Strong 3rd party votes in 2008?

[Acanthus]

AP

With people getting so fed up with partisan politics and our government doing things for businesses and not for the people of the United States, do you guys think we will see a strong 3rd party candidate in 2008?

I think is possible if you get a big political figure with a real campaign going.

Democrats and Republicans alike are drawing enormous amounts of fire from voters right now. Its almost a certainty that our next president will not be republican.

I think stats like:

"Nearly half of independents say the Democratic and Republican parties are equally corrupt."

"An AP-Ipsos poll in December found nearly 90 percent of all voters believes political corruption is a serious problem."

"A George Washington University Battleground 2006 survey in February found that 84 percent of likely voters believe lawmakers in Washington put partisan politics above all else."

"Nearly 70 percent of the public believes the country is on the wrong track"

 

[Cerb]

No. The Republicans will use their PR machine to spin their next guy as a NOT-Bush, and win. The Democrats will take too great of a chance, and lose. The third parties will get lost in the shuffle of sheeple.

 

[Dissipate]

Nothing will change. Someone from the establishment will be elected once again.

 

[magomago]

Strong third party votes means nothing...Even if they doubled their voter base it is probably still something less than five percent. Bull Moose party was the only real, and last alternative we have really ever had...I THINK I would love to see something like that happen, but Republicans and Democrats are so ingrained into a our system that these will only be the two choices we will ever have despite how LITTLE they actually differ in.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Actually the largest 3rd party in the US is the Libertarian party and it's larger then all other 3rd parties combined.

Having said that no they probably won't get very far next time either. The Dems and Reps have before and will continue to actively undermine them at every corner. I don't think the LP will give up anytime soon. It's just a real shame how they are so openly undermined and nobody cares because the controlled mass media refuses to cover it.

The US elections are a sham.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Aelius
Actually the largest 3rd party in the US is the Libertarian party and it's larger then all other 3rd parties combined.

Having said that no they probably won't get very far next time either. The Dems and Reps have before and will continue to actively undermine them at every corner. I don't think the LP will give up anytime soon. It's just a real shame how they are so openly undermined and nobody cares because the controlled mass media refuses to cover it.

The US elections are a sham.

Putting the biggest third party against a two party system is like taking the fastest production Toyota and putting it in an F-1 race.

Until the system is reformed, nothing will change for third parties. That being said, how can you expect anything different from a 3rd party? So much effort for nothing; many countries around the world have 3, 4...12 party systems; how are their alternatives doing? The exact same as the traditional mainstream parties. You are far better trying to get a good candidate within the two main parties. All elections come down to a two man race anyway. Here in Canada, the urban areas are between NDP/Liberals; suburbia and rural areas Liberals/Conservatives. 3rd party sounds all well and good, but in the real world you aren't going to find what you want. Besides, new parties tend to be prone to attracting extremist social agendas as the major parties don't want to rock the boat and ignore them.

 

[Thump553]

Here's a main part of the problem-nearly everything in our voting system, from the electoral college on down, is designed to frustrate and limit the growth of new parties. Take for example, campaign disclosure laws- a noble endeavor. In my state, despite the best efforts of the people adminsitering them, the laws applicable to campaign financing are enormously complicated and full of traps for the unwary. Even if a person 100% financed a campaign for local office they would still have to file extensive disclosure reports with substanital penalties for missing deadlines (which are very frequent) by even one day.

It goes even further, for I think if you took a good look at the system you would find that a very large part (probably the overwhelming majority) is run, de facto, by a one party system. I used to live in a major city that literally didn't even have a Republican Party. All local elections were effectively decided in the Democratic primaries, if not before. In my current state, state law mandates a certain amount of minority party reprenstation in town councils, etc., otherwise certain areas would be either 100% GOP or Dem.

I recently participated in the very successful formation of a local third party which overwhelmingly swept (to the extent permitted by law) both the Dems and GOP out of office. With dedicated people willing to work hard to overcome the red tape and inherent disadvantages it can be done-at least on a local scale where the almight campaign money is not so important. Just be prepared to have to work twice as hard and twice as smart. It takes an awful lot to even make a dent at changing the system, but its not too late.

 

[eilute]

I don't expect strong 3rd party votes.

Are the Ds and Rs equally corrupt? The perception of this will probably hinge on the Abramhoff scandal. If it turns out that only Rs are the only ones taking bribes, then Ds could win out. This has not yet happened.

The Libertarians will not win any major elections because they are all extremists. They will have to become significantly more moderate to get into office.

Ds would also make large gains if they dropped their stance on abortion. Conversely Rs would make gains if their policies were more favorable to the unwealthy.

The only thing I can think of that would fix our two party rut is a runoff voting system. For this to happen people will have to stand up and demand it.

 

[dullard]

I think that link is way overblowing the data. People have been anti-incumbant for decades. People have thought politicians as being all corrupt for decades.

How about some ACTUAL numbers? Look at the % of people in each category.
[*]Republicans are about where they were 2 years ago. They range from ~34% to ~37%. Although, they are now right at the bottom of that range.
[*]Democrats are about where they were 2 years ago. They range from ~36% to ~39%. They are currently in the middle of that range.
[*]Independants are slighlty higher than they were 2 years ago. They range from ~24% to ~30%. They are currently in the high end of that range.

Note: people who say they are independant generally decline as an election nears, then those numbers swell between elections. Basically, they want to be independant, but when it comes to electing someone they become realists and vote for the lesser of two R or D evils.

I'd love to see multiple parties out there with real chances of winning. The fact is that 2 parties aren't enough to cover the range of people's political beliefs. Sadly, our system is set up to distroy any 3rd party if it ever becomes big. A constitutional change is the only way to fix this nationally.

 

[ExpertNovice]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Nothing will change. Someone from the establishment will be elected once again.

I'm afraid you are correct.

Originally posted by: magomago
Strong third party votes means nothing...Even if they doubled their voter base it is probably still something less than five percent. Bull Moose party was the only real, and last alternative we have really ever had...I THINK I would love to see something like that happen, but Republicans and Democrats are so ingrained into a our system that these will only be the two choices we will ever have despite how LITTLE they actually differ in.

I disagree that they mean nothing. I do agree that they mean something if only a small percentage of voters actually vote for them as we saw when Perot pretended to run.

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Nothing will change. Someone from the establishment will be elected once again.

Actually the largest 3rd party in the US is the Libertarian party and it's larger then all other 3rd parties combined.

Having said that no they probably won't get very far next time either.

Think about this the 43% (D) to 37% (R) to 19% (I) was not enough to get their attention.

What would happen if most of the incumbants who had been in office more than 12 years (2 terms for Senators and 6 for the House) were removed from office, regardless of who won the election.

What would happen if, regardless of who won the 2008 election if the voting percentages were 33% (?) to 32% (?) to 30% (I)?

What would happen if one of the platforms of the Independant party was term limits. We the People might start making a difference. It would shake up the status quo.

I would also like to see runoffs for the Senate, House, and Presidency if the POPULAR vote was not at least 50% for the majority side.

Term limits and runoffs would mean that a third party would become a viable party and if nothing else it would send clearer messages to the incumbants than emails, telephone calls, and protests.

The Libertarian party doesn't have a chance. While I am a Libertarian all too often the Libertarian party is a magnet for much too radical ideas that were well suited for the 1700s and 1800s but not in 2006. The other reason they will not likely receive many elections is that too many people, Democrats and Republicans, want BIG Governemtn to take care of them. Thus, a party with a core principle of smaller Governemnt is not a viable party at this time. Still, I have hopes...

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I wouldn't be surprised to see anti-illegal immigration Rep Tom Tancredo (R) run independently.

http://www.teamamericapac.org/aboutus.htm