Evan McMullin was on “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos, on Sunday morning, October 23. During the 10-minute interview McMullin said the U.S. needs a new political vehicle for the conservative movement and that the U.S. therefore “may need a new political party.” McMullin says the Republican Party is unlikely to make the changes that it needs to make, at least in the next few years. He describes the movement he represents as one which is conservative and which would treat Americans of all races and religions equally. Thanks to Ken Bush for the link.
California already has the American Independent Party and it has been qualified since 1968. We have Trump/Pence ticket.
The transcript of the interview has McMullin making vague statements about how the GOP has to change. He talks about being conservative, implying that the GOP is not now conservative. Is McMullin anti-establishment (e.g. Kasich, Ryan, Graham)? Or anti-populist (e.g. Trump)? Or what? It’s not clear. My conclusion is that McMullin is an idiot commissioned by Romney’s clique that is angry that Trump is the nominee, not for policy reasons, but as a petty personal vendetta.
Although based in Boston, Romney’s Bain Capital and Bain Consulting are firmly in the NY/DC elite world of banksters, lobbyists and bottom feeders. Blankfein, Romney, Dimon, Paulson – they are all evil human beings, enriching themselves through collusion with government bureaucrats and outright fraud, all the while destroying American corporations and the US$. These are the banksters who threatened Armageddon is they didn’t get a bailout (Bain was a recipient). Is that what being conservative means to McMullin – bank bailouts, RomneyCare, endless wars? I doubt McMullin even knows the answer to that rhetorical question as he’s just one of Romney’s soldiers, obediently carrying out orders.
Here’s an interesting article about Romney/Bain. The comment thread has some excellent tidbits. http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/bain-capital-2012-9/
And why isn’t the Constitution Party worthwhile?
America needs a new voting method, to dispel the “wasted vote” objection.
“And why isn’t the Constitution Party worthwhile?”
The ‘religion factor’, for one…
My quick take is that McMullen’s backers are positioning themselves for the coming power struggle to see which faction will control the Republican Party after this election.
Unlike Don, I do not think McMullin is an idiot. But he is a tool of the Bill Kristol, Romney national greatness conservatism of strong national defense, willingness for foreign intervention and a conservative version of the welfare state, all without the nasty rhetoric and tone of Trump.
Deep down I do not believe his backers want a third party. That is most likely why McMullin has not been filing any ballot access lawsuits. They are big defenders of the two party system – they just want to be in control of one of those parties. Right now with Trump at the head of the Republican Party, they are not. If they did form a new party, their voter base would be just be a subset of the existing Republican base. Do they really want to further divide the anti-Hillary voters in two years and possibly give her a Democratic majority in the House and Senate?
“And why isn’t the Constitution Party worthwhile?”
After 27 years, the Constitution Party has made very little progress. Their ballot access this year is worse than 2012 (I heard this, not personally verified), they have weak state organizations, they have made little or no play to win any offices other than president, and their campaign has been very weak. For example, multiple national radio hosts complained they were unable to get a response from the campaign for weeks when trying to schedule an interview.
Many leaders in the Constitution Party subscribe to conspiracy theories and others give the theories play.
While some might object to the religiosity of the party, per Cody Quirk, I think a bigger issue is the neo-isolationism. There is a wide gulf between those who advocate aggressive American involvement everywhere (e.g. neo-cons like Max Boot, John McCain, maybe a Marco Rubio), those who favor American leadership with select involvement to protect American and allied interests while recognizing we are in a global war against islamism (e.g. LTG Mike Flynn, Ted Cruz, Ben Sasse, Evan McMullin), and those who favor America withdrawing from the world including dissolving long standing alliances (e.g Gary Johnson, Drumpf, maybe a Rand Paul).
These views on foreign affairs represent a spectrum, not necessarily three distinct camps. Regardless, there is little to reconcile between Marco Rubio’s and Rand Paul’s positions, or between those of John McCain and Gary Johnson. To the extent the Constitution Party is at one extreme of the spectrum, they are not a suitable party for a majority voters who previously described themselves as ‘conservatives.’
I’ve been very critical of several articles written by Cody Quirk. They seemed like jaundiced hit pieces to me, but I definitely do not see the Constitution Party as a viable vehicle to represent my political beliefs.
McMullin is also too moderate for me, but I still voted for him over Darrell Castle (who I agree with on many more issues) because I think McMullin has a more balanced view of American leadership in the world and because he is working much harder to earn votes.
Agree. There has been division upon division in the CP ever since the party was formed in 1992. Very bad leadership that has been ongoing and turning against allies. In terms of state ballots this is the worse year since it’s founding, plus missing out on Tennessee by 37 signatures, in Castle’s home state yet! The CP will be folding if there is a strong conservative Republican candidate, like the American Party when Reagan was nominated. Also, I wrote in McMullin because his game plan sounded more solid than the CP’s.
Those who actually believe that the CP or LP or Greens are relevant are dreaming. Without a change in electoral process to RCV/IRV or approval voting, supporting a third party with your money and votes and hard work is a fools errand. The wasted vote syndrome is simply too powerful to be overcome.
As a couple of commenters noted, McMullin is nothing more than a soldier in the upcoming battle for the Republican Party brand and ballot access. If Trump wins, the McMullin/Romney/Ryan/Kasich “moderates” will be cast off unless they pledge allegiance to the populists led by DJT — I suspect there will be a lot of disgruntled RINOs who swallow their pride and get on board. However, if Trump loses, it will actually be much more fun to watch — the battle for control of the remnants of what’s left of the GOP will be really ugly (and entertaining for those of us with nothing but loathing for the Republican establishment).
Something like the battle for the GOP after Goldwater?
The Republicans are losing the Capitalist Sector which has been its backbone for last 125 years. And they are losing it fast. With that they could keep peace withing the ranks. Bill Clinton scored The Coup in 1992 when he brought the last segment of Mega Capitalists in to the Democrat. The Republicans have been hanging on by their finger nails ever since. Both of George W. Bush’s wins were squeakers. Trying to parse out the perfect program only serves to narrow the number of people that will accept it. What you are creating is in essence a single issue party like the “Right-to-Life Party” and the Prohibition Party. The Right had its moment, actually it was 4 years long, to form a 3rd Party in 1992-1996 when the Nativist Rallied behind Perot. That was your chance for a 3rd Party but the religious conservatives stayed home. Now by saying “our agenda wasn’t specific enough and needed to be tweaked” you hope to discover the magic formula that will bring everyone in ? The Libertarians, CP, and AIP have existed at the margins They have never shown any break-out potential and in the process established themselves Protest Vote Repositories.
Looking @ McMullin he’s very close on foreign policy to warmonger Hillary Clinton. Wants to take out Assad with a special force. Also very anti-Russian and always points to Trump’s association with Putin also similar to Clinton.But is a social conservative anti-abortion pro-christian “morality” etc but is disturbed anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant rhetoric that has infected the Republican Party. So I think a new party is possible. Different from what we have now.
I support the ideas of New political party’s .A party that has an ideology .I like to see a Labor party organized that supports a 36 hour work week .No overtime and eliminate third shift jobs in the manufacturing sector .Make workers rights an issue
Who is Nebraska Republican Senator Ben Sasse supporting.I know he is not supporting Trump.Time to leave the United States I guess and renounce your United States citizenship .Send a message to the politicians .My choice would be Namibia in Southwest Africa.
How about a woman’s party or feminist party to address women’s issues .I don’t think the Constitution party will fold .Maybe it will just run a few local or state candidates.Maybe a party on a piece of paper with state and National leaders who talk and take no action like there friends at the John Birch Society.If a new conservative party is formed it would probably be formed by establishment conservatives or Old Reagan Republicans.Now I think young people the millennium voters will determine this Election.The Less religious voters .I have nothing against Christians or Christianity .Many people are non religious and don’t think about religion or spirituality in there daily life
I will admit I like Bible prophecy.And listen to shows about Bible prophecy and read about it .My concern politically is supporting more leisurely time for the American Workers .I worked third shift and felt like a paid slave in a bird seed plant .So I know how it feels
I worked seven days a week for a month .I don’t want to feel like a paid slave again
I could find any thing about this Cody Quick or his writings on the internet .
Cody Quirk I meant .who is he ?
What Evan McMullen is looking for is a home for his brand of Neo-Conservatism. Trump has gone native, and doesn’t support the Neo-Conservative internationalist agenda. The irony right now is that Hillary Clinton is the most internationalist candidate running.
First we need people to break free from the spell of fear and unreason the Democrats and Republicans have put on the electorate. But personally, I think a Green and Libertarian led government (with a few other parties in the mix as a result of adopting proportional representation and/or Ranked Choice Voting) would be the best thing for this country; we’d stop our country’s insane foreign policy, we would catch up with the rest of the industrialized world in terms of infrastructure and social programs, we’d get our civil liberties back, and we’d do it while staying within a reasonable budget. Initially both parties would probably butt heads over economics, but given that we are parties of the people by the people and for the people, we would find some way to compromise to get things done without compromising our beliefs.
This is definitely the start of a new ‘party system’. Should we get prop. representation sometime soon, I see 7 major parties forming, with 2 others occasionally grabbing a couple of seats. Those would be the Green Party, the Democratic Party, a center-left party, a Libertarian-leaning party, a center-right party (probably a reincarnation of the Reform party), the Republican Party, and a restructured Constitution Party; with the Socialist Party and a “Christian Democracy” Party, grabbing seats every now and then.
“Agree. There has been division upon division in the CP ever since the party was formed in 1992.”
That’s most third parties in general. By my count there are 9 different party monikers nationally that are to the right of the Republicans with ballot access running 67 different candidates for president.
Donald Trump/American Independent (Calif.) – 55
Darrell Castle/Constitution – 172
Darrell Castle/American Constitution (Colo.) – 9
Darrell Castle/U.S. Taxpayers (Mich.) – 16
Darrell Castle/Independent American (Nev.) – 6
Jim Hedges/Prohibition (Colo. & Miss.) – 15
Tom Hoefling/America’s Party (Colo.) – 9
Kyle Kenley Kopitke/Independent American (Colo.) – 9
Rocky Giordani/Independent American (Utah) – 6
Arlon Copeland/Constitution (Idaho) – 4
Some of these are state-level affiliates that don’t want to change their name, but multiple names causes confusion on the national voting stage of what are you voting for.
Meanwhile, parties to the left of the Democrats:
Jill Stein/Green – 406
Jill Stein/D.C. Statehood Green (D.C.) – 3
Jill Stein/Green Independent (Maine) – 4
Jill Stein/Green-Rainbow (Mass.) – 11
Jill Stein/Pacific Green (Ore.) – 7
Jill Stein/Progressive (Ore.) – 7
Jill Stein/Mountain (W.Va.) – 5
Gloria La Riva/Socialism and Liberation – 54
Gloria La Riva/Peace and Freedom (Calif.) – 55
Gloria La Riva/Liberty Union (Vt.) – 3
Alyson Kennedy/Socialist Workers – 53
Monica Moorehead/Workers World (N.J. & Wis.) – 24
Mimi Soltysik/Socialist Party USA (Colo.) – 9
Mimi Soltysik/Natural Law (Mich.) – 16
Bradford Lyttle/Nonviolent Resistance-Pacifist (Colo.) – 9
Jerry White/Socialism Equality Anti-War (La.) – 8
Some of these are state-level affiliates that don’t want to change their name, but multiple names causes confusion on the national voting stage of what are you voting for.
“If you show you are unable to handle your own internal party affairs, why should I vote you into government?”
Dunno about other states, but in Michigan a party that changed its name would have to re-petition for ballot status. That’s why the Constitution Party affiliate here still has the national party’s old name; it’s the US Taxpayers Party of Michigan.
http://ustpm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=49&Itemid=241
William–they have been talking about a “Women’s Party” since 1984. I don’t see it happening.
How about a workers rights party .For the Workers and by the Workers .
Who will get 0.1 percent or more of the popular votes — in addition to Clinton, Trump, Johnson and Stein ???
Place your bets NOW.
—
Abolish the Electoral College.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
rj wrote: “Some of these are state-level affiliates that don’t want to change their name, but multiple names causes confusion on the national voting stage of what are you voting for.
“If you show you are unable to handle your own internal party affairs, why should I vote you into government?” ”
rj some of the Parties predate the dominant party. For instance the Pacific-Green came into being in the early 90s when the Greens were only on the Ballot in Alaska, Hawaii and California. They didn’t know how things would go and if the Greens would gain any traction on a national level. For whatever reason they chose the name Pacific Green Party. The catch is once you are on the ballot with a name that’s what it is. There isn’t an administrative process to change a party name. If you want to do that you have to take out the new name and start over from scratch. It’s a great deal of work and not very practical for a small party.
On another note you have Socialism Equality Party listed ……it should be SocialisT Equality Party
Bob M wrote “The catch is once you are on the ballot with a name that’s what it is. There isn’t an administrative process to change a party name.”
Then how is that the Republican party in Minnesota went from legally calling itself “Republican” to “Independent-Republicans of Minnesota” (from 1975 to 1995) then back to “Republican”? Also, how many people are confused that the Democrats in Minnesota are officially the “Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.”
For those that support workers rights and the labor movement: In the US we lack a mass socialist or labor party so I can see the Green Party filling that void, if they do the right things. A multi-tendency party that will act as a tent and electoral arm for progressive movements
If a political party is big has the organizational structure and the resources to do it they can organize a re-registration drive. In the case of the Farm-Labor Party it was pretty big itself so it made sense for two parties that had similar platforms and values to merge. I didn’t say it could not be done just not very practical and cost prohibitive, particularly for small parties.
I think McMullin’s real goal is to discourage people from voting for Gary Johnson.