>I don't see, jowever, that we are any
>further along in developing a viable third party or
You aren't likely to, unless you recognise the powerful legal obstacles that stand in the way of any political party (let alone a new radical party) being meaningfully involved in electoral politics in the USA. If you don't recognise a problem, it is difficult to overcome it. The problem is that political parties, especially new parties, seem to be prevented from nominating candidates for office under most of the US electoral systems and are thus electorally irrelevant.
So developing a viable (in terms of electoral politics) third party is naturally going to be tricky. If it is not able to control who its electoral candidates are, or is not allowed to have electoral candidates at all.
It seems to me, as an outsider, that the first step is to campaign for a change in the electoral system that would permit a political party to stand candidates for elected office and to control who its candidates will be.
That would at least permit a political party to have a consistent political manifesto which voters would have the option to vote for across different jurisdictions. It isn't much, but its the basis for electoral politics in other modern democracies. Or should I just say in say in modern democracies.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas