3rd party percentages

[lotus503]

what is your prediction for the total percentage of national 3rd party support this election.

My guess is %8 total between them all, the more the better in my opinion.

Not just here but everywhere I see lot of disgust with the duopoly.

 

[nextJin]

I am hopefully the Libertarians will hit 5% but who knows, they will certainly be higher thanks to the GOP nominating Romney.

 

[Moonbeam]

Yup, eight % is going to terrify the two party system. I'm sure in four years it will be 50% min. Maybe pick a time in the past, say 50 or more years, and see what it was then. Probably about the same I would bet. How did Ross do?

 

[mect]

I've wondered if they changed the polling methods if they could increase 3rd party support. Make the polls 1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, etc, instead of who are you likely to vote for. If a 3rd party candidate was polling strongly as 2nd choice, for example, it might enable one to really break through.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I'd guess around 2-3% total. Third parties always overpoll.

 

[dank69]

1%. Maybe 2% tops.

 

[techs]

The third party voting percentage is absolutely useless.
Many (most?) Americans live in states where the outcome is a certainty and therefore they are not "wasting" their vote to vote for a third party.
If the election were based on the popular vote then third party candidates would do far worse than they do, unless the election is going to be a blow out.

 

[blackangst1]

For which election? POTUS? In that case, my guess is <1% for the votes that actually matter-electoral.

 

[MixMasterTang]

Third-party candidates could qualify for retroactive public funds if they receive 5% or more of the vote in the general election and are eligible for convention grants. That being said I doubt it hits 5% for any of the 3rd party candidates, probably only 1%.

 

[AstroManLuca]

The third party voting percentage is absolutely useless.
Many (most?) Americans live in states where the outcome is a certainty and therefore they are not "wasting" their vote to vote for a third party.
If the election were based on the popular vote then third party candidates would do far worse than they do, unless the election is going to be a blow out.

Yeah exactly, because I live in Minnesota I can vote for Gary Johnson without worrying about wasting my vote. If it was a national popular vote I'd have voted for Obama.

 

[Moonbeam]

Third-party candidates could qualify for retroactive public funds if they receive 5% or more of the vote in the general election and are eligible for convention grants. That being said I doubt it hits 5% for any of the 3rd party candidates, probably only 1%.

I think with Romney being such a worthless piece of shit it could be more. I hope so anyway.

 

[lotus503]

The third party voting percentage is absolutely useless.
Many (most?) Americans live in states where the outcome is a certainty and therefore they are not "wasting" their vote to vote for a third party.
If the election were based on the popular vote then third party candidates would do far worse than they do, unless the election is going to be a blow out.

Its not useless its a decent indicator on how Americans feel about their choices within the 2 party system.

Id say if it wont be a wasted vote then its even more clear because if your not in a battleground you can vote for who you actually want vs feel obligated.

 

[soulcougher73]

Get rid of the EC and 3rd parties would do better as your vote would matter. Most dont vote 3rd party with the current EC system because there is no reason to. Hell there is barely a reason to vote at all outside a swing state if you are not the favored color.

 

[Thump553]

On the tube last night they went through the final poll for Ohio (CNN poll I think) that pegged Gary Johnson at 5%. I will be stunned if that really happens, that would be great. The GOP needs a major boot in the pants to get off their moral authoritarian agenda.

 

[MagickMan]

2 more 3rd party votes from me and the wife, Go Gary!

 

[bfdd]

8% of voters should matter to you guys seeing as Obama became President with only 30% of eligible voters voting for him. Remember half of those who can vote, don't.

 

[Steeplerot]

I always thought taxbreaks for voting like other countries is a good idea, and when reelections come up a extra tax bonus if you vote third party. The establishment parties would be scared shitless every cycle into talking about real issues.

 

[bfdd]

I always thought taxbreaks for voting like other countries is a good idea, and when reelections come up a extra tax bonus if you vote third party. The establishment parties would be scared shitless every cycle into talking about real issues.

Or how about you only have to pay taxes if you vote? That way those who feel their voice matters to the rest pay for their own vision of the world.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Get rid of the EC and 3rd parties would do better as your vote would matter.

Could easily argue the opposite -- the EC allows people in many states to vote third party without concern for this tipping the election to someone they dislike.

I voted for Gary Johnson today. With no EC, if the race were very close, I'd have voted for Obama.

 

[Steeplerot]

Or how about you only have to pay taxes if you vote? That way those who feel their voice matters to the rest pay for their own vision of the world.

Sounds counterintuitive. Only those with money and a lust for power would control. This is a fast road to dismantling all a populace has to protect it in the face of a bulwark of power/wealth. Democracy.

Neoliberalism thrives best with a disenfranchised apathetic public. This is why Americans are endless barraged by think tank right wing pro-corporate anti-government/anti-democratic propaganda.

 

[bfdd]

Like I said roll back the Reapportionment Act and the Electoral College swells to over 10,000 and would far better represent the people. Just like having more Reps in the House would better represent the people. Then again I also think Senators should be elected by State Congresses or Assemblies.

Steeplerot, threat of violence isn't enough to keep people in check? Isn't that the reason we pay for so much welfare? To keep those without from getting violent and stealing from the rest of us? Seems we should apply similar logic.

 

[Vic Vega]

Already voted.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2278430&highlight=gary+johnson

 

[soulcougher73]

Could easily argue the opposite -- the EC allows people in many states to vote third party without concern for this tipping the election to someone they dislike.

I voted for Gary Johnson today. With no EC, if the race were very close, I'd have voted for Obama.

You shouldnt vote like that though. You should vote for who YOU actually want in office. Its a sad state of affairs where you vote just to keep someone you dislike more out of office. Less of two evils needs to go.

 

[Moonbeam]

You shouldnt vote like that though. You should vote for who YOU actually want in office. Its a sad state of affairs where you vote just to keep someone you dislike more out of office. Less of two evils needs to go.

He got to vote how he wanted. It was his choice to make. His vote is a voice for his idea of should, not yours. Some people will not vote at all and others will be prevented from voting. I think folk should vote and should be able to, however they like.

 

[AstroManLuca]

You shouldnt vote like that though. You should vote for who YOU actually want in office. Its a sad state of affairs where you vote just to keep someone you dislike more out of office. Less of two evils needs to go.

No matter what electoral system is in place, it will ALWAYS be lesser of two evils. There will always be two main candidates and one of those two will always win. Even when a third party gains decent support, as Ross Perot did in 1992 (nearly 20% of the popular vote!), they won't win. The electoral college doesn't really prevent third parties from winning.

I agree that you should vote for who you like the most but let's face facts. Sometimes you have to vote defensively. It's just a fact of life.