A purely hypothetical question: IF THERE WERE A VIABLE THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE....?

Question

...WOULD YOU LEAVE YOUR PARTY?

I would.

And I'm not talking about Ron Paul, either, he has some "black issues" and used to write for a radical rightwing rag.

This is a serious question.

If the American public could come up with a well-spoken, smart, rational person...would you leave your party?

To Mr. Rainbow-head Alias Smith and Jones: Good point about the "institutionalization of the two parties...."

O.K. -- I see some genuine interest in a third party..Viable third party candidate.

NOW. Would you actually donate some of your valuable TIME to make this happen before 2008?

Answer 1

"IF" be a big word. But "if" there were a viable third party we, as a country, could show George Washington...see?

We ain't so stupid after all.

George warned America, in his farewell address, NOT to adopt a two party system.

We didn’t listen then; we might want to listen now!

“Hope springs eternal…”

Jim D

Answer 2

YES! I've been waiting for a real one.

In 1980, I was *this close* to voting for John Anderson - it really seemed possible to upset the apple cart. Unfortunately the polls started indicating a tight race between Reagan and Carter and I felt I had to put my vote right there on the line.

In 1992 and 1996, Perot was an option for some, but not for me. Had Perot been more viable - as a potential leader, I mean - I would have paid him attention and thought of voting for him (certainly in '92), but he started revealing too many eccentricities combined with, ultimately, a lack of comprehension for how government actually works.

In my own home state, I voted Green Party against both Romney and O'Brien in the 2002 MA governor's race. That wasn't even a protest vote - I liked the woman who was running for the Greens.

On the national level, it would take someone whom people could REALLY see in the White House. Unity 08 might offer the potential - Sam Nunn has suggested he's interested. I'm no Sam Nunn fan politically, but I *do* respect him and I *know* he has the chops to be president (which was never clear with Perot).

The real problem, though, is that our laws have institutionalized the two parties we have - it will take more than an attractive candidate to drive real reform in the system.

Answer 3

It's something that I could give some serious consideration to. I've voted for some 3rd party candidates in the past and of course, that vote was thrown out of the window.

I don't think it'll happen this time around, but can easily see it taking place sometime within the near future (another four to eight years). There is a lot of discontent on both sides when it comes to our two party system.

Answer 4

at the same time as there's a terrific variety of dissatisfaction with the two the Democrat and Republican events, the only achievable 0.33 party candidate would be person who would have geared up call acceptance in the previous this element interior the election, as Ross Perot did back in 1992. otherwise, the only achievable 0.33-party candidate is person who left the D or R events to run as an autonomous. On a hopeful notice, Sen Joseph Lieberman, rejected by the Democrats, ran in Connecticut for his incumbent seat in 2004 as an autonomous, beat the D and R applicants, and stored his seat. interior the no longer likely experience that Barack Obama have been omitted for the Democratic nomination, he could conceivably have a guess of working as an autonomous, because of the fact he has a sizable marketing campaign fund war-chest and has an already commonly used marketing campaign company and national call acceptance. i'd say Hillary Clinton has the call acceptance and acceptance to run independently, yet at $12 million in debt (6 million of her very own funds) she fairly has the money to end the Democrat primaries, no longer to show change to an autonomous race. Ron Paul could bypass autonomous too, and has some marketing campaign reserves nonetheless, yet whilst he could no longer rally extra suitable than 15percentsupport as a Republican, i'm no longer able to think of him prevailing extra as an autonomous. ny city mayor and billionaire Bloomberg has the money to finance a marketing campaign, yet lacks national call acceptance, and at this element would be leaping in too previous through rally a win as an autonomous. the only different I see as a threat is Al Gore, who i think of is extra ordinary than he advance into in 2000, together with his environmental activism and Nobel Prize. i've got seen Gore because of the fact the default candidate if the two Obama and Hillary's campaigns have been to implode. yet Gore often is the Democratic candidate, no longer an autonomous, and that i think of he on my own has the acceptance to run with the DNC as their candidate, interior the absence of the two Obama and Hillary. If Gore even expressed an activity in desiring the activity, which he does not. And Ralph Nader... properly... i like the guy, yet whilst he had a guess at a valuable run, it would have occurred in the two 2000 or 2004, and his marketing campaign company is massively dwindled, relative to those 2 previous runs.

Answer 5

I'm canadian, and I assume you're talking about american politics, so I can't really say. If I were an american, I would probably be a democrat over a republican and a libertarian over a democrat, and voting for a new party would depend mostly on the party's policies and ideas.

Answer 6

I have mentioned many times about the creation of the "American Party" whihc would be made of different law makers, politicians and sucessful entrepreneurs.
We need to be able to find a balance in our political world. right now we have a right wing that is way too conservative of many issues and a left wing that is way too liberal on many issues. Both of them being way too close and partisant to personal interest groups. I believe we as a nation are no longer ruled by individuals we are ruled by consortiums and corporations. We need to bring back political integrity to politic in general.
I am stuck in voting for the less of two evil.

Answer 7

If I could reference the Simpsons episode where Kang and Kodos come to Springfield disguised as Bill Clinton and Bob Dole. They are discovered and the voters are shocked. Kang says "what are you going to do, you have to vote for one of us?" someone in the crowd says "I believe I'll vote for a third party candidate." Kodos laughs and says, "go ahead, throw your vote away." and the people look at each other, totally worried and defeated.

So you see, if two evil aliens were running for President, one of them would still win.

Answer 8

Most definitely. I have in the past, actually.

What this country needs are more political parties, but somehow, people have become convinced that voting for a third party = throwing your vote away.

Answer 9

I did when I voted for Ross Perot and I'd do it again under the same circumstances.

The choices in the main two parties are about as bad as picking grapes in January.

Answer 10

I am in a third party. If the libertarians could actually present a viable candidate that had a prayer of winning I might vote for my party. As it is now I have to cast votes for guys like President Bush in order to keep you leftists out of the white house. I absolutely hate the idea of voting for Rudy Giuliani but if it keeps the Marxists out I have to do it.