If the Revolution Were A Political Party...?

[libertad16]

If the Ron Paul movement started its own party to carry Paul's message on in the future, what would it be called? Libertarian and Constitution Parties are already taken.

This question is not about him ACTUALLY DOING IT, just curious what you guys would call it if it happened.

Maybe the Freedom Party? I think that's too vague though, what do you think?

[dmspilot00]

I think the Libertarian and Constitution parties should merge.

[garrettwombat]

The Sons of Liberty party has already started in my area...

we have people working on a website and pretty much base all our views off of ron pauls policy.


libertarian is a nice party but, they arnt strict constitutionalists
constitutionalit is a nice party but, they are so closed minded as to only accept christians.

[nosebruise]

the party party

[Elliott]

I was thinking about this idea a few days ago and I decided the perfect name would be the "Conservative Party."

Typically, people describe themselves as members of one of the two parties (Democrats or Republicans) almost as if those party titles are placeholders for the underlying political philosophy (Liberal or Conservative respectively.)

If there was a party called the "Conservative Party," that would pose a dilemma for brainwashed Republican conservatives who don't realize that the Republican party has abandoned conservatism in favor of neoconservatism (which isn't conservatism at all.)

[PC_for_Paul]

How bout:

"None of the Above" Party

[Ryokucha]

How about the "Freedom for all, not just the top 1%" party?

[Noleader]

If you want to affect elections the best thing to do it get as large a base as possible and endorse folks in other parties that agree with us on most items. Running a new party will not make an impact on any sizeable level as there are to many of them and few take them serious.

[alsis8xmy]

The Jeffersonian Party!

This name makes so much sense to me, the only party that can cure the curse of Hamilton!!! Not only that, it has a nice ring to it

[OddballAZ]

This could be a good idea. We need to wait and see how Ron Paul does.

The Libertarian party isn't bad, but as a previous poster pointed out they do have their differences with the Constitution.

The Constitution party sounds good by the name, but they force a heavy dose of religion into it. I'm a Christian, but I reject this type of view of the Constitution. Religion needs to stay the hell out of politics as much as possible. Also most of their membership is in CA, due to the fact that they call themselves the "American Independent Party".

From what it looks like right now, almost 30,000 people have voted for Ron Paul, and that is just in Iowa and NH alone. By the time this is all said and done we will have gotten a lot of people to vote for Ron Paul. If even half of those people joined a new party we'd instantly be the 3rd largest political party in the US. We should try to get our base to include all of those disgruntled Americans out there that don't vote. I'm a life long Republican but I am sick of the BS. If Ron Paul does not win the nomination I am leaving the party. The NeoCon's have destroyed the party and they are just as dangerous to this country as the Democrats are.

With the meetup group base we have for Ron Paul we could probably quickly spread.

[Dustancostine]

How about the "Revolution Party"

[AlexMerced]

Whatever parties you all start open up a group at Liberty Independence Alliance, I invite all fledling parties to unite their to join in our fight for liberty

http://libertyia.ning.com

Seriously, everybody sign up

I'll join any party that'll support my runs for office :) (PM ME)

[american.swan]

I was thinking about this idea a few days ago and I decided the perfect name would be the "Conservative Party."

Typically, people describe themselves as members of one of the two parties (Democrats or Republicans) almost as if those party titles are placeholders for the underlying political philosophy (Liberal or Conservative respectively.)

If there was a party called the "Conservative Party," that would pose a dilemma for brainwashed Republican conservatives who don't realize that the Republican party has abandoned conservatism in favor of neoconservatism (which isn't conservatism at all.)

Good idea, but I don't think third party is viable, but I like your idea.

[RPCanadian]

Good idea, but I don't think third party is viable, but I like your idea.

The name "Conservative Party" would definetly make the most sense. Up here in Canada we once had a Reform party that eventually merged with the Progressive Conservative party creating the Conservative party of Canada. The Reform party was the closest thing to RP policy that Canada has had for a number of years.

[liberty-rp08]

Anti-Neocon Party

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm

[Malakai0]

The Revolutionary Party

[mdmarino]

How 'bout the no-party party. Let's just get rid of the whole contrived party system. Not trying to parrot Lou Dobbs here, but what's wrong with just being Independent?

[SimpleName]

The Jeffersonian Party!

This name makes so much sense to me, the only party that can cure the curse of Hamilton!!! Not only that, it has a nice ring to it

I like that one A LOT! But i think actually trying to run will be impossible like everyone else. Americans are just too weak minded to vote for them. I liked the idea somebody mentioned about endorsing (i believe) members of other parties. Only thing that will work in the good ol' stubborn USA.

[nate895]

The Jeffersonian Party!

This name makes so much sense to me, the only party that can cure the curse of Hamilton!!! Not only that, it has a nice ring to it

Already taken. (http://www.jeffersonianparty.com/)

[VoluntaryMan]

"American Revolution Party"?

[piotr1]

the rEVOLution party

[1000-points-of-fright]

Already taken. (http://www.jeffersonianparty.com/)

The Jeffersonian Party sounded good until I read this part of their platform:


5. Make military instruction a regular part of education, and protect "the right
of the people to keep and bear arms" for the defense of themselves and
their Nation.

6. Establish a Constitutional Amendment for Federal involvement in education.

8. Establish a Constitutional Amendment Convention to be held every twenty
years.

No thanks.

What about the Constitutionalist Party (http://home.earthlink.net/~jmarkels/cp.html)? We could try and take it over. They're a little weak on foreign policy and the war on drugs (they're headed in the right direction, but their plan is a bit too incremental) but nothing says that can't be changed. It's probably just one guy in his basement. they don't even have their own domain name.

[VoluntaryMan]

Not sure about a name. There are lots of good ones (although I'm partial to 'Voluntarist Party'). I do have an idea for a sub-party, though. It would work something like this:

1) form an organization

2) put forth candidates within the existing two major parties

3) [it would have to be a coalition party for this part to work, but...] we would decide upon one candidate for each major party, and work for both of them, by joining forces between paleocons, libertarians, and classical liberals.

4) If both of our candidates win their party's nomination, it's a victory for our coalition, because we'll have succeeded (inevitably) in electing an honest, benevolent man (or woman).

5) If only one of our candidates wins nomination, the entire coalition will back that candidate, by working for and voting for him in the general election -- effectively punishing the party that has rejected our candidate. This is more effective than a 3rd party effort because, instead of allowing the Republicrats to split 80% of the vote, the remaining 20% will be dedicated to the concentrated defeat of the opposition party, which will weaken it, making it an easier target for the next run.

6) If neither of our candidates wins, we will hold an election to determine which will be top and bottom of the ticket, and will run them as an Independent ticket.

The benefit of this is that it will make effective use of an intelligent, principled minority to destroy the death grip that the twin party system holds on the electoral process. Let's flex our muscles for good. What say you?

[RedLightning]

The Tea Party?

[AlexMerced]

Not sure about a name. There are lots of good ones (although I'm partial to 'Voluntarist Party'). I do have an idea for a sub-party, though. It would work something like this:

1) form an organization

2) put forth candidates within the existing two major parties

3) [it would have to be a coalition party for this part to work, but...] we would decide upon one candidate for each major party, and work for both of them, by joining forces between paleocons, libertarians, and classical liberals.

4) If both of our candidates win their party's nomination, it's a victory for our coalition, because we'll have succeeded (inevitably) in electing an honest, benevolent man (or woman).

5) If only one of our candidates wins nomination, the entire coalition will back that candidate, by working for and voting for him in the general election -- effectively punishing the party that has rejected our candidate. This is more effective than a 3rd party effort because, instead of allowing the Republicrats to split 80% of the vote, the remaining 20% will be dedicated to the concentrated defeat of the opposition party, which will weaken it, making it an easier target for the next run.

6) If neither of our candidates wins, we will hold an election to determine which will be top and bottom of the ticket, and will run them as an Independent ticket.

The benefit of this is that it will make effective use of an intelligent, principled minority to destroy the death grip that the twin party system holds on the electoral process. Let's flex our muscles for good. What say you?

this is what I'm doing with Liberty Independence Alliance, check it out a http://libertyia.ning.com

How about we just do honor to what united us

the Paulestinian Party

[peacemonger]

Throw-The-Bums-Out Party

[Ron LOL]

The various third parties are a COLOSSALLY STUPID idea. Our focus should be on "hijacking" the republican party back to where it should be.

[nate895]

The Jeffersonian Party sounded good until I read this part of their platform:



No thanks.

What about the Constitutionalist Party (http://home.earthlink.net/~jmarkels/cp.html)? We could try and take it over. They're a little weak on foreign policy and the war on drugs (they're headed in the right direction, but their plan is a bit too incremental) but nothing says that can't be changed. It's probably just one guy in his basement. they don't even have their own domain name.

I was only saying it was taken, but those aren't that bad.

I actually agree that we should all know how to fight, the intent of the 2nd amendment was twofold (now it's threefold);

1) To protect ourselves from government (we need military training for that)

2) To protect ourselves from invaders (military training needed)

On education, at least they have the respect to amend the Constitution, even if I'd vote against it.

And the Convention thing, hey Jefferson did say every generation needs a revolution, at least that way isn't violent.

Wait, RP is one of their candidates. (http://www.jeffersonianparty.com/)

[RonPaulVolunteer]

Founder's Freedom Party

.

[Paulestinian]

The Republikan party..with a k!

[TN_VOL]

We should just reestablish the Democratic-Republican party since it was founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. It ran on ideas such as states' rights, the power of farmers over bankers, industrialists, merchants, and other monied interests. It also opposed such Federalist policies as high tariffs, a navy, military spending, a national debt, and a national bank. Sounds pretty close to Ron Paul don't you think?

[VoluntaryMan]

this is what I'm doing with Liberty Independence Alliance, check it out a http://libertyia.ning.com

How about we just do honor to what united us

the Paulestinian Party

I like it. I checked out your site. As far as taking over the parties goes, though, I think that needs to be done from the top. Only the President has sufficient influence to dominate the party machinery. Even succeeding in getting fifty Congressman elected, a colassal feat, will not accomplish the same thing. This is not to suggest that getting 50 Congressmen elected is not a good thing. It needs to be done. But the tasks should probably be broken down, so that focus can be mainitain. And the effort should be from within either party, to take advantage of existing aparatus.

[1000-points-of-fright]

The various third parties are a COLOSSALLY STUPID idea. Our focus should be on "hijacking" the republican party back to where it should be.

Yes for this and the next election. But do you seriously want to have a two party system for the next few centuries? The long term plan should be to open the political process to more parties and individuals. You can bet your ass RP would encourage it if he were president.

I think you are COLOSSALLY STUPID because you aren't capable of working toward short term goals while simultaneously musing on the internet about the long term. Put that in your hat and smoke it.

[VoluntaryMan]

We should just reestablish the Democratic-Republican party since it was founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. It ran on ideas such as states' rights, the power of farmers over bankers, industrialists, merchants, and other monied interests. It also opposed such Federalist policies as high tariffs, a navy, military spending, a national debt, and a national bank. Sounds pretty close to Ron Paul don't you think?

Actually, the "Republican Party" was the original name of the party founded by Jefferson. Jefferson's party eventually adopted the name of the democratic societies that served as the parties "meetups." By the time of Jackson, it was known as simply the Democratic Party. Lincoln's party adopted the name "Republican Party," because it was no longer in use by Jefferson's party.

However, incorporating the name "Democratic-Republican Society" into my idea for a sub-party, bi-partisan nominating organization would be perfect.

[Minlawc]

I really do believe that the Constitution and Libertarian could merge. It would probably be a quicker way to getting a more limited government.

I also like the Democratic-Republican idea, reinstituting the original Jefferson party...

[Azprint]

Liberally Conservative party!

[louisiana4liberty]

Limitarian Party

[Ron LOL]

Yes for this and the next election. But do you seriously want to have a two party system for the next few centuries? The long term plan should be to open the political process to more parties and individuals. You can bet your ass RP would encourage it if he were president.

I think you are COLOSSALLY STUPID because you aren't capable of working toward short term goals while simultaneously musing on the internet about the long term. Put that in your hat and smoke it.

The LP and the Greens are living examples that this kind of thinking is a waste of time.

We have a two party system. Deal with it. Instead of thrashing around trying to "change" things, why not embrace the system and actually change things. A rose by any other name and all that.

[dblee]

Personally I am partial to the "Non-Party" hahaha. But that wouldn't get much respect.

I say we form the "Revolution" party for the following reasons.

1.) It pays homage to the American Revolution, the founders, the constitution and rejection of tyranny.

2.) It is already a widely recognized buzz word in the Ron Paul Revolution and thus would be the natural next step.

3.) Because of the familiarity of the word within the Ron Paul Revolution, it would not take any mental adjustment because most people already identify with it. Plus we could keep using the logo.

3.) It has a ring to it.

[dblee]

and while we're at it, we should actively poach the other third parties for members and people.

third parties have remained at the fringe of american politics for too long, there needs to be some kind of uniting movement.

CNN cites statistics that have independent voters at an all time high right now, we could definitely be a significant force. If Lou Dobbs wasn't such a egomaniac, he would be a strong ally.

[Jeremy]

The American Party

[Cleaner44]

My home is in the Libertarian Party.

[TwiLeXia]

Sick idea.

How about... the Peace Party?

[Meiun]

er, the internet thing...

iParty
Lib3rty Party
r0XX0r Party

revolution theme...

The Henrys (Patrick Henry, "give me liberty...")
Founders Party
Wolverine Party (old movie, young revolutionaries)

In the end though... I agree. We should focus on taking back the Republican party. How dare them defame such an institution!

[torchbearer]

Son of Liberty, with the focus on reverence of the constitution.

[dblee]

well. this is why third parties don't succeed, because no one can agree on a name.

[torchbearer]

well. this is why third parties don't succeed, because no one can agree on a name.

I've never seen a room of libertarians agree on anything either... especially when it comes to details...

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

The Liberty Party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Drknows]

Patriotic party.

Instead of a donkey or elephant we could just have the American flag.


Fox News Style

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

The various third parties are a COLOSSALLY STUPID idea. Our focus should be on "hijacking" the republican party back to where it should be.

Um, yeah, that aint gonna happen.

[Myerz]

THE REVOLUTIONARY PARTY!!!!

I would join!

[Goldwater Conservative]

I like Ross Perot's slogan for his independent candidacy, "United We Stand."

[crink]

I agree with taking over the libertarian party and joining with the constitutionalist party. Think about it, the libertarian party already has influence all over the country. If we were to found our own party it would take years to establish hq's in every state, and gain true national support.

But whatever is decided, we need to pick a party soon because we need a party after the presidential elections to put our congress members in.

[rice_classic]

How about just, "THE PARTY" ?

*I didn't read all 6 pages*

[ScotTX]

The RPRP or Ron Paul Republican Party

Patriotic Americans United for Liberty "P.A.U.L" Party

[rajibo]

The Classical Liberals

[koob]

I think the Paulites should infiltrate the Republican Party by slowly taking seats in congress. We could use our internet organization to help out smaller local campaigns. Imagine if we took all this internet support and honed on a few small elections each election year.

[Goldwater Conservative]

How about just, "THE PARTY" ?

*I didn't read all 6 pages*

There are only two if you set your posts-per-page view to the maximum. ;)


The RPRP or Ron Paul Republican Party

Patriotic Americans United for Liberty "P.A.U.L" Party

That second one is incredible! Way better than "Connecticut for Lieberman." :D


The Classical Liberals

That's the last thing we need when trying to win over the less well-read conservatives. :)

How about the Constitutional Liberty Party? Ties together his two themes very nicely, I think.

[Swmorgan77]

If the Ron Paul movement started its own party to carry Paul's message on in the future, what would it be called? Libertarian and Constitution Parties are already taken.

This question is not about him ACTUALLY DOING IT, just curious what you guys would call it if it happened.

Maybe the Freedom Party? I think that's too vague though, what do you think?

I know its already taken, but I think it would be something like "Independent Americans" or the American party.

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

I like:

REVOLUTIONARY PARTY

or

LIBERTY PARTY

[exer51]

I was thinking about this idea a few days ago and I decided the perfect name would be the "Conservative Party."

Typically, people describe themselves as members of one of the two parties (Democrats or Republicans) almost as if those party titles are placeholders for the underlying political philosophy (Liberal or Conservative respectively.)

If there was a party called the "Conservative Party," that would pose a dilemma for brainwashed Republican conservatives who don't realize that the Republican party has abandoned conservatism in favor of neoconservatism (which isn't conservatism at all.)

I had that exact same thought a while back. IMO there's no real reason for a new party(Libertarian is fine), but if it were to happen for some reason this is clearly the best name.

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

"Conservative Party" is a bad idea, IMO, because it conjures up visions of angry old men and so-called "conservative moral values" that will turn off a lot of young people.

Something like "Liberty Party" or "Freedom Party" sound more positive.

[LibertyForever]

I like the

Sons of Liberty Party.

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

I like the

Sons of Liberty Party.

Lol, this is supposed to attract women as well? :confused:

[Grandson of Liberty]

I think the Paulites should infiltrate the Republican Party by slowly taking seats in congress. We could use our internet organization to help out smaller local campaigns. Imagine if we took all this internet support and honed on a few small elections each election year.

Bingo! Bingo! We have a winner. This is absolutely what we need to do.

But since we're throwing out party names, how about "Grandsons of Liberty" ;)

[MikeStanart]

How about we just take over the Republican Party?

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

How about we just take over the Republican Party?

How about no?

[MikeStanart]

How about no?

Your attitude is disturbing. What Would Ron Paul Do?

I mean, exactly what is it that Ron has been doing his entire life?

He's spear-headed the effort for US to take over the GOP. Retreating now would just be a waste.

[kushaze]

I like unaffiliated.

[Joe3113]

How about the "Revolution Party"

+1

[Tronchaser]

Your attitude is disturbing. What Would Ron Paul Do?

I mean, exactly what is it that Ron has been doing his entire life?

He's spear-headed the effort for US to take over the GOP. Retreating now would just be a waste.


Don't worry, this guy never says anything positive... and is borderline trollish.

I probably should set him to "ignore".. the negativity is getting me down. :(

[LibertyRevolution]

The Patriot Party

The Revolutionary Party

The Liberty Party

[dblee]

The Patriot Party

The Revolutionary Party

The Liberty Party

i like all of these

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

The Patriot Party

The Revolutionary Party

The Liberty Party

Yeh, all three are good.

[free.alive]

The sign-waving party

[Virtual Isolation]

How about no?

This would be the best option to take but it depends if the Republican party nominates someone else and loses in a colossal fashion. The entire base is going to splinter into 6-7-8 pieces in that case.

Or if Dr. Paul wins it will realign itself as a union of the old right and the old left (classical conservatives, classical liberals) while the Democratic party will become a union of the new right and new left (neoconservatives, socialist liberals). In due time, however, I think this will happen anyway. A similar realignment of the party structure as happened in the 1920s-1930s and in the 1960s-1970s.

Either way, the GOP is established, has the ballot access, and is extremely weak. Howard Dean went against the Clinton machine and lost, but now he's in charge of the party. Nothing says we can't do the same, win or lose.

For the third party option though, Liberty Party.

[Dave Pedersen]

Why do we need a federal level of government any longer? Perhaps we do but before we rally behind a platform there should be careful examination of the role of government at the federal level. I see nothing wrong with the Libertarian party except it seems to naturally fill with the self serving and self promoting types we so desperately need to disenfranchise.

What is the difference between the Libertarian party and the Constitution party? The founders were not fond of political parties but did love their beer and yam pie.

When you think about it there should be no need for a "constitution" party since all parties should be 100% behind the constitution if they honor their oath of office. A sad state of affairs.

[LibertyRevolution]

The Disenfranchised Voter Party...

[Revolution9]

The New American Revolution Coalition (NARC..heh). Not a third party at first but a coalition of like minded politicians who abide by the Founding Fathers vision of a free and prosperous America. Once well established they can become as a third party and put their weight behind and against corporate, theocratic and fascistic bills and political maneuverings.

Best
Randy