The vision that I have includes allowing web based voting on party issues for party members. Complete financial transparency. Debate and decide what the party should support from within. Decide what issues are most important and attempt to tackle those first. I think the platform is that there is no real platform and the members decide what is important. Forget about gay marriage there are real problems in America. (education, war, privacy) I could go on and on about what I think are the issues in America but the point is we need to have a place to discuss these issues and have a group of people that can decide what should be done and then do something about it. Leaving it to a group of old men who are constantly lobbied is no longer an option.

That's not a party, that's more about process (which I do agree with, btw).

A party has to have a platform -- that's the whole point of a party: shared core values. But those values have to be actionable otherwise they are just platitudes.

It's all about money: who pays and how is it spent. Gods, Guns and Gays are distractions, but they have to be addressed in some way or they will remain distractions. The "right" uses those tactics because they are very effective. It just needs reframing.

In multiparty systems, it is possible to have a single-issue party which is actually electable (see the Pirate Party in Sweden and Germany). But in the US, any party must have a completely defined platform which is acceptable to a majority - or at least a plurality - of voters.

That is why the Libertarian and Green parties, both of which receive quite a few votes, are never elected. And that is why the proposed new party has very little chance. If its platform is defined by San Francisco hackers, there's a good chance that I will agree with half of the platform and strongly disagree with the other half, and most of the country will have the same reaction.

it doesnt have to be a national party initially. If you took a pro-privacy, socially-liberal, fiscally conservative platform you could make a strong push in large urban centers across the nation. I know that the bay area would be accepting of this (accepting != elected, but it wouldnt get laughed at by the voters, only by the national media).

you just cant name it pirate party. In the us that would probably work against you.

> Please share your vision of that party's platform.

"It's like libertarianism meets communism but with promiscuous transparency and cryptography instead of classlessness.

Get ready people, Libercommusharepunkism is about to disrupt!"

I've progressed from Liberal to Liberaltarian.