3rd Party President in Your Lifetime

[xaeniac]

Do you think there will be a president that is not Republican or Democrat that is elected in your lifetime? I feel this would be a great thing and shake things up politically.

 

[Dulanic]

Won't happen.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Hitler belonged to a third party.

 

[Thump553]

As a party official of a third party, it is painfully clear to me that the election laws are stacked against third parties-election laws are the one last area where Dems and the GOP can find common ground (to squash everyone else).

But I would not be surprised if in the near future the GOP splinters and one of it's successor parties ultimately gets the Presidency. I just don't see how liberatarian minded folk can stomach moral authoritarians in the long run.

 

[shortylickens]

Nope. Americans are dumb. They honestly believe theres only two parties.

 

[IronWing]

Nope. Americans are dumb. They honestly believe theres only two parties.

Even worse, they identify themselves as members of those two parties when they aren't.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I just don't see how liberatarian minded folk can stomach moral authoritarians in the long run.

Social conservatism is already dying rapidly, literally. Hardly anyone except old people will actually seriously claim to hate gay people or act excited about banning marijuana or whatever. Republicans will continue pandering as long as that element exists, but they know it's a losing battle and outside of persecution of Muslims (which crosses over to the nationalist/pro-war side) I don't see anything actually happening.

 

[Smoblikat]

Nope. Americans are dumb. They honestly believe theres only two parties.

This

The ideal scenario is that after Romney gets elected, people will be like "Hey, republicans suck" then they will be like "hey, we put in a republican because theyre better than democrats, who suck even more" THEN maybe, just maybe, people will be like "If these two guys suck, lets try some other options"

Basically whats going to happen is everything I said will be true until the maybe part, the rest will go like this "Hey, Romney sucks, lets get obama back so he can hope us back to health"

We just need a revolution.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

No, though Ross Perot came close.

 

[JKing106]

Won't happen after the Perot episode scared the shit out the two established parties. The system has been rigged since so that no candidate without the big two's support and approval has any chance at all.

 

[Anarchist420]

But I would not be surprised if in the near future the GOP splinters and one of it's successor parties ultimately gets the Presidency.

The GOP is going to get so small, that it's going to dissolve like the Whigs did and like the Federalists did before the Whigs, although it will regroup into yet another Hamiltonian/Clayite/Lincolnite Party. The Democrats, though, are probably going to always exist since they're the longest lasting political party that ever existed anywhere in the world (and that starts with 1832 or 1836 rather than 1792, because Jefferson's party actually isn't the modern Democratic party).

 

[shortylickens]

The GOP is going to get so small, that it's going to dissolve like the Whigs did and like the Federalists did before the Whigs, although it will regroup into yet another Hamiltonian/Clayite/Lincolnite Party. The Democrats, though, are probably going to always exist since they're the longest lasting political party that ever existed anywhere in the world (and that starts with 1832 or 1836 rather than 1792, because Jefferson's party actually isn't the modern Democratic party).

Umm, Kennedy's party isn't the modern Democratic party.

 

[IronWing]

Umm, Kennedy's party isn't the modern Democratic party.

This is true. The modern Dem party is far to the right of the Dem party of Kennedy on fiscal, labor, trade, banking, and just about everything else except civil rights.

 

[soulcougher73]

Without the EC a 3rd party would stand a much better and fairer chance.

 

[Zorkorist]

No, though Ross Perot came close.

Next time I will vote for Ross Perot.

-John

 

[Sonikku]

No. What's the point of electing a third party? We don't even need two.

 

[CallMeJoe]

No, though Ross Perot came close.

19% of the popular vote in 1992, 8% in 1996, no electors in either campaign.

 

[jackschmittusa]

I'm sure it won't happen in my lifetime. But then again, I'm an old fart.

 

[schneiderguy]

Mr. Johnson is going to win in November, so yes.

 

[Smoblikat]

Mr. Johnson is going to win in November, so yes.

I highly doubt that the powers that be will actually let someone who wants to help America become president.

 

[dennilfloss]

Implement a reasonably low limit to what party financing (including ads) can be and you will get a viable third party (and maybe 4, 5). For example, a third party that appeared only a year ago is in the running for the Quebec elections on Tuesday and surveys show the votes % to split 31 center left - 28 right- 27 center right so far,with 15% undecided & minor parties. Should be a lot of fun watching that election night unfold.

 

[nextJin]

Like others have said it's possible but the GOP is going to have to dissolve first. Democrats aren't going anywhere we just have to wait for a few million old people to die.

It will either be a new party or the future GOP will look nothing like the one in existence today.

 

[Anarchist420]

Umm, Kennedy's party isn't the modern Democratic party.

It's the same party in name only.

This is true. The Dem party today is far to the right of the Dem party of Kennedy on fiscal, labor, trade, banking, and just about everything else except civil rights.

If you're talking about Tedward Kennedy, then that may be true, but if you're talking about John or their father (whose father supported the Last Good Democratic President), then that is absolutely false. The first two Irish Catholic descended Americans who ran for President were still a lot more conservative than the 3rd (JFK) was though and conservative in better ways.

 

[Double Trouble]

I don't think it will happen because that's one issue that both parties can agree on: a third party is a threat to their power. They will make sure that the deck gets ever more stacked against a third party. They can't stack the deck against each other because the two powers are roughly equally divided, but they can (and do) work together to make sure nobody else steps on their collective turf.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I don't think it will happen because that's one issue that both parties can agree on: a third party is a threat to their power. They will make sure that the deck gets ever more stacked against a third party. They can't stack the deck against each other because the two powers are roughly equally divided, but they can (and do) work together to make sure nobody else steps on their collective turf.

Yep, and the only resolution is effectively blocked by them since they would have to approve of surrendering power.

The theoretical division of powers between the judiciary, legislative and executive branch does not effectively exist, or if so it's so subordinate to party control that it's irrelevant.

The hierarchy of power in government is Republicrat. That's it.

I'll consider it one entity since they use the same mentality to govern, that being their way or the highway. In theory Obama ought not to have any connection with Congress in terms of legislation and vice versa and most people don't even realize it. What we are supposed to do is pick a President or Representative who may belong to a political party, but we pick a party and they control both, and sometimes judges depending on the office. Even when this is not the case, parties pick who can be appointed. Consequently the government as intended is a farce, an illusion, that some cling to and others openly defy in place of partisanship.

George Washington was right.