Or do they only steal from the party they are most like? Perot stole from Bush Sr. and Nader stole from Gore and Kerry. Do you think for national elections it should be only the top 2 with the best chance to win?
2006-07-21 03:30:06 · 11 answers · asked by anitahooker_transvestite 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I have not liked the 3rd party candidates in recent elections. However, I have not liked the top two candidates either. I have higher standards than the ones that these guys bring to the table. I'm hoping for a candidate that meets or exceeds those standards. 1st, 2nd, or 3rd party.
2006-07-21 03:37:06 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As much as I would like to see more choice, I do feel they cost elections for which ever party they are like. The Bull Moose party cost Taft the Presidency and put W. Wilson in office. This is not a new thing but it is an unfortunate state of affairs. Bush Sr might have had a second term, Gore might have been President. Since the odd candidates always draw from their own party it changes the course that this country takes. And that is not always a good thing.
2006-07-21 03:46:16 · answer #2 · answered by olderandwiser 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In most major elections, third party candidates are not there as a "Viable" choice. It is an EXTREMELY long shot, that they could ever win a majority, and they know this, when they run on a third party ticket. However, it would seem, that they do offer a chance for voters to cast their ballot, in protest of the major parties and their candidates. As I said, though, that's only how it seems. In reality the third party candidate's campaign is usually designed with great care, especially, to pull votes away from a major party and it's candidate. Often, that campaign will be directed and financed by the campaign supporters of a major party candidate. So, in essence, voting for a third party is actually a tremendous help to one or the other major party candidates. It's not simply a vote thrown away in protest. Third parties and their supporters really are only tools, to be used by the big dogs! Hope this helps you, to vote wisely.
Doc
2006-07-21 03:52:26 · answer #3 · answered by Arbuckle Doc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a third party got enough traction, they would not 'steal' votes from another candidate. Currently, third parties are not taken seriously. Although, I think that the Democratic Party is close to splitting. There is a large schism of beliefs within its ranks. The 'new' third party would stand a better chance than the current choices. Although, I wonder which 'faction' will leave the 'Democrat' name/label and form the new party, since both factions believe that they represent the 'average' Democrat.
2006-07-21 03:38:27 · answer #4 · answered by opusthepenguin_1999 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democrats: Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, somebody else, i imagine the 'somebody else' will win the celebration vote... Too a lot of human beings hate Hillary, and all John Kerry needs is to damage the protection rigidity and talk about how a lot Bush Sucks... it isn't any thanks to win an election. Republicans: perchance Jeb Bush, Condi Rice, Colin Powell... i'd vote for Condi Rice of Colin Powell... yet I doubt both of them will run. i'd purely vote for the fairway celebration Canidate this 365 days... The Democrats are idiots who purely blabber about how a lot issues suck, yet under no circumstances say what they could do distinct... no suggestions, no ingenious and prescient, purely complaining. The Republicans purely have the want to make money, promoting the american human beings into multi-generational debit, and are keen to destory the international to do it. both way the american each and every individual is screwed, we may be able to only vote for whoever the businesses allow us to vote for anyhow... do you imagine we quite have a say? the USA of a isn't a democracy, and it hasent been a represenative democracy in over 50 years... we are now a company republic, and also you, your toddlers, and your large grand youthful toddlers were offered and acquired a lengthy time period in the past.
2016-12-02 01:21:44 · answer #5 · answered by ericksen 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I consider third parties when I like their platform, but 2 times I've been disappointed - with Perot, and later with Alan Keyes who dropped out.
2006-07-21 03:37:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I certainly don't think national elections should be limited like that. It would reward the major parties for their incompetence. Instead, we should adopt a more sensible voting method that won't cause these problems. Any of the Condorcet methods would be an improvement, for example.
2006-07-21 03:34:20 · answer #7 · answered by Charles G 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like my party. SPLATT (note the name). It stands for Stop PLATe Tectonics. ~<{:-)]#
Our platform is to eliminate earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and tsunamis.
Our mascots are the flatworm and squash.
Theme songs: "Shake, Rattle and Roll", "Whole Lot of Shaking Going On", "I Fell the Earth Move Under My Feet", "Hunka Burning Love"
Do you want to join?
2006-07-21 04:06:16 · answer #8 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Find out what George Washington said about being beware of political parties.
2006-07-21 03:40:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes.... besides i dont think a 3rd party candidate ever wins.... at least not in presidential elections
2006-07-21 03:34:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋