American cynicism negates having third party candidates

With Congress at its lowest approval rating in "poll-taking history," a president whose approval rating has not been consistently above 50 percent for at least a year and a Republican party that seems to be in a meltdown trying to figure out what direction it wants to take for the years to come, there has been a lot of talk lately about a third party candidate. "Is this the year of the third party?" people seem to be asking. Yes, people have been asking that question for years now but this year seems to be getting more attention.

What do I have to say about that you might ask? I think it's absolutely absurd and it is because of that question and thinking, in my opinion, that government "seems to be broken."

The cynicism toward government appears to be growing and while there are some merits to Americans' thinking about politicians, the idea that having a third party would somehow make things better doesn't make sense. If politicians are corrupt and stop listening to the people once they get there then what makes them think a "third party" or "independent" candidate would make things any different. If you think about it, those running for office campaign on changing Washington, going against the party grain, voting for what they think is right regardless of how the majority of the party might feel. Some say they will not be swayed by lobbyists or serve more than a certain amount of terms. But, as we've found since President Obama has been in office and since the Tea Party Republicans have taken control of the House of Representatives, those concepts are easier said than done.

I also don't get the reasoning behind people being upset with President Obama. They say he hasn't changed Washington and some say he hasn't done much if any at all, but what do they expect him to do when there is a party that is hell bent on opposing him even if it means going against principles they have championed for years if not decades just because he supports their idea. This is not an authoritarian government or a dictatorship, it is a democracy. The Constitution limits the president in what he can do and it is actually Congress that has more pull in what gets done. Government makes the law, the president just signs it into law. That means the president can request whatever he wants and lay out a vision and path for the country but if Congress wants something different they can ultimately sway the president into going along with it. 

So that gets back to my theory that having a third party candidate will solve nothing. A third party candidate in the Senate actually has to caucus with one of the two major parties. There already are two independent senators, both of whom caucus with the Democrats. They also vote with Democrats the majority of the time. The Tea Party Republicans went to Washington in 2010 not only vowing to stop the policies of President Obama but also to get the establishment Republicans back to more conservative principles. They said they would vote against their party if they did not think deals were in the best interest of conservatism. What happened though? They ended up voting party line probably 95 percent of the time. They would rail against a bill not having enough savings or being done behind closed doors when Democrats controlled Congress, but then they voted in favor of bills that they criticized for not having enough savings and that were done at the last minute once they got into power all because their establishment Republican leadership told them to.

People's cynicism toward government and their constant "changing of the guard" so-to-speak is part of the problem of why nothing gets done. Americans are hell bent on having a high-speed, always-on-the-go, need-results-now mentality that if change doesn't occur instantaneously then they say it's not working and they kick the bums out. They expect change from that group but when it doesn't happen they go back to the other party. Over time, they say well I'm just not going to vote because nobody listens. Politicians listen, the American people just aren't willing to pay attention.

For example, the majority of Americans support increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Republicans don't support that, Democrats do. The majority of Americans now favor legalizing same-sex marriage. Republicans don't support that, Democrats do. The majority of Americans support using an "all-of-the-above" energy strategy. Republicans don't support that, Democrats do. The majority of Americans support Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Republicans don't support those things, Democrats do.

So it seems to me like Americans actually do have a party that listens to them and attempts to protect them but the American people, again in my opinion, are so afraid of sticking to a label, that they call themselves independent and say they are disgusted with both parties. Yet polling seems to indicate they are actually more liberal than they might want to admit. Sure there is room for compromise on both sides, but at the root of the issues Americans' opinions now seem to favor one party over the other.

I really could go on and in a future blog I will talk about this more because it really aggravates me when people talk about third parties. There are a few other angles to take when talking about this but I kind of wanted to focus on the "Americans just aren't willing to listen" part first. The American people certainly aren't the only reason why third party candidates actually won't work, but they are a good place to start.