If the GOP can decide on a candidate and NOT have one split off to be a Ross Perot, we'll be alright.
I'm hoping that some democrat like Gore tries to run as some green candidate. Enough lefties would vote for him that the democrat candidate would lose some key states by being watered down.
We can cross our fingers.
2007-06-16 08:59:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Curt 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I will address your question by party.
The Democrats are in a mess, if hillary gets the nod, not sure if that will divide the party, but if al gore jumps in it will. Obama if he really wants this is going to have to go after hillary, to not do so, well he is going to get flattened by her. There is no third party player that can hurt them unless it is Nader or Gore.
The Repubs are doing pretty good at running on issues. Rudy's 12 points was pretty spectacular, makes you wonder why the MSM is not all over it. Fred Thompson could make a party out of if, people seem to like Romney more now, but Rudy's points are hard to fight against, so inside I say it will be one of the three. Ron Paul could hurt if he does not openly support one of these three. I am surprised he did not run as a libertarian, which is what he says he is, but he has a pretty heavy socialist leaning on social issues. Can he split things, not as long as he runs Repub and I believe he cannot change at this point. So the only damage comes if Paul tells his supporter to vote for one of the socialists, which I find hard to imagine.
I am impressed with Fred, a lot, but Rudy scored a major coup with the 12 points, so it is getting more interesting to me.
An add on here, were you aware that CNN has given twice as much time to the dem candidates than the repubs? It appears that CNN is giving up on even trying to look unbiased. And interestingly you will not hear this on the MSM. Wonder why?
2007-06-16 10:24:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by rmagedon 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
A true vote is one cast according to the dictates of the voter's opinion. The two major political parties have both grown corrupt and stale with power and greed. I sincerely feel they're both in the pockets of Corporate America. They've distanced themselves so far from the average American they have little concepts of the problems and values faced on a day to day basis. Though third parties aren't that strong YET they're gaining in popularity from all sides. This scares the major parties into at least taking some consideration of the voices from the populace or face losing votes. For this reason and others third parties are already demanding and commanding a portion of respect. Both parties will be affected by third party agendas and I believe it to beneficial to the American public and World Community.
2007-06-16 06:11:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by Don W 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
You are right, a third party will never stand a real chance, especially during war time. That being said, I really do think it's the Republicans. They are unhappier with their choices than the Democrats and many of them have become critical of their own party lately, something fairly unusual for Republicans - they generally do the Reagan thing and stick together no matter what. Unless a candidate comes along that can unite them in their usual way (possibly Fred Thompson) the Republican vote will not be as predictable as it has been in past recent elections.
2007-06-16 06:10:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
It always depends upon who the 3rd party candidate is. Nadar hurt the democrats, especially in 2000, and old Perot, while he got a spectrum of voters interested in him, probably more the Republicans. I think your question is a good one, but, as I see it, it is more about who the "outside" candidate is, that predicts, which party will suffer the most harm at the box office.
2007-06-16 06:28:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
both are in grave danger of a legit 3rd party run by a high profile candidate like chuck hagel or wesley clark, or perhaps both.
the american people are WAY out in front of the politicians on the war in iraq and the basic dishonesty that it's pursuit represents.
over 70% of the american people know full well that iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and that the war in iraq was started fueled by lies and deception - and that goes on to this day.
over 70% of americans know full well that it was saudi arabians (mostly) who attacked america and that it was saudi financial interests who made fortunes based on the stock moves after 9/11.
americans know full well that bin laden and his fortune are saudi arabian and that george h.w. bush was with bin laden's brother on 9/11 while they watched the tragedy unfold on tv.
people who think that this is going to be a hair splitting election are out of their minds - whoever speaks the truth about these issues (so far only one or two are doing so) will win BIG.
2007-06-16 06:09:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by nostradamus02012 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
The disenfranchised vote will propel a Democrat this time around, much as it did Clinton Vs. Bush1
Bush has done irreparable harm to true republicans.
2007-06-16 06:06:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I think I understand your question, but I may not.
Republican votes usually get split off by the Libertarian votes.
Democrat Votes get split off into numerous third parties.
It's an even split for both.
2007-06-16 06:04:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by rosslambert 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Reps are running two tickets, both oil corp puppets...
The regular Rep party ticket and the "Kinder, gentler" Independant ticket...
Thet are trying to split the democrat vote with this "Kinder, gentler" ticket.......too bad dems aren't that stupid.....the GOP will only suceed in splitting what's left of the REP vote and thereby GUARANTEE a dem sweep, as if that needed any more help anyway...but hey, I say "Go for it GOP!"
BBBBAAAAAAAAWAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
.
2007-06-16 06:10:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I think it will be the Dems as Republicans are more abt to vote a straight ticket
2007-06-16 06:34:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by ALASPADA 6
·
0⤊
1⤋