This much should be said in defense of Americans Elect, the ambitious new venture to place a third party on the presidential ballot in 50 states: It at least defends the idea that there is a vibrant center remaining in American politics. That’s no small thing in a season where both parties have based their strategies on mobilizing the Left and Right respectively, and when the most energetic grassroots forces in the last several years — the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street — denigrate the center as feckless and dishonest.
But virtues aside, Americans Elect is just a decently capitalized start-up that still hasn’t raised enough cash to compete in a California governor’s race, much less a nationwide election. It is ostensibly free from the interest-group matrix that dominates each party, but because its donors don’t have to be disclosed under federal tax law, it’s less transparent than any presidential campaign operation in the modern era. It has constructed a state-of-the-art formula for a virtual online convention to pick a nominee, but has apparently shopped its nomination to every retired or retiring self-described moderate who has done a few terms in the Senate. It is a movement of the “responsible center” whose online followers track Ron Paul — the avatar of a politics that stitches the extreme Right and extreme Left together — more than any other political figure.
Advertisement
If Americans Elect amounts to nothing more than a footnote, its failure will be attributed to the obstacles third parties encounter in American politics. But its shortcomings also hint at something deeper: the elite centrism embodied by Americans Elect doesn’t address the fault-lines that are dividing the country, and, as a result, does not resonate with the actual middle ground that, according to Gallup, may comprise as much as 40 percent of the electorate.
To the extent an agenda can be gleaned from the impeccably credentialed insiders who form the vanguard for Americans Elect, from Tom Friedman to Mark McKinnon to Christie Todd Whitman, it is a Beltway/Wall Street–approved sensibility more than a program — a consensus of an affluent, cosmopolitan establishment that contentious social issues should be de-emphasized, that the Tea Party’s priorities have too much weight in the Republican party, and that President Obama has failed to summon the nation to an appropriately bold national challenge. The critique of Washington is descriptive — too many pledges, too many organized interests — but weak on details and actual proposals.
As a result, this version of elite centrism has been cryptically ambiguous on a range of policy disputes, from the merits or flaws of more government intervention in the health-care sector, to the balance between individual responsibility and entitlement, to the shape of immigration policy in a strained job market. This centrism is confident of what it doesn’t like — willful indifference to the science of climate change; flat-out refusals to raise taxes — but vague in its response to the erosion of the manufacturing sector and the wage stagnation of blue-collar workers. If elite centrism is troubled by the toll domestic regulations impose in a globally wired economy, or the weight of red tape on small businesses, it doesn’t say so.
On social issues, the silence is even more acute. Should a sweeping judge-made vision of equal protection trump federalism, and the prerogatives of states and communities to promote their own visions of the common good? It’s arguably the pivotal social question after a generation of constitutional rights expanding by non-democratic means, in a society roughly split on touchstones like abortion and gay marriage, but it’s a debate that elite centrism deliberately avoids.
It is not surprising, if Politico’s extensive story last week is to be believed, that Americans Elect has spent so much energy trying to draft either Evan Bayh, Bob Kerrey, Joe Lieberman, Lamar Alexander, or Chuck Hagel — all well-regarded Beltway personalities who are on the record denouncing hyper-partisanship and the collapse of bonhomie in the congressional cloakrooms. But their only major commonalities are an ambidextrous political profile and substantial time spent at a metro-D.C. address. The fact that they are equally appealing to Americans Elect is decisive proof that the organization’s convictions run broad not deep.
Americans Elect probably regards its lack of definition as a strategic asset. It may even be a necessity for an entity that is raising money around the value of an alternative voice, not around what that voice should actually say. But the carefully modulated, nuanced moderation that it embodies, the favored tone in the Acela corridor between New York and Washington, is probably the weakest possible catalyst for dynamic change.
Too much of the elite center was on retainer or in the boardroom when exotic financial instruments were distorting capital markets and Fannie and Freddie were collaborating to take the risk out of lending. Too many of them are immersed in a worldview that is famously tolerant and cosmopolitan, but tone-deaf about the anxieties of blue-collar Catholics and rural evangelicals, who fret that their social and economic moralities are under siege at the same time their communities are becoming poorer. The elite centrists are meritocrats whose children exercise every option of abundance, and are therefore too disconnected from places where ambition and work are not rewarded. Because power has been so good and so stable for them, they have only a thin understanding of how powerlessness and alienation are changing America’s civic culture.
The elite centrists are invariably charming, worldly people. But, to channel a line from Barack Obama channeling Alice Walker, if we want an upheaval, they are not the people we have been waiting for.
— Artur Davis served four terms in Congress representing Alabama’s 7th district.
Please read the web site CashInTheHand.org to see if it describes the third way former presidents have talked about. The web site describes a tax deduction where people are taken care of, but they work for what they get, in "A Vision for America" and "A Vision for Health Care in America". It describes how Government is made smaller, but only after the problems have been solved in the letter "Two Problems with Every Tax Deduction Passed by Congress". The tax deduction "CashInTheHand even allows the creation of a Public Option for Health Care that Democrats should support. It describes how to get politics out of money, so that money gets out of politics, in the posts "Campaign Finance Reform for Individuals" and "Campaign Finance Reform for Unions and Corporations". Thanks.
Please read the web site CashInTheHand.org to see if it describes the third way former presidents have talked about. The web site describes a tax deduction where people are taken care of, but they work for what they get, in "A Vision for America" and "A Vision for Health Care in America". It describes how Government is made smaller, but only after the problems have been solved in the letter "Two Problems with Every Tax Deduction Passed by Congress". The tax deduction "CashInTheHand even allows the creation of a Public Option for Health Care that Democrats should support. It describes how to get politics out of money, so that money gets out of politics, in the posts "Campaign Finance Reform for Individuals" and "Campaign Finance Reform for Unions and Corporations". Thanks.
This is the second article by Mr. Davis that I have read on NRO, and I just want to let him and NRO know that I am very glad they have given him space. Both of his articles that I've read have given me much to think about, and say much of what I'm thinking but am not articulate enough to write.
Despite what this article says, Americas Elect is a brilliant concept that will evolve over the ensuing months or years to make the theatrical media- driven primary process irrelevant. Imagine choosing a candidate like you would a potential partner or date via an online matchmaking service. This will indeed revolutionize politics, not only in the US but worldwide. The Internet represents a new doorway to democracy, and it is time for us all to participate and leave behind the vitriolic partisan divide.
This article appears to represent another attempt to steer people away from joining AE by sowing seeds of fear and suspicion. There is absolutely no negative consequence for American voters to participate by becoming AE members. By doing so there will be a bipartisan presidential ticket that the majority of its members has selected and will be on the ballot in all 50 states. True Democracy is on the horizon. The people will rule.
The more the merrier! I'd love to see someone from this group qualify for the ballot, along with Obama, Romney and Paul. The third- and fourth-party candidates would not win, but it would make for a lively and more inclusive debate on the issues.
It is rare that I agree with any Democrat, but Mr. Davis is an unusual Democrat. When the root of the problem is a ruling class made up of career politicians, lobbyists and pundits owned by corporations and unions you don't solve it by forming a political party made up of career politicians, lobbyists and pundits owned by corporations and unions.
Tom Friedman a moderate and "centrist"? If the "center" in this country is now represented by someone who writes enviously about Communist China's ability to dictate "optimum solutions" from above, then we're in much worse shape than I thought.
The massive distrust the American people have in Government and the politicians who control is severely underestimated. There is a groundswell revolution occurring in America right now, but it's invisible, just beneath the surface. Like a volcano, the American public is about to explode at the crass incompetence of our Washington establishment. AmericansElect is the focal point for the manifestation of the outrage that is boiling in our country. The American public is ready to take the reins of their government, and country, in their own hands…it is the ultimate expression of "We the People…"
The reason AmericansElect will be a tremendously powerful force in the 2012 election is not because of itself or its organization…but because the American people crave an outlet beyond what we already have...
I agree that the American people crave an outlet beyond what we already have. I encourage everyone to check out David Jon Sponheim for President. He is an honest, unbuyable candidate who cares deeply about the American people. He hosts a video chat show every weeknight at 6pm Pacific so that the American people can get to know him on a more personal level. www.blogtv.com/people/americasthirdparty to join the chat.
Sponheim is a centrist-fiscally conservative and socially liberal. He has new ideas for this nation, which you can read about at www.americasthirdparty.com
I don't think that the author of this article quite understands what Americans Elect is trying to do. Americans Elect is not about the "elite center" and their agenda; it is about giving every person in America the opportunity to set the agenda, regardless of their priorities or ideology. It is about engaging as many people as possible through utilizing modern technology. It enables us to gauge citizens' opinions about our problems and how we can solve them. And most importantly, it forces the establishment to listen and feel the presence of the people who are tired of our two-party system.
I am looking forward to participating in Americans Elect, and I am encouraging everyone I know to get involved.
Passion fuels politics and many in the elite center may be decent/competent at this or that function in the action that demands political reward manifest itself, but they are not creators, they move little, if anything, forward. Yet they can, through their lethargy and/or offended tastes, undo what it took a good many years to construct.
They will draw a middle that really isn't the middle at all.
What will give rise to American evolution (if it remains capable of evolving) will be an unravelling first and a burst of sacred dynamism.
The two-party system is corrupt. The American people want a chance to BE HEARD. No one can be heard in this corrupt two-party system. Any attempt to change this corrupt, heavily controlled system is a positive venture. Americans Elect has opened up an opportunity for average Americans to become involved in their government. Americans Elect offers an alternative to the two-party system. They are working to bring about a new form of direct representation for the American people.
For over three years, David Jon Sponheim has been running an independent grassroots campaign in America to build America's Third Party. He has been using every avenue possible to get exposure in the media. This effort has been completely independent of Americans Elect. David Jon Sponheim will be seizing the opportunity Americans Elect offers to raise awareness for his Presidential campaign.
The answer to many of the very valid issues raised in this article IS America's Third Party and David Jon Sponheim for President. The American people are seeking an honest candidate who is not bought off by the elite. They want someone who is an average American and can relate to them. Yet, at the same time, they want someone who is intelligent and can lead them out of the mire that our country has devolved into. David Jon Sponheim is the perfect Presidential candidate at this time for America.
David Jon Sponheim is a centrist, but not an elitist. He would agree that, "Too much of the elite... are immersed in a worldview that is famously tolerant and cosmopolitan, but tone-deaf about... their communities [that] are becoming poorer." He will stand up to the elitists that have taken down our nation in pursuit of personal profits. He has worked tirelessly for three years on the internet to reach out to thousands of people using social media networks.
It's time to fight against the powerless and alienation the American people are feeling. You can change this, simply by chatting directly with David Jon Sponheim every week night at 6pm Pacific at www.blogtv.com/people/americasthirdparty - Sponheim has already hosted over 950 shows on blogTV for at least 2 hours each night, interacting with the American people.
David Jon Sponheim is a centrist and can bridge the "fault-lines that are dividing the country." He has a strong border policy and he wants to encourage the American people to invest in alternative energy through the creation of Renewable Energy Saving Bonds.
To put the American people back to work and on a path toward sustainability, Sponheim proposes a Homestead Renewal Plan where people can work fixing up houses they can live in at an affordable rate.
On social issues, David Jon Sponheim believes the government should stay out of the way, for the most part. He defers to state rights on the issue of gay marriage. You can read more about his stances at www.americasthirdparty.com/OnTheIssues
No one from Americans Elect has tried to draft David Jon Sponheim for President. Yet, they will (supposedly) offer the opportunity for any American to Draft a Candidate of their choice. Therefore, I will be starting a Draft Committee on Americans Elect for David Jon Sponheim as soon as they go into the final stage on their Candidate Section.
The reason I will start this draft committee is because Americans Elect offers the potential for ballot access in all 50 states. The way that ballot access rules are written make it extremely difficult for third party and independent Presidential candidates to get on the ballot. Ballot access is the only "gift" Americans Elect will give to a Presidential Candidate.
Why is Americans Elect attempting to gain ballot access in all 50 states? They want to a create a new form of direct representation for the American people. The very name "Americans Elect" says what this organization is about- Having the Americans elect the Presidential candidate, rather than limiting the primary to people who are involved in a particular party. Instead of powerful elitists attending and controlling the convention (as is often the case with Democrats and Republicans), ANY U.S. registered voter can become a delegate and vote in the online primaries and ONLINE National Convention for Americans Elect. To become a delegate, you simply have to sign up to their website, www.americanselect.org and then SUPPORT the Candidates you like (once this goes out of Beta Stage). Then, vote in early April in a round of voting that will shorten the field of candidates to the top 6 contenders. Then vote again this summer to choose who will be the Americans Elect Presidential candidate.
Americans Elect is a 501c4, a nonprofit organization that can affect political change but cannot endorse or support any particular candidate. They are attempting to bring the primaries into the 21st century by using technology- introducing an Online Convention into the process. In addition, they want to incorporate the entire American electorate. Finally, they want to encourage politicians to work together by requiring the Presidential candidate to choose a running mate who differs from themselves politically.
Americans Elect is not a Third Party in the traditional sense. They do not have a platform that candidates and members must classify themselves into. The Candidates themselves will reveal where they stand on these issues. Then, the American people will choose the candidate that they feel will best serve the needs of the American people. I personally hope they choose David Jon Sponheim.
I refuse to vote for a republican or democrat, and that includes former centrist republicans and democrats on third party tickets. "Soon we'll find out who is the real revolutionary, cuz I don't want my people to be tricked by mercenaries."
Reaction to January 23rd issue of the National Review Online entitled " Americans Elect: The flaws of the elite center" by Artur Davis.
Mr. Davis’ reaction to Americans Elect is like a person’s response to Rorschach cards. For him what little he has learned about Americans Elect is ambiguous and incomplete. So he makes stuff up from his own projected fears and wishes. I am sorry Mr. Davis that you have boggiemen in your life that you loosely identify as “the elite center.”
Your supporting facts are at the level of innuendo and cast aspersion. This is a truly fact-free presentation. The charge of elitism appears to be based on AE leaders having some experience in politics, with the related assumption that anyone who has experience in politics could only be elitist (I guess. That appears to be your reasoning) The reader is sold an exercise in circular reasoning without even the most simple supporting link in historical events or current fact related to the charges. An ephemeral link for AE to economic elitism is built upon . . . . . . less than nothing – a simple, completely unsubstantiated charge. Unfortunately there may be an opening in this faux-factual presentation in that most people have probably not even heard of Americans Elect. And therefore the fictitious charge of elitism sounds plausible because of the fallacy of “if its new then it must be diabolical - fear the unknown.” This is blatantly simple minded and wrong. Mr. Davis lulls the reader in the beginning by offering a superficial, semi-plausible and inaccurate description that AE is a third party effort. This reveals his true lack of information about AE. It is not a third party and any honest effort on his part to learn of AE would have made this clear in his mind. But then he morphs the reference to its appeal to the center into the lie that AE is unscrupulously hijacking the voting center to its elitist agenda. He also dismisses the non-party AE efforts roundly based on meager funding. This is mind blowing in that AE’s modest beginnings, financial and processed based efforts, establish its only option to influence voters is its “people power” appeal (excuse the apt but over-used phrase).
I have kept up with the developments in AE by reading the postings on the listserv, contributing to the discussion and by completing the activities on the main website. I am far from a naive or gullible participant. If I detect any bias or attempt to quiet points of view I will call AE out immediately. AE is the only possibility I have to fully participate in a way that contributes to the shaping of an election. It is a rare and valuable attempt to offer something valuable and original to voters. It may be slow to take hold, but to throw it out without valid inspection or the hatchet job that Mr. Davis offers is one more sign that the American political system may be beyond repair. That is your contribution Mr. Davis. Here’s hoping your biased, simple-minded rhetoric is seen for its actual value – nothing.
Any third party fails because the Democrats or the Republicans with incorporate any popular stance they take. It has been that way for 2 hundred years, and I don't see it changing soon.
There comes a time when every prestigious publication falters and prints an article that is inaccurate. I am referring to the January 23rd issue of the National Review Online entitled " Americans Elect: The flaws of the elite center" by Artur Davis. Mr. Davis' innuendo from the start is that Americans Elect is a third party. Nothing could be further from the truth. Americans Elect has developed a process for a potential presidential candidate, voted on and nominated by the voting delegates, to gain access in all 50 states. Once the candidate is chosen He/She is on their own to develop their own campaign strategy including campaign financing.
Now to Mr. Davis' second point that Americans Elect is embodied by elite centrists. What Mr. Davis has failed to recognize is that 2.4 million real people have joined this organization and are the driving force of this movement. Without the volunteer actions of the Voting Delegates, Delegate Leaders and Statewide Captains the effort of Americans Elect would have faltered months ago. Presently we are on the ballot in 14 states including Ohio, Michigan, Florida and California, pending certification in 16 others and will start the certification process in the final 22 states and District of Columbia as the election laws allow. We have no platform as yet because we are not a third party. Our platform, if you wish to call it that, will be determined by the candidate our voting delegates choose in the June internet convention. So if Mr. Davis can line up 2.4 million "elite centrists" from all backgrounds and walks of life across the country he is a better man than I. In my opinion Mr. Davis has insulted and belittled the efforts of every hard working and dedicated person of Americans Elect that recognizes something is drastically wrong with the election process and this government. Why Mr. Davis has chosen to belittle the efforts of 2.4 million people is beyond my comprehension but maybe it's a case of jealousy as he hasn't been asked.
Ric Wells
Americans Elect
New York State Captain
Wilton, New York
Repackaged Coffee Party. If they run an open free internet election the top three candidtaes would be :Ron Paul, Howard Stern, and Stephen Colbert. Not what they have in mind I suppose. Still 2 of these 3 would be better than Obama.
I believe this concept is quite brilliant in that it has the potential, at the very least, to force the electoral machine into submission and stop playing back-room, behind the door games, and put the country first, not their own interests. I like the ingenuity and out of the box thinking behind Americans Elect, but I am extremely skeptical of the overall outcome, and more so about the nature of its beginnings/inception. I signed-up on their website, answered their questions (which by the way, were not quantitatively or qualitatively accurate by any means), and was thoroughly disappointed with the "weighted" results. The results were heavily progressive-leaning, which caused my skepticism to increase even more. This made me wonder where, exactly, their marketing has focused on the most. Here is why I'm quite skeptical about their overall, real agenda: Their website says that some 17,000,000 questions have been answered. If they are counting only the 9 questions people answer AFTER the "important issues color wheel," that would be approximately 2 million people participating so far. If they are dividing the number of questions answered, AND the "issues color wheel," then that would be right at a million people. Here's the point: without a baseline (I know, it's supposed to be all about the "center," which is in itself, a baseline), Americans Elect is able to use the results however it likes, and even worse, make the results sway left, right or center, all without the users' knowledge. This leads me to believe their "goal" is possibly better described as "smoke and mirrors," as they take advantage of the GOP's affliction of "we're not happy with our candidates" syndrome, and are using it as an implied store-front. Could this be a "test balloon" for swaying public opinion, because it certainly doesn't have the solid foundation nor integrity to be what it purports to be. This type of "public opinion polling" (which is what it is thus far) is less than professional, and looks juvenile at best. (Basic mass-marketing is meant to target about an 8th-grade understanding across the board, increasing the number of people they can influence, knowing they have less of a chance to sway executives and professionals.) The results on the Americans Elect website have the potential to mislead active participants and future participants. Public opinion on such a large scale (their goal, by itself, is the determining factor as to the scale of influence they are seeking), by definition, should innately obligate (integrity and conviction) the organization's executive team to rise to a higher standard at the onset, and not by proxy, prognostically, through fear of failure. Due to the lack of professionalism, lack of integrity, and absence of quantitative and qualitative measurements in a public opinion "polling" questionnaire (that has the potential to be a nationally persuasive platform), I am not at all interested in dealing with the Americans Elect organization, but am simply intrigued with idea.
I believe this concept is quite brilliant in that it has the potential, at the very least, to force the electoral machine into submission and stop playing back-room, behind the door games, and put the country first, not their own interests. I like the ingenuity and out of the box thinking behind Americans Elect, but I am extremely skeptical of the overall outcome, and more so about the nature of its beginnings/inception. I signed-up on their website, answered their questions (which by the way, were not quantitatively or qualitatively accurate by any means), and was thoroughly disappointed with the "weighted" results. The results were heavily progressive-leaning, which caused my skepticism to increase even more. This made me wonder where, exactly, their marketing has focused on the most. Here is why I'm quite skeptical about their overall, real agenda: Their website says that some 17,000,000 questions have been answered. If they are counting only the 9 questions people answer AFTER the "important issues color wheel," that would be approximately 2 million people participating so far. If they are dividing the number of questions answered, AND the "issues color wheel," then that would be right at a million people. Here's the point: without a baseline (I know, it's supposed to be all about the "center," which is in itself, a baseline), Americans Elect is able to use the results however it likes, and even worse, make the results sway left, right or center, all without the users' knowledge. This leads me to believe their "goal" is possibly better described as "smoke and mirrors," as they take advantage of the GOP's affliction of "we're not happy with our candidates" syndrome, and are using it as an implied store-front. Could this be a "test balloon" for swaying public opinion, because it certainly doesn't have the solid foundation nor integrity to be what it purports to be. This type of "public opinion polling" (which is what it is thus far) is less than professional, and looks juvenile at best. (Basic mass-marketing is meant to target about an 8th-grade understanding across the board, increasing the number of people they can influence, knowing they have less of a chance to sway executives and professionals.) The results on the Americans Elect website have the potential to mislead active participants and future participants. Public opinion on such a large scale (their goal, by itself, is the determining factor as to the scale of influence they are seeking), by definition, should innately obligate (integrity and conviction) the organization's executive team to rise to a higher standard at the onset, and not by proxy, prognostically, through fear of failure. Due to the lack of professionalism, lack of integrity, and absence of quantitative and qualitative measurements in a public opinion "polling" questionnaire (that has the potential to be a nationally persuasive platform), I am not at all interested in dealing with the Americans Elect organization, but am simply intrigued with idea.
