Seth Bodnar - independent US Senate candidate
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
SAJ-99
Well-known member
All for it, but it has to acknowledge the problem. Most Ind and even Liberatarians started their careers as either Dems or Reps. Once they got name recognition they switched the letter and ran on name and power of incumbency. This and the Independent party seems to lack $$$. My guess is because Independent candidates can vary widely in their views and Americans don't want to do the hard work of vetting all the candidates. Because of this, any Indy is just going to steal votes of well-informed voters from a D or R in a close race. I hope that Bodnar breaks the cycle. It will be hard for other Independents until someone proves it can be done.
406dn
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 2,988
I do not think most people neatly fit entirely in either party. But, given the fact that for almost the entirety of our history, there have been two political parties, that are dominant, people most often pick the party that come closest to their views. There are fringe parties, like the Green Party, Libertarian Party, but they effectively serve as spoilers of their own interests.
Going back fifty or sixty years, there were left and right wings in each party. The bulk of southern Democrats became Republicans, after the various civil rights acts became law. At one time all of New England was dominated by moderate Republicans.
Now the parties have sorted out to be more homogenous in their views. It makes bi partisan coalitions much harder to form. Committee chairmen were once nearly as powerful as the leaders of their party. Now they mostly get to bang a gavel, to restore order.
We can all see it's not working very well, but it is not easy to imagine it working much differently.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
We can restart Jefferson’s Democratic Republican Party and confuse everyone.
In the end, we the voters are to blame for any flaws in the system. We can revisit this thread in 4 months and see if Montanans put their vote behind their complaints.
I don't know how you measure that unless we agree on what complaints count. There are enough to go around.
The biggest problem is our voting system creates a false dichotomy, and the parties in power push the fear-based division of “we cannot allow the other person to be elected!” That is their most powerful weapon- working to not vote for your preferred candidate, but to vote AGAINST your non preferred candidate. If it weren’t for this, independents could run and regularly win open, fair elections.
But as we have seen in the past 3 presidential elections, the two-party system will lie, cheat, and steal to lock out the candidates that the voting public prefers in order to push them aside. Johnson and Sanders were physically barred from debates they were legally required to be in.
I might be a tad jaded…
But as we have seen in the past 3 presidential elections, the two-party system will lie, cheat, and steal to lock out the candidates that the voting public prefers in order to push them aside. Johnson and Sanders were physically barred from debates they were legally required to be in.
I might be a tad jaded…
Nunyacreek
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2013
- Messages
- 329
I enjoyed the podcast and while I might not agree with all Bodners positions he certainly seemed genuine. I understand committee assignments and party power but a candidate who caucuses with both parties depending on the issue could wield enormous power in a senate with a narrow majority. Arguable far more than a more predictable party-line candidate. They certainly have recently.
Dakotakid
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Messages
- 916
Sending anyone to Washington to “fix” anything is futile. It may have taken 250 years to prove Jefferson right, but centralized federal power is by its very nature corrupt.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,980
True individually. But imagine a senate with 10 independents, 45 dems and 45 repubs. Cant get there without an independent breaking through.
I imagine people that will be liking this post also resonated with "draining the swamp" and had the idea that sending trump to the DC would fix their life and countries problems.
Edited, cause i cant add to 100
Last edited:
Can't get there with only 90 senators either ....
Wildabeest
Well-known member
I had you pegged as more of a straight ticket guy…
lifeisgoodsteve
Well-known member
As a die hard member of the choir welcoming the value and need of something other than the dysfunctional 2 party system, @Big Fin, did you guys talk any more maybe offline about what it really will take for him to get elected?
For some of us, the "why" an Independent is so important was something we get in the first 2 minutes, but how to make it a reality is really where I'm starving for answers.
Did he have any concrete examples or road maps of success for non-big name independents?
Any thoughts on how he can practically compete with the big money donors you talked about without he himself becoming beholden when the very same donors who give to D and R start to give to him?
Thanks for doing your part to give some airplay to a new way.
For some of us, the "why" an Independent is so important was something we get in the first 2 minutes, but how to make it a reality is really where I'm starving for answers.
Did he have any concrete examples or road maps of success for non-big name independents?
Any thoughts on how he can practically compete with the big money donors you talked about without he himself becoming beholden when the very same donors who give to D and R start to give to him?
Thanks for doing your part to give some airplay to a new way.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Find a PAC with a few million$ to throw your way and tell them you will vote the way they want you to.
My question is do you think just getting more independents elected will give you different types of people in office?
Gulf of America
Well-known member
This is the real kicker. The two parties get all the hate, but the truth is it's the super PACs controlling the direction of the parties. It sure as hell wasn't the RNC that sunk Cornyn, if they had their way they sure wouldn't have sunk $100M into picking the candidate they would have to spend more to try to elect.
406dn
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 2,988
It is an uphill pull for any candidate in Montana, without the GOP label beside them. imo, Bodnar aligns closer to a Democrat, than a Republican. As I stated earlier, almost no one fits perfectly in either party.
It is a fact that over the last generation or more, the national Democratic party has trashed its reputation in rural America. That is a millstone around the neck of any politician in rural America with Democrat next to his name. Baucus used to not include Democrat on his campaign stickers. Tester swam upstream, in all of his elections. He would not have beaten Burns, if Burns would have been even average.
It is a fact that over the last generation or more, the national Democratic party has trashed its reputation in rural America. That is a millstone around the neck of any politician in rural America with Democrat next to his name. Baucus used to not include Democrat on his campaign stickers. Tester swam upstream, in all of his elections. He would not have beaten Burns, if Burns would have been even average.
lifeisgoodsteve
Well-known member
Very good points as who's to say that money will not simply control an independent as the source of their funding to keep themselves in office.
However, considering how dysfunctional the current system is, I sure am will to try almost anything different.
Randy and Seth's comments about getting rid of Citizen's United would certainly be a step in the right direction, though since money controls both parties, it's hard to imagine money getting out of electing politicians.
I suppose if there was enough of an individual grass roots donation from individuals to an Indepenedent...an idealistic maybe they have more chance of staying independent. There will always be the pull of money to control and politicians giving in to it to hold onto their position and power, but to me it's sure worth a try to go in a better direction!
I don't know if they are going to get Bodnar to be beholden to them or not, but there are several PACs supporting Bodnar including some who have supported Ds. Also, some are probably running ads for him or will without any explicit approval by him. That would just be a normal election.
It's ok to say you don't want big money to support you, but getting elected without it will be an uphill battle to be different than Ds and Rs. Ads cost money to reach the low information voters.
So far, I think Bodnar is still leading all candidates in fundraising. We won't know what the all in spending by all PACs and candidates until quite a bit later.
