Poll: 31% Say America Needs 3rd Party

All that happens is that our two parties morph over time to match the two extremes of the electorate (and whatever issues are top of the mind in any given decade).

it's time for a little Political Science 101

This doesn't sound right.

People trying to start a third party generally make the exact opposite claim-- that there is no significant difference between the two existing parties (i.e. they are morphing to the center).

The point is that neither party is advocating for a single payer health care system-- and neither party is trying to get rid of social security.

What is needed, obviously and painfully, is a voters' bill of rights and the first item of such a bill HAS TO BE runoff elections or instant runoff elections for all public offices.

Nobody should ever fear to vote his first choice, at least on a first ballot, and nobody should ever hold any public office with less than 50% of the vote.

There should also be a None-Of-Above choice on all ballots for public office and if that choice ever wins, then the other candidates should be barred for life from holding any public office and the parties sponsoring them should be barred for at least ten years from sponsoring candidates for that particular office. The penalty for running dead wood for public offices should be severe.

Another item on such a voters' bill of rights should be something which would eliminate voting fraud for all time and if that means getting rid of the secret ballot or at least limiting it somehow or other, so be it, we're paying too high a price for it. Somehow or other it has to be possible to check up on votes when there are questions or evidence of fraud.

One last item on such a list would be a provision that when a president is impeached and removed, his VP goes out the door with him and the office is either vacant until the next election or an emergency election is held to fill the office for the remainder of the current term. Granted removing a president should be difficult but it should not be impossible and if we couldn't remove Slick, we'd not have been able to remove Hitler or Nero either.

What happened in 98/99 was that Trent Lott simply refused to hand the presidency over to Algor with a year to go on Slick's second term, for obvious reasons. The situation should not be possible.

You guys definitely need a new party.
In fact, you used to have them. If i remember my American history courses correctly you used to have them up until just before the first world war, often having 3, 4 or 5 parties running candidates for congress, the senate and the president.
Perhaps you should get a new liberal party and conservative, so the democrats can stop pretending their anything but a slightly more left wing conservative party and the republicans uncomfortable with the religious right (like the rest of us observers) can move to their own party. I remember being taught if the political spectrum was 3 feet long, our Canadian political parties (I know some of you are just dying to insert a commie/socialist joke here, but our system more or less works) would be spread out at more or less 6 inch intervals from the center to both the right and left. This was then contrasted to your system where the two parties sit a foot in from the right and are about a quarter inch apart on most issues.