Home » Open Mic » nora's blog

New Political Party Suggestion

Submitted by nora on Fri, 06/11/2010 - 8:32pm.

Here's the suggestion:

It can be called

The No Advertising Party.

OR

The No Propaganda Party.

All members and all candidates will be dedicated to NOT spending any money outside fees for qualifying for the ballot, PRINTING ballot statements of their platform, having a phone for inquiries and business, postage or computer server for necessary communication, and possibly transportation and per diem to access interviews, debates and meetings for local, regional and national offices.

All donations for the above costs will be accepted from individuals only.

NO advertising.
NO tv, radio, print ads.
NO mailers.
NO signs.
NO campaign donations from corporations, groups, or associations.

THIS PARTY COULD BE EXCELLENTLY FUNDED BY THE RATE OF CONTRIBUTIONS MADE IN THE PAST BY THOSE DEM & REP VOTERS WHOSE POCKETS HAVE BEEN PICKED BY THE DEM & REP CORPORATE PUPPET PARTIES.

This would simplify the voters' task of weeding through candidates. No more burden from trying to figure out which campaign ads are lying and which are honest, no more trying to figure out which candidate is a bagman/bagwoman for the corporate despotism.

In short, the voter never has to read a campaign ad again. The voter can just understand that all ads are the tools of the broken corporate-stranglehold system and that system's puppet candidates and that those who campaign on the corporate dime are automatically suspect.

Instead of bothering with time-wasting ads, the voter can read the ballot statements of the No Propaganda Party.

»

I'll

Submitted by Alice on Sat, 06/12/2010 - 1:11pm.

take two, or more, of those....thank you. :)

»

Problems

Submitted by gloryoski on Mon, 06/14/2010 - 4:53am.

1. Currently millionaires (and on up) can fund their own campaigns.

Actually, it looks to be even more complicated...

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=19547

2. They can still lie, even if they don't do it in ads.

There would still be all kinds of reasons (besides being a rich person) to say one thing and turn around and do another when they get into office. Committee assignments would be one (unless we turn all the senior incumbents out and disband the money party). Another would be under the table no bull about it bribery. Another would be threats from the military/industrial/intelligence complex.

3. People who now make up their mind through watching ads would probably not read these position papers. They would also not do the kind of vetting that would be necessary to find out whether the non-ad statements in interviews, debates and speeches of candidates are likely to be true or not (based on cui bono and also what you can extrapolate about of character based on record).

Not saying it wouldn't help, though.

»