Third party candidates

[Autolycus]

I agree with Derek Zeanah. Just because I am voting Libertarian does not mean that I would automatically vote Republican if there was no Libertarian party.

I like the Democrats views on many issues such as gay rights, abortion rights, privacy, the first amendment, and drug law reform. I like the Republicans for their fiscal plans and their views on guns. However it seems that the Democrats are stereotypically more concerned with my rights than the Republicans.

 

[poor_richard]

I only speak for me on this.....but I can no longer contribute to american socialism by continuing to reward the GOP with another of my votes...or my money.

+1 on that. You may not have been speaking for me, but I made the same decision when GWB started trampling the USC.


If the Republicans "loose the presidency because of the third party vote", then they have only themselves to blame because they ignored the will of the people and suffered for it. If you hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils, then blame yourself (for letting a Dem in) because it is you who are rewarding the "business as usual" attitude in D.C. The Republicans have been out of touch with the American people, and it cost them the Congress. It wasn't third party voters, or even the people sitting at home. It was the Republican Party, and the actions of the Republicans in office that caused them to be fired, and if the Dems gain the presidency in 2008, it will be the fault of the Republicans, not any third party voters. If the Republicans want my vote, then they better earn it.

 

[Dan from MI]

Here's the situation we have. The last "3rd Party" candidate to have a major impact was John C Fremont in 1856. He was a Republican. This election was the demise of the Whigs and led to Lincoln in 1860 over a split Democrat ticket (Douglas and Breckenridge). Teddy Roosevelt tried a 3rd party run even after being president. Strom Thurmond and George Wallace had regional support. John Anderson bombed. Ross Perot's billions got about 20% of the vote - and no states.

For the forseeable future, we have a two party system. The winners of nearly all partisan races at any level are either GOP or Democrat. 3rd party candidates are protest votes.

Now my recommendation to all pro-freedom individuals here is the following. Get involved in a major political party. Go to their meetings and events and run pro-freedom candidates in their primaries. Influence them. Back their most pro-freedom candidates. Ron Paul is running as an R. Leon Drolet in my state ran and won as an R. Pro-freedom candidates can gain much experience running for smaller office to build themselves up for mid-major (State Rep) and major (Congress) offices in the future. It's about smart tactics, name recognition, experience, and a good campaign with little waste.

PRIMARY elections are where most of the major decisions are made. Now if we are stuck with say McCain v Obama, I'd be voting third party myself at the top of the ticket and I'm usually a staunch Republican (with a bit of a small l libertarian streak). However, let's do our best to make sure those aren't the two choices in the first place.

And that should go for ALL offices, not just president.

 

[JohnL2]

So many people around here claim to be Libertarians, but it makes me wonder where the hec is the Libertarian Party with all these claimants floating around?
The LP makes the Democrats look like organizational geniuses and that is not a good thing.
I agree with the whole Republicrats and Democans concept. I think there are many of these who would fit better under the Libertarian banner.
The Democrats use to be the party of the middle-class. That group was the tail-end of the post-industrial age. Well, what exactly is the middle class now? Ask each and every individual pundit and you'll get a different answer. And you know what? Each one is probably right. To some degree.


Ex-Southern Democrats turned contemporary Republicans in the political arena seem to be an interesting undercurrent worth examining.

 

[Cuda]

IMHO, a third party president is almost impossible until such time as the liberals don't control the education system in this country. My youngest daughter is in AP history and other AP classes and although what they "teach" is technically correct it's what they leave out that bothers me. The kids are not given a full picture of how the US was formed, (good and bad) and until that happens dems/reps will be all they know.


C

 

[MattC]

In real life, a third party candidate will never win. … It's wagering everything you have for the hope of something better, but you will inevitably lose everything you have even faster. In 2008, and in 2012, and 2016, and 2020, etc, the President of the United States of America will be a member of either the Republican Party, or the Democratic Party. … It's a pointless gesture to vote for anyone but the 2 main parties in the general election. … When you vote third party in a general election, you are gambling with all of our futures. Don't end up owing more than you have.

In real life, third party candidates do win. People focus on the Presidential election like it is the only one that matters, and the party composition of the House of Representatives is a sign of how much support the populace is showing for the President. Presidents are not kings—they are figureheads because the founders of this country realized that people need the yummy-spicy feeling of being able to focus on a specific leader sometimes. I will bet my checking account that a third-party candidate will not win any of the next four Presidential elections, as you listed above. I will not gamble on a single election for any candidate at the state level or more local. Third party candidates do win.

Humans have the natural, biological tendency to think myopically. What the hell does that mean? We focus on near periods of time in the future. We think about tomorrow, next week, sometimes next year. And there’s this fuzzy same-ol'-thing will happen beyond that time period, for most people. It takes training and practice to consider long-term investments. Small example: you own stock in a publicly traded company, and its price has dropped 2% for three days in a row. Do you sell? Stop, look back at the historical patterns. Stop, look forward using predictor variables. You should not make the decision to sell until you have considered the long-term advantages and disadvantages.

I don't understand why you think I'd be voting Republican if I weren't voting third party.

Thank you for expressing my sentiments on that so succinctly.

For the forseeable [sic] future, we have a two party system.

Dan, you are correct, at the national level. But if we consider beyond our naturally myopic limits, we’ll find that this can be overcome. You do have good points about encouraging those involved in the two major parties to attend meetings and use the primaries to make changes within those parties.

However, let's do our best to make sure those aren't the two choices in the first place. And that should go for ALL offices, not just president.

Cheers to that!

The LP makes the Democrats look like organizational geniuses and that is not a good thing.

Yeah, I can’t argue against that one. I have greater confidence in the new Executive Director, Shane Cory. And the Ballot Base program has been a move in the right direction.

IMHO, a third party president is almost impossible until such time as the liberals don't control the education system in this country.

There's an excellent point. School systems are, by nature and admission, means for indoctrination, and every teachers union I have heard of in the news endorses Democrats. Getting a little off-topic, but my personal opinion is that elementary schools need to prepare students for logical discussion, not emotional. After that, discussions are necessary about logical fallasies and traps. Once students have a good understanding of what a logical argument looks like, it's a lot harder to pull the wool over their eyes.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

People who believe in a Third Party would have been taken in by the Ghost Dance if they'd been indians living in the 1880s -- wear the shirt, dance the dance, and the buffalo will magically reappear.

 

[xd9fan]

If the Republicans "loose the presidency because of the third party vote", then they have only themselves to blame because they ignored the will of the people and suffered for it. If you hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils, then blame yourself (for letting a Dem in) because it is you who are rewarding the "business as usual" attitude in D.C. The Republicans have been out of touch with the American people, and it cost them the Congress. It wasn't third party voters, or even the people sitting at home. It was the Republican Party, and the actions of the Republicans in office that caused them to be fired, and if the Dems gain the presidency in 2008, it will be the fault of the Republicans, not any third party voters. If the Republicans want my vote, then they better earn it.

sooooo many in the GOP are in denial about this. They blame the victim (just voters who want better and if its 3rd party....so be it) without looking in the mirror.

 

[General Geoff]

The only way I'm voting republican is if Ron Paul gets the ticket.

Otherwise, I'm voting for the Libertarian candidate, as I did during the '04 Election. As some others have commented, my vote isn't being "thrown away," as my vote wouldn't be cast at all if it wasn't put toward a candidate I really want to be the president.