Additional Titles








Chick-Fil-A Versus the Radical Gay Agenda

In Mexico, The Body Count Continues to Mount









By Allan Wall
April 10, 2013

Our country faces many political problems, and most if not all are driven by the “National Question.”

In short, our country’s elite are electing a new people. Due to mass immigration (both legal and illegal) the historic American people is being reduced to a minority. If that happens, you can forget about limited government or honoring the Constitution. It would be a whole new ballgame.

For more details, see my previous article

Get The Message, People! Demography Is Destiny!

What our country needs is a shutdown on immigration, including legal immigration. Maybe a couple hundred thousand immigrants could be admitted annually – if they were carefully selected.

From the perspective of the National Question, the 2012 election was a real bummer.

Incumbent president Obama was and is a known entity- we know what he’s doing. Challenger Mitt Romney was not trustworthy and as the election progressed was looking worse. Both candidates supported mass immigration and both pandered to Hispanics.

By the time one voted on November 6th, what were the options, really? Vote for Mitt Romney, as many of us did, and hope for the best. Or vote for some third party candidate who’d get a microscopic portion of the vote.

Obama won, and is even more empowered than he was before. He’s only beginning four more years of his agenda. Who knows what he’ll accomplish as the demographic clock ticks away on the historic American nation.

The Democrats control the Senate and John Boehner (a Republican unwilling to fight) is Speaker of the House. If they get together they’ll be tough to beat.

What about the presidency? How can we improve our chances to get a president who truly cares about national sovereignty and controlling our border, and one who favors a decrease in legal immigration?

The last president who really cared about controlling the border was Dwight David Eisenhower, whose last term ended in 1961. Even the much-admired Ronald Reagan made a great error by signing off on an amnesty in 1986, the effects of which are still being felt.

What can we do?

The problem is, by the time you get to election day, there’s really not much you can do. You’re stuck with the candidates on the ballot. Sure, you can write in somebody else, but what good does that do?

In this election cycle, the problem began way back in the primary phase. On the GOP side, not a one of the many candidates running for the nomination was really acceptable on the National Question. Not a one!

Mitt Romney, the eventual nominee, came out strong against illegal immigration, and it helped him win the nomination. But as the general election proceeded, the possibility that he was trustworthy on the subject looked less and less likely.

For the 2016 election, we need a candidate in the primary phase who will run on the National Question. We need a candidate who will unapologetically oppose the illegal invasion, and even call for a moratorium on legal immigration.

With the current GOP leadership this is an uphill fight. Therefore, some think the better strategy is to form a Third Party.

Which is easier – to take over the Republican Party and fight the invasion/transformation of our nation, or utilize a third party to do the same?

In order to pose a serious challenge, any third party challenge must be managed better than the current third parties. Frankly, the current third parties aren’t doing too well.

A third party has to get publicity. It has to reach out into the mainstream population, beyond the echo chamber which is the current home of third parties.

A third party must move beyond preaching to the choir. It’s not about letting a couple of million voters feel good about themselves – it’s about truly transforming the political discourse. Remember that, even if a third party loses, it can still have a big effect.

To truly get the message out, a third party or independent candidate must get into the televised debates.

Let’s take a look at the most “successful” third parties which competed in this year’s election.

The Libertarian Party, with its standard-bearer Gary Johnson, had its best showing over, with 1,241,387 votes. Historically, this was the biggest vote the Libertarian party has ever received, but it still amounted to 0.99% of the vote, which means they didn’t even reach the 1% mark. (In 1980, the party had 921,128 votes but had a higher percentage at 1.06%).

Gary Johnson was abysmal on the National Question. The candidate declared on his website that “As the former governor of a southern border state, I know fences and walls do not keep out illegal immigrants.” How would he know when it hasn’t really been tried yet!

Here’s another doozy from Gary Johnson’s campaign website:

“Legal immigration strengthens America’s economy and the social fabric.” [What?]

“It will also strengthen our relationship with our southern neighbor Mexico.” [Yeah, by making us a colony of Mexico!]

Johnson was for amnesty, referring to it as a “two-year grace period.”

Do these Libertarians really believe that importing millions of Latin Americans is going to make the U.S. a more libertarian country? They are truly living in a fantasy land.

Jill Stein of the Green Party garnered 447,597 votes, which amounted to 0.36%. The Green Party is for amnesty, and “calls for permanent border passes to all citizens of Mexico and Canada whose identity can be traced and verified.” That’s all we need to know about them....

Virgil Goode was the standard-bearer for the Constitution Party. (I actually voted for this party’s presidential candidate back in 2004). The Constitution Party has a great immigration platform – it calls for no amnesty and a moratorium on legal immigration. Now we’re talking! But how did Virgil and the CP do in 2012? The party got 117,738 votes, that’s 0.09% of the total vote!

Those were the most “successful” third parties. Running fourth, fifth and sixth were the Peace and Freedom party, (candidate Rosanne Barr), the Justice Party (Rocky Anderson) and America’s Party (Tom Hoefling).

None of these parties, by the way, has anybody in Congress. Supposing a third party won, who would it work with?

If we’re going to support a third party, or an independent candidate to fight for the historical American nation, we’ve got our work cut out for us. This has to be a party that will really attract attention and threaten the status quo. Certainly, no third party candidate did that this time.

We have to understand that those of us who follow politics, write, blog and engage in activism, are in a minority. Most Americans don’t follow politics closely. They have opinions, but they aren’t following the issues closely. We have to find ways to reach these people.

If we’re going to get a third party or independent candidacy to work, we’d better get started right now, building it up. It might help too if we got a famous personality involved.

In recent decades, there have been a few candidates who have made some headway in breaking the two-party duopoly. But there wasn’t enough follow-up.

In 1980, independent candidate John Anderson won 5,719,850 votes, which constituted 6.6% of the voting electorate. Not much, but a lot more than the Libertarian party has ever gotten.

Back in 1968, George Wallace, running as the standard-bearer of the American Independent Party, won 9,901,118 votes (13.5%), carrying 5 states and racking up 46 electoral votes. That was impressive.

In 1992, independent candidate Ross Perot got an impressive 19,743,821 votes, 18.9% of the electorate, yet won no electoral votes.

It seems that a viable third party challenge is possible, but it needs a clear platform, a clear electoral strategy, and an articulate standard-bearer, preferably someone who is already famous. Who could it be?

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

A successful strategy might involve an acceptable candidate running in the GOP primary and then at a certain point being drafted by a third party. Or maybe, if they could be found, a couple of acceptable candidates – one in the Republican primary and another in a third party.

The national question provides an excellent platform – an immigration moratorium on legal immigration, getting serious about fighting illegal immigration , and closing the anchor baby loophole. A candidate who forthrightly spoke out for such policies could be a winner, whether he were running as a Republican candidate or a third party or independent candidate.

We have the platform, now where’s the candidate?

� 2013 Allan Wall - All Rights Reserved

Share This Article

Click Here For Mass E-mailing

Allan Wall recently returned to the U.S. after residing many years in Mexico.











To truly get the message out, a third party or independent candidate must get into the televised debates.