Do you feel that there are any third party candidates who have a chance of winning, or at least making the two major parties take notice? Would you vote for him/her even if the possibility of them winning was extremely remote?
2007-03-20 03:06:22 · 9 answers · asked by Political Enigma 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The answer is NO. However, by voting for Libertarian, Reform Party or any other 'fringe' candidate you are sending an unmistakable message to the Republictrats that 'We the People' are displeased with the status-quo. For a viable third party candidate to have a chance, he/she would have to be around for at least two election cycles, have a solid and growing voter base formed of individuals who are willing to submerge their own views for the greater good of the 'Party'. I say 'at least two election cycles' because of the Electoral College whose existence is to curb or blunt the will of the masses and maintain stable government. It takes time for the 'radical' to become 'main-stream'. Even before political victory has been achieved the battle for the hearts and minds of the people must begin through educational efforts to bring about the commonality of knowledge necessary to mold public opinion.
2007-03-20 03:46:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I wish there was because there is not even a viable candidate from the two major parties. This actually scares me. This is the first time in my life that every candidate I see running sucks.
What is going to happen to our country?
2007-03-20 03:23:26 · answer #2 · answered by Dog Lover 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would rather vote for an independent than for either mainstream party but I haven't seen a candidate in years run as an independent that I thought was capable of doing the job.
2007-03-20 03:11:09 · answer #3 · answered by joevette 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, i do no longer think of we can choose a president from a nil.33 social gathering every time quickly. traditionally, we in no way have (different than perhaps George Washington). traditionally, any extreme 0.33 social gathering candidate has in effortless terms served to choose the less offensive of the two substantial social gathering applicants. Politically, it could be the worst of all achievable consequences because of the fact, because of the fact the final public of Congress contributors are the two Republicans of Democrats, no one in Congress might prefer to cooperate with them. we would see gridlock the likes of which we've in no way seen in the previous. that's a candy thought, besides the shown fact that it won't take place in our lifetime.
2016-10-02 10:51:07 · answer #4 · answered by ghalieh 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There isn't one yet. Yes I would vote for a third party candidate if I agreed with her/his platform.
I hope that Fred Thompson announces that he is going to run. Right now I have no one to vote for.
2007-03-20 03:12:52 · answer #5 · answered by Mother 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
About the only thing a 3rd party candidate can accomplish is ensuring a loss from one of the major parties.
2007-03-20 03:12:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree with mother, start a grass roots campaign to get Former Senator Fred Thompson to run for President. It's really too bad that he is so sick of the phonies in DC that he prefers the more realistic land of Television.
2007-03-20 03:22:26 · answer #7 · answered by SteveA8 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
RON PAUL!!
Some say it's throwing your vote away, but aren't you throwing it away if you vote for the extremists in the Donkey or Elephant party?
RP is a Republican, by the way, but he's an ACTUAL Conservative, not like the pretend conservatives that are running amok, lately.
2007-03-20 03:11:11 · answer #8 · answered by one_dog_grinning 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Libertarian.
2007-03-20 03:14:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋