Conservatives and Republicans, would you consider joining a Third Party founded by Trump called the Patriot Party?

Question

This is not the Official Logo by the way.

Yes

No

Other

Select age and gender to cast your vote:

GirlGuy

Updates:

1 y

This question is only for Conservatives and Republicans. If you're not, and I (may) know who you are, your response will be deleted. Thank you.

Answer 1

BeMuse | 4.2K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Master

I think when this is all over and the chips fall where they may, both the Republicans and Democrats will have a lasting stain on their party name. In that regard a new party might be alluring to many after they realize what is happening right now, especially if the new party is more moderate and inclusive in it’s views. The divisiveness in modern American politics is not healthy for the country and is not representative of the majority of American citizens. That said, I don’t think conservatives should move left necessarily skewing the entire country towards a battle with moderation and communism. The easiest way to combat communism is with moral authority. In America that is usually rooted in our religious freedoms and related traditions. When you have strong foundational roots from good parenting and community involvement in the church, temple, mosque, etc. people are more likely to preserve their cultural heritage, rather than be divided and turned against their countrymen by communist subversion. While I see that as a common solution for the average Joe, I’m personally not all that religious. I do however believe in religious freedoms and see their value. I personally wouldn’t join any party. I’m an independent with no party loyalty. I have always voted based on policy. So if the candidates running for that hypothetical party had interesting policy positions I would consider voting for them. Being outside the two party system would not negatively impact their chances of earning my vote. My views align with the Constitution and Classical Liberalism for the most part with a tiny leftward leaning for worker and environmental safety and open academic and research availability. On the negative side of a new party, political fragmentation is very dangerous. The more you fragment a country, the more often you see radicalism arise. In many countries that has eventually lead to civil war where totalitarian dictators take country under the guise of communism, fascism, military dictatorship, etc. Fragmentation like this occurred in Weimar Germany prior to the rise of Hitler. That same game is being pushed on America outside influences are subverting our national traditions. It would be nice to avoid the rise of a new Hitler if we can prevent it. Communism will always fail in America due to our military tradition, but exterminating minority populations that revel in Marxist ideas isn’t the solution either. We need to get back to our found principles and return toward classical liberalism and push out foreign influence by becoming more nationalistic, independent, and patriotic.

React

2 People

BeMuse

1 y
*by outside

Reply
BeMuse

1 y
*founding

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
Ya wanna really fight communism? Unify everyone against it? Then the answer is ACTUAL, fierce, free market libertarianism. It'd have to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal but be VERY strict with sticking to it. This means religious freedom and guns, but also access to any drug and abortion.
It'd also mean 100% being able to hire/choose customers you want. Meaning yes, you could have a bakery that declines to make a gay oriented cake but also no bailouts/strict terms for loans if discrimination against certain customers means less money.

This system would ultimately both delight and disappoint the left and right, but then again, it's better this than complete socialism or fascism which basically end up the same almost always.

As stated, I have no issue with religious freedom but that/family issues as the main focus would be like focusing on saving a specific baby dear when a whole forest is on fire. Doesn't help much.

Reply
Show All Show Less
BeMuse

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound It’s more so about insulating our local population from outside influence that could alter our core values. Communists always attack countries through subversion. They find something about a culture that is receptive and then they use that in to plant seeds of hate to drive division within a society. It doesn’t matter what the issue is so long as it divides people and gets them to fight each other. Communities that are very tight knit and traditional are closed minded and impossible to penetrate. Think about countries like Japan that are very traditional and conformist. For the most part they do not allow outside influence and shame anyone that strays from the flock. America is a very receptive and open minded country. That is a major strength when it comes to innovation and research, but it is also our ultimate weakness… They use it to divide us based on Black vs White, man vs women, straight vs gay, tall vs short, blond vs brunette, rich vs poor, small boobs vs large boobs, Christian vs Muslim, rap vs rock, abortion vs pro life, science vs religion, free speech vs political correctness, etc. They want to fragment us. Join or die... The more a community is in consensus of their own set of views, the more resistant it is from communist subversion. One of America’s major founding principles was religious liberty, thus why it is in the first amendment. As a result many Americans value their religious freedom. Therefore it is an easy tool to unite communities and make them more resistant to communist subversion. It is already part of the culture, it just needs to be amplified. Religion is a good one because it is strongly rooted in faith and emotion. Emotional people are most often the ones that are targeted for subversion and influence. So if you give them something to gravitate towards, they are less likely to be used against the rest of the population...

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
Again, in my idea of how we should move forward, small, tight knit communities would 100% be allowed and probably have it much easier, but also, I would never demand that anyone live specifically that lifestyle because it erodes freedom. If I want to be in a a big city with a mix of satanists and vampire cults, then it's my right, just as it should be your right to be in a tight knit community. The minute you tell me/others how to live our lives, you're no matter than a commie.

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
Now I am not saying we can't agree on general principles. We should. But it should be 10% focused on economics, rather than social terms because then there's always going to be people who say no and fight. Everyone relates to economics similarly, because everyone knows money is needed to get by. Therefore, common law should be based on economics.

Reply
BeMuse

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound I’ll give you an example of how communists attack economics indirectly. If Black people are church going people that are strong believers in Jesus and they have great conviction that they should love thy neighbor and do to others what you would have them do to you then Christianity is a great uniting force. People in their community are important to them, thus race becomes less of a factor than religion. You can’t divide those people because they know and respect one another. They go to the same church every week and they’re not going to listen to some communists twisted tail. When you remove the common religion where people see themselves as equal and responsible to one another, then the communist can come in an drive a wedge. Look at these rich White billionaires. You know they only have that money because they used Black people as slaves. Why should White people have more money than Black people. It’s not fair. They don’t respect you. They see you as less than an animal. You are nothing more than a slave to them... This sort of rhetoric doesn’t paint the reality that there are tons of poor White people just the same that share the same hardships as many Black people, but since there is a small outlier in the population that is very wealthy, it makes it easy to rip communities apart and enrage hatred and push people to rioting. If they knew the other people in their community and they had a uniting principle like Christianity, they’d be like what are you talking about, Bob isn’t anything like that, John can barely make his rent payment, Tom goes to the food pantry as well, get the fuck out of here with that bullshit commie. Life is hard, but we help each other out and we get through it together.

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
I don't argue those merits, but who are you to say specifically Christianity should be the unifier for all? And if so, which branch? Episopical? Evangelion? Protestant? Roman Catholic? The minute somebody says there is specific social rules, there's conflicts. You STILL fail to tackle the economics issue. I could become a Christian, Hindu, or Satanic cultist. That doesn't put food on the table magically.

Reply
BeMuse

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound Christianity isn’t a unifier for all. I’m just showing you how communists work and how you make Americans resilient to their attacks. In Japan they hate outsiders and are crazy racist to people that are different than them. They have a very homogeneous country, that dresses very similar when they go to work, they cut their hair the same, etc. and that’s what works for them. They feel very strongly that they need to preserve Japanese tradition and purity. It’s an ethnostate. America is a land of immigrants and thus a very diverse melting pot so you can’t unite on the way people look. It has to be based on centralized ideas. In America religion is a huge one of those ideas and Christianity is the most popular one. I’m a strong believer in Constitutional ideas and American patriotism, but I have to accept that the majority are people in my country are more closely associated with their religion than the constitution and therefore it is an easy tool that will have more successful outcomes for large groups of people. I do think we need a revitalization of constitutional education and patriotism to bring more unity, but religion is a very strong tool even if it’s not much of a factor in my personal life.

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
I can see what you mean. I doubt you'll be able to get all people to accept one single religion. The example you used for Japan could also be used for China who is far more nationalistic. Look how that turned out. We have one single religion, we risk somebody using it to where we end up like Iran who ironically, is a good friend of China. I've said it before and I'll say it again, unify for ECONOMICS not SOCIAL causes. If we agree to specific economic rules, the rotten will die out and the righteous will survive. Then, perhaps a sort of unifying religion/ideology can be agreed upon.

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
But right now with egoism being at record highs, we can not risk either going full Atheistic communist or Christian nationalist because BOTH get too easily corrupted. We need a middle ground. ECONOMICS!!!

Reply
BeMuse

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound You don’t need to unify religion behind Christianity specifically, you just have to amplify the religious foundations of the nation. America allows for freedom of religion. It’s something many people come to America to enjoy. Most people in America grow up in a household with some sort of religious morals. Many are not devout and do not go to their house of worship regularly, thus they become disjointed from their community and are more lax in their belief structure. When religions are promoted those people that grew up with something as a moral foundation end up returning to whatever one their family is rooted in and become involved in their community, private charity outreach, etc. Communism on the other hand is strongly against religion because they want people to worship the state and only the state. Communist don’t like private charity, because they want everyone to be dependent on the state for all of their needs so that they can control the population from a centralized dogma. When you break up dependence on the state via concepts like habitat for humanity, good will, church food banks, Thanksgiving turkey drives, etc. that are run by religious institutions and manned by members of the community it deprives the state of public power over the poor. The poor are often leveraged in class warfare by communists.

Reply
BeMuse

1 y
Money/Economics will never work as a unifying principle because it is competition based not cooperation based. Communities need to be strong and supportive to resist outside influence. When individuals falter, they need their community to pick them up and steer them back on track. Money divides people. It allows people with more money to corrupt, bribe, and buy people that do not have a moral foundation. Thus why you have media, movies, the press that are bought off by communists to spread propaganda (e. g. social justice movies, pedo acceptance, tranny body image, broken families). Communists buy large portions of a company’s stock to influence the directors of corporations to spread their divisive propaganda in advertising (e. g. toxic masculinity, feminism, etc.). Communists buy politicians and judges to corrupt the laws and rule of it. Money is not a unifier. I think economic competition and social mobility are very important for capitalist countries like America, but people need something more to keep them from falling prey to corruption. Religion serves that purpose well. It’s not the only way to do it, it’s just the easiest way to do it. Another approach would be youth groups and fraternal organizations. That’s how Nazi Germany did it… At a young age, all kids become involved in their community through youth groups and learn a since of duty to their community and country. As they get older they become community leaders and teach the children that same since of duty. In America this was often pushed through groups like Boy Scouts of America, Sports, etc. that taught boys to be tough, masculine, and resilient but still had them doing charity work in the community. Often it steered young men towards active service military or the national gaurd. Later in life they became involved in groups like The Knights of Columbus, Team Rubicon, etc. That is another method that is very good.

Reply

Answer 2

BeMuse

*by outside

Answer 3

BeMuse

*founding

Answer 4

errorgoodnameunfound

Ya wanna really fight communism? Unify everyone against it? Then the answer is ACTUAL, fierce, free market libertarianism. It'd have to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal but be VERY strict with sticking to it. This means religious freedom and guns, but also access to any drug and abortion.
It'd also mean 100% being able to hire/choose customers you want. Meaning yes, you could have a bakery that declines to make a gay oriented cake but also no bailouts/strict terms for loans if discrimination against certain customers means less money.

This system would ultimately both delight and disappoint the left and right, but then again, it's better this than complete socialism or fascism which basically end up the same almost always.

As stated, I have no issue with religious freedom but that/family issues as the main focus would be like focusing on saving a specific baby dear when a whole forest is on fire. Doesn't help much.

Answer 5

BeMuse

@errorgoodnameunfound It’s more so about insulating our local population from outside influence that could alter our core values. Communists always attack countries through subversion. They find something about a culture that is receptive and then they use that in to plant seeds of hate to drive division within a society. It doesn’t matter what the issue is so long as it divides people and gets them to fight each other. Communities that are very tight knit and traditional are closed minded and impossible to penetrate. Think about countries like Japan that are very traditional and conformist. For the most part they do not allow outside influence and shame anyone that strays from the flock. America is a very receptive and open minded country. That is a major strength when it comes to innovation and research, but it is also our ultimate weakness… They use it to divide us based on Black vs White, man vs women, straight vs gay, tall vs short, blond vs brunette, rich vs poor, small boobs vs large boobs, Christian vs Muslim, rap vs rock, abortion vs pro life, science vs religion, free speech vs political correctness, etc. They want to fragment us. Join or die... The more a community is in consensus of their own set of views, the more resistant it is from communist subversion. One of America’s major founding principles was religious liberty, thus why it is in the first amendment. As a result many Americans value their religious freedom. Therefore it is an easy tool to unite communities and make them more resistant to communist subversion. It is already part of the culture, it just needs to be amplified. Religion is a good one because it is strongly rooted in faith and emotion. Emotional people are most often the ones that are targeted for subversion and influence. So if you give them something to gravitate towards, they are less likely to be used against the rest of the population...

Conservatives and Republicans, would you consider joining a Third Party founded by Trump called the Patriot Party?

Answer 6

errorgoodnameunfound

Again, in my idea of how we should move forward, small, tight knit communities would 100% be allowed and probably have it much easier, but also, I would never demand that anyone live specifically that lifestyle because it erodes freedom. If I want to be in a a big city with a mix of satanists and vampire cults, then it's my right, just as it should be your right to be in a tight knit community. The minute you tell me/others how to live our lives, you're no matter than a commie.

Answer 7

errorgoodnameunfound

Now I am not saying we can't agree on general principles. We should. But it should be 10% focused on economics, rather than social terms because then there's always going to be people who say no and fight. Everyone relates to economics similarly, because everyone knows money is needed to get by. Therefore, common law should be based on economics.

Answer 8

BeMuse

@errorgoodnameunfound I’ll give you an example of how communists attack economics indirectly. If Black people are church going people that are strong believers in Jesus and they have great conviction that they should love thy neighbor and do to others what you would have them do to you then Christianity is a great uniting force. People in their community are important to them, thus race becomes less of a factor than religion. You can’t divide those people because they know and respect one another. They go to the same church every week and they’re not going to listen to some communists twisted tail. When you remove the common religion where people see themselves as equal and responsible to one another, then the communist can come in an drive a wedge. Look at these rich White billionaires. You know they only have that money because they used Black people as slaves. Why should White people have more money than Black people. It’s not fair. They don’t respect you. They see you as less than an animal. You are nothing more than a slave to them... This sort of rhetoric doesn’t paint the reality that there are tons of poor White people just the same that share the same hardships as many Black people, but since there is a small outlier in the population that is very wealthy, it makes it easy to rip communities apart and enrage hatred and push people to rioting. If they knew the other people in their community and they had a uniting principle like Christianity, they’d be like what are you talking about, Bob isn’t anything like that, John can barely make his rent payment, Tom goes to the food pantry as well, get the fuck out of here with that bullshit commie. Life is hard, but we help each other out and we get through it together.

Answer 9

errorgoodnameunfound

I don't argue those merits, but who are you to say specifically Christianity should be the unifier for all? And if so, which branch? Episopical? Evangelion? Protestant? Roman Catholic? The minute somebody says there is specific social rules, there's conflicts. You STILL fail to tackle the economics issue. I could become a Christian, Hindu, or Satanic cultist. That doesn't put food on the table magically.

Answer 10

BeMuse

@errorgoodnameunfound Christianity isn’t a unifier for all. I’m just showing you how communists work and how you make Americans resilient to their attacks. In Japan they hate outsiders and are crazy racist to people that are different than them. They have a very homogeneous country, that dresses very similar when they go to work, they cut their hair the same, etc. and that’s what works for them. They feel very strongly that they need to preserve Japanese tradition and purity. It’s an ethnostate. America is a land of immigrants and thus a very diverse melting pot so you can’t unite on the way people look. It has to be based on centralized ideas. In America religion is a huge one of those ideas and Christianity is the most popular one. I’m a strong believer in Constitutional ideas and American patriotism, but I have to accept that the majority are people in my country are more closely associated with their religion than the constitution and therefore it is an easy tool that will have more successful outcomes for large groups of people. I do think we need a revitalization of constitutional education and patriotism to bring more unity, but religion is a very strong tool even if it’s not much of a factor in my personal life.

Answer 11

errorgoodnameunfound

I can see what you mean. I doubt you'll be able to get all people to accept one single religion. The example you used for Japan could also be used for China who is far more nationalistic. Look how that turned out. We have one single religion, we risk somebody using it to where we end up like Iran who ironically, is a good friend of China. I've said it before and I'll say it again, unify for ECONOMICS not SOCIAL causes. If we agree to specific economic rules, the rotten will die out and the righteous will survive. Then, perhaps a sort of unifying religion/ideology can be agreed upon.

Answer 12

errorgoodnameunfound

But right now with egoism being at record highs, we can not risk either going full Atheistic communist or Christian nationalist because BOTH get too easily corrupted. We need a middle ground. ECONOMICS!!!

Answer 13

BeMuse

@errorgoodnameunfound You don’t need to unify religion behind Christianity specifically, you just have to amplify the religious foundations of the nation. America allows for freedom of religion. It’s something many people come to America to enjoy. Most people in America grow up in a household with some sort of religious morals. Many are not devout and do not go to their house of worship regularly, thus they become disjointed from their community and are more lax in their belief structure. When religions are promoted those people that grew up with something as a moral foundation end up returning to whatever one their family is rooted in and become involved in their community, private charity outreach, etc. Communism on the other hand is strongly against religion because they want people to worship the state and only the state. Communist don’t like private charity, because they want everyone to be dependent on the state for all of their needs so that they can control the population from a centralized dogma. When you break up dependence on the state via concepts like habitat for humanity, good will, church food banks, Thanksgiving turkey drives, etc. that are run by religious institutions and manned by members of the community it deprives the state of public power over the poor. The poor are often leveraged in class warfare by communists.

Answer 14

BeMuse

Money/Economics will never work as a unifying principle because it is competition based not cooperation based. Communities need to be strong and supportive to resist outside influence. When individuals falter, they need their community to pick them up and steer them back on track. Money divides people. It allows people with more money to corrupt, bribe, and buy people that do not have a moral foundation. Thus why you have media, movies, the press that are bought off by communists to spread propaganda (e. g. social justice movies, pedo acceptance, tranny body image, broken families). Communists buy large portions of a company’s stock to influence the directors of corporations to spread their divisive propaganda in advertising (e. g. toxic masculinity, feminism, etc.). Communists buy politicians and judges to corrupt the laws and rule of it. Money is not a unifier. I think economic competition and social mobility are very important for capitalist countries like America, but people need something more to keep them from falling prey to corruption. Religion serves that purpose well. It’s not the only way to do it, it’s just the easiest way to do it. Another approach would be youth groups and fraternal organizations. That’s how Nazi Germany did it… At a young age, all kids become involved in their community through youth groups and learn a since of duty to their community and country. As they get older they become community leaders and teach the children that same since of duty. In America this was often pushed through groups like Boy Scouts of America, Sports, etc. that taught boys to be tough, masculine, and resilient but still had them doing charity work in the community. Often it steered young men towards active service military or the national gaurd. Later in life they became involved in groups like The Knights of Columbus, Team Rubicon, etc. That is another method that is very good.

Answer 15

ShadezMcgee | 858 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

I think that would just do more harm than good because you split the vote. By all means we can add another party, we got plenty already, but the other big problem is that so long as there is a Democratic and Republican party, there will never be a third party president.

Not enough support, funding or spotlight from media outlets. Best chance would be to reach younger audiences via streaming services to host similar debates like what they have with the primaries and to stream campaign ads if they got the backing from good and well known figures and money for it via use of these services.

However what I think would be hilarious is if Trump decided to encourage his followers and voters to vote libertarian on the next run if he is barred from running with the 2nd impeachment just as a screw you to both parties. Of course this is hypothetical and unlikely, but still. Would be funny to see over 70 million votes go to a third party candidate.

React

1 Person

Answer 16

Anonymous

I really hope that Trump doesn't run, because Americans don't deserve him. Americans deserve a lump of shit, hair sniffing, pedo like Joe. And soon Kamala will get rid of the pedo, and be the snake in charge of the country. China will own us.
And yes, I will vote for him as a third party candidate, and he won't win. Third party candidates never win. But I will do it to fuck over the candy-ass Republicans that were butt hurt that Trump beat them all in 2016.

React

13 People

Answer 17

Anonymous

Well I believe there should be more then just two choices, all Trump would achieve is splitting the conservative vote. I’m sure the liberals won’t mind that at all.

React

4 People

Answer 18

OlderAndWiser | 7K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Influencer

Any effort to form a conservative third party will simply split the conservative vote and give subsequent elections to the democrats.

React

1 Person

Answer 19

The1honestguy

Xper 2

Yes because no matter if he to come grab girls pussy or whatever he might’ve done on the side he was loving this country and doing every thing he possibly could barely sleeping working his ass off night and day to make this country a better place in which you became a better place in four years a time that for presidents curtain accomplish an every promise that me and me he kept that’s why I would stand behind him 100% now he was going to screw in somebody else on the side or whatever that’s his personal life I’m worried about what he’s job is what he’s doing for us our country but you notice nobody will say a word about Biden‘s son and he’s doing for him they keep that under shit under social media they bash Trump because they are scared of what he would do and expose them for doing that’s why I have respect and I will stand behind him 100% for our country needs

React

Answer 20

WindAtMyBack | 1.1K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Yoda

Nope. I wouldn't even consider it. First, I don't join parties. I register with a party to vote in the primaries, but I don't consider myself to be a member of any party. If I did join a party it sure as hell wouldn't be Trump's party.

He should also think about about the fact that a third party split the conservative vote and may have cost him the election. In three states that Biden won, he didn't get the majority. Biden won those states only because conservative votes were split, even though the conservatives had a majority.

React

3 People

Answer 21

Hogwheels | 77 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Xper 6

I'm a conservative, but I'm closer to libertarian than republican. There are only three republicans in office that I actually like (Rand Paul, Kristi Noem, and Mike Lee) and maybe three or four more that I tolerate. Then again, I've never really liked anyone that's ran on the librarian ticket either other than Ron Paul but he's retired now. I just philosophically line up libertarian more than republican. I think Trump might be the best president we've had in over half a century, because he had some good policies, but he was still a terrible president who spoke out his ass, had some really bad opinions that thank God never turned into policy (such as being pro red flag laws and pro asset forfeiture, those things already exist though, unfortunately), and printed money like a wild man.

React

2 People

errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
Vermin Supreme 2024 sir. Look into it :D

Reply
Hogwheels

1 y
I've been a supporter of Vermin for over a decade now.

Reply
Hogwheels

1 y
What we need is a good mandatory pony identification system!

Reply
Show All Show Less
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
HELL YES! BRING ON THE PONIES AND TOOTHBRUSHES! VS 2024! :D

Reply

Answer 22

errorgoodnameunfound

Vermin Supreme 2024 sir. Look into it :D

Answer 23

Hogwheels

I've been a supporter of Vermin for over a decade now.

Answer 24

Hogwheels

What we need is a good mandatory pony identification system!

Answer 25

errorgoodnameunfound

HELL YES! BRING ON THE PONIES AND TOOTHBRUSHES! VS 2024! :D

Answer 26

BCA6010 | 4.5K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

I mostly like the idea, but it would have to involve the very prominent disavowing of the faux conservatives who are currently known as RINOs; in other words the Patriot Party would have to effectively neutralize the Republican party outright, or else it would only serve to split the votes up so bad that the Democrats just take everything, which frankly is the more likely scenario.

On that note, the Democratic party needs a heavy-handed schism as well. The liberals and the socialists need to go their separate ways because they are mutually exclusive ideologies, and the latter needs to be crushed. If the RINOs got directly onboard with forming a Liberal party to break away from the socialists, the ensuing 3 or 4-party system would much more accurately represent the actual sentiments of the population, cheating notwithstanding.

React

2 People

Answer 27

LesterJester | 153 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Yoda

He and his party would have as much of a chance in winning as Kanye West did.

I mean that seriously, since him splitting the conservative vote between two parties would lead to both losing and the Democrats winning time and time again.

I'm neither Dem or Rep, but I will say that it's always good to switch up leadership from time to time in a Democracy, even if you don't like the other party. It's a couple of years and then you can vote to switch again.

Both parties will always end up screwing this or that up. Happens in every country. Each will also do some good here and there.

So due to the current way the US political system works right now, adding a third party into the mix isn't going to work like it does in other countries, like the UK, Canada or Australia, which all have multiple parties. The US system requires more reform in order to get in a position where multiple parties will work. At the moment, adding a third wheel will only break 2 of the 3.

React

1 Person

LesterJester

1 y
... And weaken your position.

Reply

Answer 28

LesterJester

... And weaken your position.

Answer 29

ShortCircuit | 1.7K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

Not likely, but depending on their platform, they may be marginally better than the GOP. I can see them being better on some issues, but worse on others, from a libertarian perspective. But I'm still probably not going to join any party besides the libertarian party, and I won't even join them until they get their shit together.

But yeah, I'd have to see how it all went. At worst, it could just split the Republican vote. At best, it replaces the GOP, but this time purging the corrupt neocons and RINOs.

React

1 Person

Answer 30

Stoner710 | 3.2K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

No I would nor would I support it at this time, not because I don’t want a third party but we would need to get a 3rd and 4th party emerge from both sides of the political party in order for it to be equal. Think if the republicans splits into 2 parties and democrats don’t then you have 50% of the vote going to democrats and the republicans and patriot party get 25% each then conservatives never win again. It what the Democrats want and we shouldn’t give it to them sorry guys third party idea is a bad one.

React

1 Person

Answer 31

Kiss_Me | 253 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Xper 6

Yes.
Not because it was founded by Trump, but because our country is locked into a two-party system. We need more choices to keep things more fair and honest. A multiple party system would also help eliminate the political chameleons we have today. Candidates could actually express how they feel about subjects instead of supporting whatever will get or keep them in office.

React

3 People

Answer 32

lightbulb27 | 1.8K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Master

im already independent, so that's 3rd party. you mean 4th party. not sure, doubt it. but I'll vote for the best person I see. we tried this under ross perot... I think it be a good thing to get away from the bi polar system we have now.

React

1 Person

Physics-Man

1 y
The sources were talking about it being a 3rd Major Political Party, so I just repeated it for the sake of consistency.

Reply
Physics-Man

1 y
Whether Independent is considered 3rd or not, I don't know.

Reply

Answer 33

Physics-Man

The sources were talking about it being a 3rd Major Political Party, so I just repeated it for the sake of consistency.

Answer 34

Physics-Man

Whether Independent is considered 3rd or not, I don't know.

Answer 35

JackSmy

Guru

HELL NO!! Trump has shown that he has NO RESPECT for the LAW, or the Constitution, and he is just another DICTATOR, that was ousted, before he did more DAMAGE!!!
He is BEYOND FCKING CRAZY!!! He is a liar, manipulator, and a cheater!!
But he's no worse than the the Dumbocrats, that pretend to be your friend, so you vote them in, so they can control you by stealing your rights, "TO KEEP YOU SAFE!!!"

React

2 People

Answer 36

QuietRunner | 1.2K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

Maybe. I like a lot of the ideas Trump had and disagreed with most of the the Trade policies.

I like Free Trade and thought leaving TPP was a mistake. The New North American Free Trade agreement seems better, almost the same. The Jones Act needs to go or be heavily modified.

I support more of the Manchester Liberal Economic polices and love Otto von Bismarck.

I don't care for how the Iron Chancellor, switched to the first modern Welfare state, but Realpolitik may have forced his hand. The balance of power should be done.

Also the Automated Payment Transaction Tax should be the primary focus for Trump's new party to get me hooked.

React

1 Person

Answer 37

hellionthesagereborn | 3.7K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

Absolutely, we need a viable third party and I think Trump can actually pull it off. He has brought together conservatives and moderates while showing us that republican elites and democrats hate america, hate the people and will do what ever it takes to remain in power. So a third party is desperately needed and I would gladly vote for it if they had a candidate that I believed in.

React

3 People

errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
He did bring in SOME moderates, but trust me, he also failed to bring in many that he needed and would fail in the future. I'm somebody he could have brought over. But his many of his fans were BEYOND insufferable from the beginning and saying "you should vote for him, he's anti abortion :D " doesn't appeal to the average joe. What about the economy? Yah, Covid wrecked it. Idgaf, his job is to find solutions. He never did so. I still slightly hope he makes his own party ONLY because then, just maybe, the current GOP would become the new libertarian party as they go a bit more centrist and THAT I would vote for and so would enough to win, trust me.

Reply
hellionthesagereborn

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound He did find solutions though? He wanted a wall built and while he was blocked at every turn, he did build at least some of it. He isn't responsible for covid and never was so blaming him for that is just ignorant. The presidents powers are limited, he cannot tell states what to do and he stuck to that, the states fucked everything up. The only thing he could have done is ignore the constitution and force states to obey him which would have been unconstitutional. He removed restrictions on businesses etc. He reformed our prison system, medical, etc. So yeah, he did a lot of good but he isn't god and he has to work within the system and the system was entirely against him.

Not saying he didn't have flaws but acting as if he accomplished nothing is just absurd. As for a libertarian party that will never happen. Libertarians do not want to work with any one within a system that by its nature requires compromise. Libertarians trashed talk trump despite the fact that Trump was probably the closest thing to a libertarian president they have ever had (which isn't saying much). Libertarians just demand that everything go their way and so they will never win an election which has been shown time and time again (and this is coming from some one who is largely libertarian (governement exists to maintain infrastructure, protect the borders, and defend the rights of the citizens and that is it).

Reply
hellionthesagereborn

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound As for republicans being libertarian, are you kidding me? The republicans aren't even republican anymore.

Reply
Show All Show Less
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
There's moderates along republicans and younger ones coming in more than likely that will mellow on social issues. Trump may have accomplished things here and there yes, but the claims he was the "greatest POTTUS of all time"? I've seen it constantly. It's beyond eyerolling. Not a single president we've had has ever been that great, but Trump had the senate and house coming into office. He had the chance to get people more center like me to vote for him.

He failed.
More so, many of his fans were no better than many democrats. Loud, obnoxious, desperate for control. Two sides same coin. We need a true libertarian party asap. No more of that constant whining over social issues when half the nation can't even point to where Melbourne is on the globe!

Reply
hellionthesagereborn

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound Yeah that is entirely incorrect. He had more center people voting for him then people on the right. Your not center and libertarian, thats contradictory either your libertarian or your a centrist you can't really be both.

As for a libertarian party, their is no liberarian party and never will be because again, they refuse to compromise on anything, refuse to take the steps necessary to start pushing towards that ideology and refuse to encourage good behavior in politicians. Trump did a lot of good things, libertarians refuse to acknowledge it because he wasn't libertarian enough, they want 100% liberarian or nothing so they get nothing and will continue to do so. They have been around for half a century and the best they could muster was 1% of the votes when Trump won and that was the weakest point the parties and candidates have ever been at. Maybe in another fifty years they will get a whole 2% of the votes but even that would be unlikely as they will continue to self sabatoge until they are just ignored by every one else.

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y

lib·er·tar·i·an
/ˌlibərˈterēən/
1. an advocate or supporter of a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.
"no true libertarian would ever support a culture where citizens must show their papers to travel"
2.
a person who advocates civil liberty.
adjective
relating to or denoting a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.
"he holds libertarian views on most social issues"

Pretty sure by defintion, that is pretty centrist but they are just relative terms. The fact is that Biden won and Trump lost, which means there were not enough in the middle Trump was able to sway. I even remember quite a few Trump supporters angry at those who voted Libertarian, independent, and such instead of him. Libertarianism has loose definition and yes, some borderline want no government, but then they'd be anarcho -libertarians, not wholly libertarian. There's many types of libertarians. Some even advocate a mix of it and socialism. Look it up. www.libertarianism.org/.../libertarian-socialism

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
This may also help: www.libertarianism.org/what-is-a-libertarian

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
This helps too.
https://www.lp.org/platform/

Reply
hellionthesagereborn

1 y
@errorgoodnameunfound Not really. Centrist in the political terms of the US is not a removal of most government but of moderate government. Hence it not being centrist. Again, I would align most with libertarians but claiming its centrist is completely false. That implies that you are moderate on all sides when all sides are not close to what libertarians are. If libertarians say they are centrist but center is some where between conservative limited government and absolute government power of the left, then wanting even less government then the right makes you far from center, this is a fact.

This further proves my point about libertarians, they shoot themselves in the foot and then shoot the other foot for good measure all while thinking they have some how won.

Reply

Answer 38

errorgoodnameunfound

He did bring in SOME moderates, but trust me, he also failed to bring in many that he needed and would fail in the future. I'm somebody he could have brought over. But his many of his fans were BEYOND insufferable from the beginning and saying "you should vote for him, he's anti abortion :D " doesn't appeal to the average joe. What about the economy? Yah, Covid wrecked it. Idgaf, his job is to find solutions. He never did so. I still slightly hope he makes his own party ONLY because then, just maybe, the current GOP would become the new libertarian party as they go a bit more centrist and THAT I would vote for and so would enough to win, trust me.

Answer 39

hellionthesagereborn

@errorgoodnameunfound He did find solutions though? He wanted a wall built and while he was blocked at every turn, he did build at least some of it. He isn't responsible for covid and never was so blaming him for that is just ignorant. The presidents powers are limited, he cannot tell states what to do and he stuck to that, the states fucked everything up. The only thing he could have done is ignore the constitution and force states to obey him which would have been unconstitutional. He removed restrictions on businesses etc. He reformed our prison system, medical, etc. So yeah, he did a lot of good but he isn't god and he has to work within the system and the system was entirely against him.

Not saying he didn't have flaws but acting as if he accomplished nothing is just absurd. As for a libertarian party that will never happen. Libertarians do not want to work with any one within a system that by its nature requires compromise. Libertarians trashed talk trump despite the fact that Trump was probably the closest thing to a libertarian president they have ever had (which isn't saying much). Libertarians just demand that everything go their way and so they will never win an election which has been shown time and time again (and this is coming from some one who is largely libertarian (governement exists to maintain infrastructure, protect the borders, and defend the rights of the citizens and that is it).

Answer 40

hellionthesagereborn

@errorgoodnameunfound As for republicans being libertarian, are you kidding me? The republicans aren't even republican anymore.

Answer 41

errorgoodnameunfound

There's moderates along republicans and younger ones coming in more than likely that will mellow on social issues. Trump may have accomplished things here and there yes, but the claims he was the "greatest POTTUS of all time"? I've seen it constantly. It's beyond eyerolling. Not a single president we've had has ever been that great, but Trump had the senate and house coming into office. He had the chance to get people more center like me to vote for him.

He failed.
More so, many of his fans were no better than many democrats. Loud, obnoxious, desperate for control. Two sides same coin. We need a true libertarian party asap. No more of that constant whining over social issues when half the nation can't even point to where Melbourne is on the globe!

Answer 42

hellionthesagereborn

@errorgoodnameunfound Yeah that is entirely incorrect. He had more center people voting for him then people on the right. Your not center and libertarian, thats contradictory either your libertarian or your a centrist you can't really be both.

As for a libertarian party, their is no liberarian party and never will be because again, they refuse to compromise on anything, refuse to take the steps necessary to start pushing towards that ideology and refuse to encourage good behavior in politicians. Trump did a lot of good things, libertarians refuse to acknowledge it because he wasn't libertarian enough, they want 100% liberarian or nothing so they get nothing and will continue to do so. They have been around for half a century and the best they could muster was 1% of the votes when Trump won and that was the weakest point the parties and candidates have ever been at. Maybe in another fifty years they will get a whole 2% of the votes but even that would be unlikely as they will continue to self sabatoge until they are just ignored by every one else.

Answer 43

errorgoodnameunfound

lib·er·tar·i·an
/ˌlibərˈterēən/
1. an advocate or supporter of a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.
"no true libertarian would ever support a culture where citizens must show their papers to travel"
2.
a person who advocates civil liberty.
adjective
relating to or denoting a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.
"he holds libertarian views on most social issues"

Pretty sure by defintion, that is pretty centrist but they are just relative terms. The fact is that Biden won and Trump lost, which means there were not enough in the middle Trump was able to sway. I even remember quite a few Trump supporters angry at those who voted Libertarian, independent, and such instead of him. Libertarianism has loose definition and yes, some borderline want no government, but then they'd be anarcho -libertarians, not wholly libertarian. There's many types of libertarians. Some even advocate a mix of it and socialism. Look it up. www.libertarianism.org/.../libertarian-socialism

Answer 44

errorgoodnameunfound

This may also help: www.libertarianism.org/what-is-a-libertarian

Answer 45

errorgoodnameunfound

This helps too.
https://www.lp.org/platform/

Answer 46

hellionthesagereborn

@errorgoodnameunfound Not really. Centrist in the political terms of the US is not a removal of most government but of moderate government. Hence it not being centrist. Again, I would align most with libertarians but claiming its centrist is completely false. That implies that you are moderate on all sides when all sides are not close to what libertarians are. If libertarians say they are centrist but center is some where between conservative limited government and absolute government power of the left, then wanting even less government then the right makes you far from center, this is a fact.

This further proves my point about libertarians, they shoot themselves in the foot and then shoot the other foot for good measure all while thinking they have some how won.

Answer 47

HikerDude | 302 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Yoda

I want a new conservative party, because I'll never vote for another republican, but I don't want Trump to lead it. He sold us out because he did basically nothing to stop the theft of the 2020 election. He even acted like he was powerless to do anything about it, which just pissed me off. So Trump needs to go away. I was a big supporter, but no more.

React

1 Person

SmolSlav

1 y
There was no theft.

Reply
HikerDude

1 y
@SmolSlav Someone stole your brain.

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
Wow. So you're no longer with Trump? Any idea how many people in general feel similar? Kinda curious as I thought most would stick with him even after Biden got put in.

Reply

Answer 48

SmolSlav

There was no theft.

Answer 49

HikerDude

@SmolSlav Someone stole your brain.

Answer 50

errorgoodnameunfound

Wow. So you're no longer with Trump? Any idea how many people in general feel similar? Kinda curious as I thought most would stick with him even after Biden got put in.

Answer 51

GoodGuyBreakingBad | 8K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Master

The thing is if former president trump has the money to pay swing states and get on the ballot come 2023-24 he may get a new political party started and get votes from people who have supported him and votes can win him delegates but he would have to most likely get the new political party validated?

React

1 Person

Answer 52

Anonymous

No but I still think it's a good idea. There's too many groups like v Qnon that give the republicans a bad name (and lets be honest every hategroup and conspiracy group latched on to trump) I'm sick of the outside world thinking we're all like the rioters or believe the worlds flat. Let those groups break off and sink into oblivion, we shouldn't be giving them the republican voice. (Republican who voted Biden to restore Americas honor)

React

7 People

KatherineJ

1 y
Absolutely right!

Reply
007kingifrit

1 y
hate groups and conspiracy groups are no more common on the right than the left

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
@007kingifrit Ik somebody who has said the same thing. But everytime I've met somebody into conspiracies, they're always right ring so I don't know. Closest thing I've seen on the left to conspiracy stuff is citing a paper who is sympathetic to the DPRK. But that was one time.

Reply

Answer 53

KatherineJ

Absolutely right!

Answer 54

007kingifrit

hate groups and conspiracy groups are no more common on the right than the left

Answer 55

errorgoodnameunfound

@007kingifrit Ik somebody who has said the same thing. But everytime I've met somebody into conspiracies, they're always right ring so I don't know. Closest thing I've seen on the left to conspiracy stuff is citing a paper who is sympathetic to the DPRK. But that was one time.

Answer 56

Matt57

Yoda

Yay, the Libertarians get to give y’all the same shit y’all have given us in the past! (I’m Lib-right and still hold on to various conservative values, so I still kinda count.😉)

React

3 People

Physics-Man

1 y
As long as you're mostly conservative or lean to the right, you're welcome to answer this question.

Reply
errorgoodnameunfound

1 y
I get that. I mainly have stuck to responding to people rather than commenting myself as I resect the rules of the question. I also vary wildly on opinion with some of my opinions scarring the shit out of right and left. Death penalty for example, I think is sometimes not done often enough as there are in fact people out there that need to put down or deported to an island with other like minded people. This includes a variety of people from broke druggies to crazy CEOs.

Further more, the right and left suck at free markets. The right says yes to guns no to drugs while also overly spoiling religious groups who should not be tax exempt, because then that's how we get scientologists, Vampire churches (ego worshippers), death cults, etc. That explains itself.

The left meanwhile solves every problem with throwing government at it to the point of caring more about using plastic straws or not vs how to solve starvation.

Just gotta point these things out.

Reply

Answer 57

Physics-Man

As long as you're mostly conservative or lean to the right, you're welcome to answer this question.

Answer 58

errorgoodnameunfound

I get that. I mainly have stuck to responding to people rather than commenting myself as I resect the rules of the question. I also vary wildly on opinion with some of my opinions scarring the shit out of right and left. Death penalty for example, I think is sometimes not done often enough as there are in fact people out there that need to put down or deported to an island with other like minded people. This includes a variety of people from broke druggies to crazy CEOs.

Further more, the right and left suck at free markets. The right says yes to guns no to drugs while also overly spoiling religious groups who should not be tax exempt, because then that's how we get scientologists, Vampire churches (ego worshippers), death cults, etc. That explains itself.

The left meanwhile solves every problem with throwing government at it to the point of caring more about using plastic straws or not vs how to solve starvation.

Just gotta point these things out.

Answer 59

gymjerk

Xper 4

There’s already a part for liberty. It’s called libertarian. This is a stupid idea. Trump lost due to election cheating as clearly proved/evidenced by 7 mathematical facts.

It won’t let me link it but google
“7 unexplainable results election fraud “
It’s on the gateway pundit and all facts are documented

React

2 People

SmolSlav

1 y
Is that why its been thrown out of court because of insufficient evidence?

Reply
gymjerk

1 y
No it has been thrown out because Chief Justice Roberts feared widespread riots. There is no lack of evidence. If you follow the info I listed you will see there are 7 mathematical evidences which are not debatable. Science is science and math is math. Perhaps you should at least look at the info someone presents before moving forward with a question like that. You can also google “dominion voting machines hacked live” and see them discussing how dominion lied and YES votes can be swapped and altered by anyone who gains access.

Reply

Answer 60

SmolSlav

Is that why its been thrown out of court because of insufficient evidence?

Answer 61

gymjerk

No it has been thrown out because Chief Justice Roberts feared widespread riots. There is no lack of evidence. If you follow the info I listed you will see there are 7 mathematical evidences which are not debatable. Science is science and math is math. Perhaps you should at least look at the info someone presents before moving forward with a question like that. You can also google “dominion voting machines hacked live” and see them discussing how dominion lied and YES votes can be swapped and altered by anyone who gains access.

Answer 62

RationalMale | 1.8K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Guru

Trump could be a spoiler but he showed he lacks the will to act, and hence, his term ended in disaster because he lacks the courage to do what is necessary. He will never be a star again or win office.

React

2 People

Answer 63

007kingifrit | 2.5K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.

Yoda

only if the GOP and this new party created a non compete pact to not fight over the same areas, gop would run in some areas, PP in others

you also can't call it PP by the way... the jokes right themselves

React

1 Person

Conservatives and Republicans, would you consider joining a Third Party founded by Trump called the Patriot Party?

Most Helpful Guys

Most Helpful Girls

What Girls & Guys Said

Conservatives and Republicans, would you consider joining a Third Party founded by Trump called the Patriot Party?

Most Helpful Guys

Most Helpful Girls

What Girls & Guys Said

Click the button below to add your opinion now!