Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

How does one start a new political party in the US?

I know lots of money and a lot of people that agree with you is needed, but what else does one need to make it a legitimate political party. I want to start a new one called the Common Sense Party, since it seems the major partys we have now don't have any.
TinyViolins · 31-35, M Best Comment
You have to get registered at the state level with each state's requirements being slightly different. There are things like age requirements, filing fees, signature collections, and party organization that gets factored into it all.

If you want to go national, you basically have to repeat the process over and over again until you can appear on each state's ballot for the upcoming elections.

More realistically, it might just be more helpful to align yourself with pre-existing third parties and try to reach some alliances that make it more likely to even appear on the ballot. It's a steep uphill battle given that Democrats and Republicans have a stranglehold on the political process. State officials have already shafted the Green and Libertarian Parties on several occasions by tweaking and twisting the rules to keep them out of elections.

Right now, the largest third-party in terms of resources is the Forward Party, headed by Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate. He's been able to get dozens of disaffected government officials from multiple states and presidential administrations to get on board with the message that the two party system is broken. Former Democrats and Republicans, as well as lifelong independents, are flocking to this movement because they sense what you're sensing too.

We need a better system of governance
@TinyViolins The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will eliminate the EC without a constitutional amendment. But the reason politicians won't support it is because it will force them to campaign in every state, since every vote will count equally. The EC makes it easier because they only have to campaign in a few swing states. There's no reason to campaign in the expensive media markets of CA, NY, IL, or TX because those states are in the bag for one party or the other. So it comes down to a handful of voters in a few states.

It remains to be seen if Yang can gather enough support to do anything without running any candidates. The way to build a political party is to start at the bottom. Put people on school boards and city hall, work up to state legislatures, then Congress.
TinyViolins · 31-35, M
@LeopoldBloom The problem with that is that so far only 15 states - all of them Democratic - have signed on to the agreement in the 15 years since it's been proposed. The likelihood of getting over the finish line anytime soon is basically nil.

The problem with getting other states to sign on is that the top 4 states have as many popular votes as the bottom 35. In this future, a candidate would have every incentive to focus their campaigning in mostly the popular states and basically exclude 2/3rds of the country. As much as I hate the Electoral College, this compact is never going to happen.
@TinyViolins I agree, that's a problem. Another problem is enforcement - making sure each member state sends its EVs to the national vote winner even if that candidate lost in that state. Also, once the compact is in effect, it will be challenged in court, and the Supreme Court could rule that while it doesn't violate the Constitution (since each state decides how to cast its EVs) it goes against the intention. Or whatever. The current court will never approve a system that will result in Democrats winning.

dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@Really There is nothing at the Constitutional level. The opinion of the Founding Fathers seemed to be that of Thomas Jefferson: political parties are a necessary evil. Hamilton, Adams, Jay, Marshall were the big proponents of a strong central government which they pushed in the Federalist Papers, and became the leaders of the de facto Federalist Party that was initially in control. Washington was a Federalist as well, but attempted to be what we would call bi-partisan today. Jefferson and Madison were the founders of the Democratic-Republican Party that argued for stronger state governments/rights.

Over the years a complex web of Federal and state laws have emerged around party organizational structures, donor identification, campaign financing, etc. Although the biggest effort to make these transparent and limit the ability of billionaire and corporate donors to dominate campaign financing, passed by Congress, was ruled un-Constitutional under the First Amendment by SCOTUS in a decision based on the assumption that corporations have the same free speech rights as individuals. Something that has to have the Boston Tea Partiers turning over in their graves.

So the initial issue for any new political party is getting on the ballot, and as a previous poster stated, the ballots are controlled by each state and the rules, steps, vary with each. So it is easier, in most case, to take over one of the smaller parties already on the ballot in as many states as possible and contrary to general belief, we have a multitude of "third parties" -- just not one with sufficient clout to matter much (with the exception of the Presidential runs by Ross Perot and Ralph Nader) where it could be argued both played a spoiler roll. Part of the battle over voting rights currently in the House and Senate is over this hybrid model where the States control the ballot and voting, even in Federal general elections. So you have the Democrats pushing for a more Federalist expansion of voting rights, and the Republicans trying to rigidly control voting in the Red states.

The major issue, though, is access to a large enough megaphone to become a big enough voice to be heard and that the two existing parties have a de facto choke hold on by controlling the rules on who participates in broadcast debates, keeping the price of campaigning extremely high, etc. Ross Perot and Ralph Nader broke through by virtue of their name recognition, and in the case of Perot, his personal finances.
Really · 80-89, M
@dancingtongue As usual, a very full & thoughtful response - a bit more than I can fully digest - but thank you.
SteelHands · 61-69, M
Partys aren't the problem. The problem is that big money interests meddle with both elections and the making of laws.

That's why both partys sound nuts sometimes and that's why the Democrats seem to have lost their minds completely.

A new party would be just as susceptible to the bribes.

1. Former government employees taking jobs in huge companies after they hold important jobs in government. (Reward Bribes)

2. Elected people who get major contributions into their "non profit" corporations. Aka Bribed

3. Superpacs. Lobbyists. Bailouts. SEC actions that benefit the major players.

4. Misuse of Federal Bureaus and investigatory branches that ignore wrongdoing by everyone on the inside.

Its a mess. That's why we call it a swamp.

Get em all out of there. Vote for the underdogs.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@SteelHands Yeah. Comment stands.
SteelHands · 61-69, M
@Graylight I'm the one who sees that the two party monopoly puppet show sells greyberry koolaid.

Ofc you don't alter your thinking bcuz you ain't about it.
Graylight · 51-55, F
Virgo79 · 61-69, M
Youll be investigated for any and everything they can think of, and probably things they didnt.
I dont know why anyone would want to go through all that.
But some have reasons now😁
You’ve seen what happens when the power is threatened. Both rinos/dems conspire to destroy them..

Orange man bad..
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Graylight · 51-55, F
But that's just it. They're charged with having just that and they shouldn't be let off the hook. That creates two languishing parties and one party which may use common sense but who are still diametrically opposed politically speaking.

We've been too long allowing the extreme ends of the spectrum decide for the other 80% of us.
get young people involved in politics.
It’s a waste of time until ranked choice voting is universal. Very few people are willing to throw away their vote and potentially help elect a candidate they despise. It’s why the current third parties have almost no support.
Elessar · 26-30, M
It's not creating one the problem, it's having one vote more than the 2nd most voted one.

In any case "common sense" is a stupid concept in politics. What's "common sense" is to a conservative may very well be the opposite of what "common sense" is to a progressive.
jimjim1969 · M
You are right. The far right and left is insane
@jimjim1969 Yeah, the Far-Right wants Fascism, while the Far-Left wants affordable healthcare. They're exactly the same amount of insane.
lots of money,,shady friends,,
GerOttman · 61-69, M
They are called Libertarians
cherokeepatti · 61-69, F
@TexChik would be a good name for it.
IM5688 · 61-69, M
@cherokeepatti Then I'd get sued by Trump for using his slogan.
THEY ARE ALREADY THERE. just two lead the pack so far
American Independent · Democratic Party · Green Party · Libertarian Party · Peace and Freedom Party · Republican Party.
Driver2 · M
Congratulations

https://www.cacommonsense.org/
IM5688 · 61-69, M
@Driver2 Being from NY, I had no idea that CA already has a Common Sense party. Thanks for letting me know.
Virgo79 · 61-69, M
@IM5688 but just the party😂
Driver2 · M
@IM5688 I didn’t know either but I think there was one years ago also
Third parties never survive , it’s a fact
circleK · F
It's best at present to support Joe Biden. He will defeat Donald Trump.
This message was deleted by its author.
Unlearn · 41-45, M
By posting about it on here...
Sounds like the Andrew Yang grift.
BackyardShaman · 61-69, M
Big money big plans
MartinTheFirst · 22-25, M
Basically rile the majority of people up about something you're pretending you can do anything about
SW-User
If you're in your 60s you should be able to Google such requirements* ... and how successful existing third parties are right now

Thank you for playing the Third Party Drinking Game, I was thirsty

* and if you [i]cannot[/i] figure it out, then you really don't have what it takes to be trying to shape US politics

 
Post Comment