It is problematic to represent a party that willingly side-steps the desires and interests of the people.  It is a greater offense to trample the will of the people and yet spend heaps of time (and money) convincing citizens that they are being represented.  It is demoralizing to listen to sales pitches from our representatives when they should be listening to us and then acting on our behalf.  I will address the question with one-half general history and then quickly travel to today with observations that hit the nail squarely.

The Democratic Party and the Republican Party are the two most widely known political parties in the United States.  Although other parties and party affiliations exist; there are no other significant political factions that brazenly suppress the voices of traditional Americans with such strong-arm tactics.  They cloak themselves in elitism and presume that their views are superior to those of ‘average’ people.  The parties have become sales departments pushing their junk like it is the only fix available.

These two parties have grown and evolved into what they would have you believe are unassailable power house units.  They falsely conclude that they have subjugated the power of the people and that the power of the party reigns supreme.  They insist that their drivel represents our interest regardless of the cries of protest that rise to their deaf ears.  At times, other political affiliations arose.  Some were identified as the Democratic-Republican Party, the Whig Party, the Radical Democratic Party, the National Union Party and the Federalist Party.  As we jog along our history line, we find environmentalist parties, union parties, and even socialist parties.  Each party established a theme and instituted a title that stood for some moral concept the party hoped people would identify with.  Some of these party themes contained proposals for dealing with slavery, nationalized banks, taxation of the wealthy, aid to the impoverished, social inequalities, sexual affiliations, healthcare, and population control.  If an idea could be supported by a group of United States citizens, a party could be formed with a platform that might interest that group.

Historically, the Democratic Party platform has favored farmers, laborers, labor unions and religious and ethnic minorities.  Historically, the Democratic Party has favored social liberalism, but has shifted considerably to support social agendas dependent upon massive government intrusion to regulate and control almost every area of life, including education, family life, community structure, the environment, medical care and the work force.  Their favored positions now include same-sex marriage, gun control, strict environmental laws, abortion rights and maintaining diverse native cultural, religious and ethnic identities over the ‘melting pot’ that fosters development of a more unified American identity.

Founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists, the Republican Party soon became the major viable party challenging the Democratic Party.  Historically, the Republican Party has favored civic virtue, objections to nobility, free market capitalism, property rights, personal responsibility, state rights, limited federal government, and fiscal conservatism.  The “Grand Old Party” [GOP] is the traditional nickname for the Republican Party.

These parties count on attracting large blocks of voters by having them identify with broadly defined party affiliations such as the party for gays, the poor, the wealthy, family values, business interests, laborers, blue collar workers, and religious values.  These parties count on a harvest of voters by affiliating with nationality and racial labels such as black, African American, Hispanic, Asian American, Native American, Jewish, middle-eastern, and Muslim American.  Statistics indicate that married couples with children at home tend to lean toward Republican candidates, while low income earners and single-parent households lean toward Democratic candidates.

The views above are generally dictated to most Democrat and Republican candidates.  Although individual candidates hold various positions and/or viewpoints, they are pressured by their party affiliations to tow the party line, and must answer to the supporting check writers that bankroll their campaigns.

Both major parties are headed by a national committee which has the sole purpose of promoting that party’s activities.  The National Party Committee promotes the party’s political platform and coordinates strategies to ‘win’ votes and ‘pocket’ monies for its future causes.  Again the National Party Committee devises a strategy to “win” votes and “pocket” monies.  Each state also has House and Senate caucuses that have fundraising and strategy committees which function to develop and implement tactics to ‘win” local and state votes and “pocket” local and state monies.

One incumbent running for a Nevada federal Senate seat has bragged about having $7 million already banked, with the expectation of raising a total of $25 million for his 2010 re-election bid.  To be elected to federal office in the state of Nevada, why should nearly ten dollars be spent for every man, woman and child in the State?  I often wonder if elections have become more about buying votes and influence rather than allowing the best candidate to fill the vacating seat.

After a brief study of online information, we find that roughly 72 million people align themselves more closely with the Democratic Party’s views, while about 55 million align themselves with the Republican Party’s views.  These reported classifications indicate that the Democratic Party should have a substantial advantage come election time.  However, major elections in recent memory have been much closer than these statistics forecast.  Apparently, much of the populace votes outside of their official party affiliations and truly picks what they believe to be the best candidate for the job, despite massive bombardment by mail, phone calls, flyers, radio spots, and television advertisements to remain faithful to their party attachment.

Voting for the “best candidate for the job” is a very interesting concept, and I believe that Nevadans will not easily have the wool pulled over their eyes by slick, expensive promotions designed to conceal political agendas and deceive the electorate.

So, the question of “why run as a non-partisan candidate” boils down to the answer below.

Both major political parties have strayed from their traditional platforms.  They now seem more interested in protecting the interests of the parties than the interests of the people.  Both parties have abandoned the principles of limited government and fiscal responsibility and are guilty of promoting unprecedented governmental growth and uncontrolled federal spending at the expense of the hard-working people they fail to represent.  Neither party has responded to the public demand to control our borders, to enhance our security and to stem the hemorrhaging of entitlement money to people that are not legal inhabitants of our country.  Both parties have failed the people and decided to cater to special interests that deposit huge sums of money into their coffers.

I cannot fathom spending nearly ten dollars for every person living in the State of Nevada to ‘win’ an office seat.  Such expensive campaigns are typically bankrolled by large corporations, banks, political groups, special interests, and wealthy individuals that are out of touch with everyday Nevada citizens.  This largesse is expended by candidates to swamp your mail box, purchase air time, fill the airwaves with sales pitches and procure computer automated mailers and speed dialers to stuff your inbox and telephone voice mail with propaganda designed to influence, or control, your thinking.  Is this the best expenditure of millions? How much money should be necessary to ‘win’ an election?  Does such unrestrained campaign fundraising and spending predispose ‘successful’ party candidates to perpetuate the uncontrolled federal spending orgy of the billions (now trillions) of dollars confiscated from taxpayers and borrowed from your children’s future?

In this modern day and age, we have access to a world of information through the internet.  We can read and follow the truth more successfully through our own efforts than through paid advertisements and the filtered ‘news’ the big media uses to indoctrinate unsuspecting recipients.  Despite the powerful fundraising and ‘organizing’ machinery of the established political parties, we, as citizens, are free to voice our opinions, speak to others and carry the message regarding the integrity of our favored candidate to our friends, families and acquaintances.  A concerted grass-roots effort can wrestle control away from the entrenched parties and return it to its rightful proprietors, you, the people.

Winning by tossing money into the wind is not my strategy.  Winning and then tossing my promises into the wind is not my strategy, either.  Winning by presentation of a false platform is not my strategy.  I will answer to the people of Nevada, to you, the voter, and to our neighbor, the non-voting citizen.  I will stand accountable to you, your children and their children.  I will not bypass the will of the people and capitulate to professional speech writers or people pumping big dollars through my bank accounts to buy political favors.  I will not answer to a political party, but rather to the people I am elected to represent.  I desire to represent the people of Nevada, not a party.

Furthermore, I will not allow a party or its affiliations to direct my choices, my voting, my action or my voice.  In order for Nevada’s interests to be represented, we need to eradicate the practice of providing political payback to the wealthiest campaign donors through their party affiliations.  If elected, it will be you, the Nevada citizen, that I represent and not a party, their direction or their mandates.

Unlike the party dousing created in American politics, I will not bathe in the polluted waters of corrupt party affiliations common in the Washington beltway.  I will represent the citizenry of Nevada rather than an established party.  I do not need a party mandate, only the directives of the people.  Remember, a representative’s vote should be your collective vote, reflecting your ideals and protecting your best interests.  It is not my vote, but YOURS.