http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110525/ap_on_el_ge/us_medicare_stakes
The win by a Democrat of a usually Republican congressional seat in Upstate NY is testimony to the success of using a three party system to divide the electorate and win the vote for the Democrat candidate.
Although the campaign and the media analysis of it casts this win for the Democrats as a referendum on the Federal Republican party’s proposals to cut spending, by revising the Tax code to be sure the everybody must pay at least some federal tax, stimulate job creation by making it easier for the job creators to do business in the USA instead of overseas, curtail mandatory funding for free medicare care while protecting current medicare recipients the issue in the Rodchester-Buffalo district was actually decided by the entrance of a third-party candidate. Jack Davis, was allowed onto the ballot by the election committee as a so-called Tea Party Candidate.
Firstly, let’s address the issue of, “Is there such a thing a the Tea Party Political party?” This writer would say there is no such political party. Allowing a third-party candidate into this election based upon the concept that the Tea Party populist movement is a political party is false. It is not even a loosely confederated organization. The Tea Party movement is instead, a very loosely affiliated group of patriotic American citizens who are demonstrating for limited and more responsive governance by Washington.
Secondly, if the election boards are going to allow a third-party candidate to run under the label of a Tea Party Political party then such a defined and incorporated individual political party such be required to register itself as such in each State of the USA. Otherwise, the electorate is given false advertising that they are supporting and voting for something called the Tea Party Political Party when such an organization does not exist.
The new Democrat Jane Hochul’s position that she wants to cut government spending but the Republicans want to cut Medicare in order to pay for tax cuts to millionaires is really a shameful use of fear, misinformation, lies and class warfare to gain personal political advantage and a two-year job for herself in Washington.
Let’s take the linkage issues apart. The only legitimate proposal by the Republicans at the Federal level is the one proposed by Representative Paul Ryan. It does overhaul and reform the current medicare system intending to protect current recipients 55 years old and over by putting the current system on actual financial foundations and not basing its funding on IOU’s taken from our children. To say that the purpose or even the unintended result of the reform is to give tax breaks to millionaires is a lie. (It may be a lie that over 55-year-old unemployed workers believed to true, but then shame on their ignorance and shame on those who won the race with old-fashioned political dung.)
The use of the class warfare issue is a standard dirty tactic lie by Democrats, very many of whom are multi millionaires or soon become multi millionaires as soon as they gain political office. The writer of this blog opposes setting one economic group of American citizens at war against another economic group of Americans. Also, ample proof has been published showing that citizens who make millions of dollars yearly are paying for at least 80 % of the Federal government expenses. Since the millionaires are the top five percent of the population, 95 percent of us pay for the remaining 20% of the expenditures.
All of the above being true, I still believe the use of the third-party candidate was the ingredient for winning. It allowed conservative Republicans to vote for a non Democrat because they were frightened into worrying about their personal healthcare. And the Tea Party banner, although not actually a viable political party, allowed scared older Americans to fool themselves into believing that they still supported the Republicans while knowingly handing the victory to the Democrat.
The use of this third-party ploy was used by Perot against Bush 41. It was the cause for the pre-emptive strike against Huckabee by a phony Donald Trump candidacy. I believe another off-year NY congressional election used the same? Anyone remember the details? Was it Gillibrand? And now, it has succeeded in the Rodchester-Buffalo fiasco. Look for more of the same.
Progressive Politics 