read one of Lou's books, is he that nieve in his books or does he reveal the whole scope of things that are planned with the NAU and ect? Does he get down and dirty in his books or it is all dreamy and things about the past and the way it ought to be? Does he name names and tell of political agendas or does he really think this has just been some kind of gilligans Island mishap?

Any answers public or private welcome.

I guess I could go on Amazon and read a snippet to get a feel of his book...hmmm good idea! But I still want your opinions.

Originally Posted by Chexfive

I've never read one of Lou's books, is he that nieve in his books or does he reveal the whole scope of things that are planned with the NAU and ect?

Lou adresses the NAU in his books.

Does he get down and dirty in his books or it is all dreamy and things about the past and the way it ought to be?

No, Lou has an entire chapter in War on the middle Class about lobbying, and specifically names lobbys in favor of amnesty.

Does he name names and tell of political agendas or does he really think this has just been some kind of gilligans Island mishap?

If you read the entire book, I would be amazed if you do not really understand what is going on.

BearFlagRepublic

thanks for your answers.
I was thinking Lou knows whats going on. I was thinking he must not be able to say some things on his mind there at the network, after all he does have a boss, but it is good to know he knows what is really going on. I watch Lou every night and he will continue to get my support.

Thanks for the reply.

Originally Posted by MW

USA_born wrote:

Ron Paul would have taken care of those things. But he was rejected.

I think Paul would have a problem with #3, #5, and #6.

Evidently you don't know too much about him.

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Originally Posted by MW

USA_born wrote:

Ron Paul would have taken care of those things. But he was rejected.

I think Paul would have a problem with #3, #5, and #6.

Agreed, MW!
The new party should be a populist party, not a libertarian party.
We need to run a candidate like Lou Dobbs rather than Ron Paul.

RP is a repbulican.