T Nation

Third Party Supporters

I originally put this question in the “So, What’s Next?” thread, but probably shouldn’t have because it had nothing to do with that subject.

What I wanted to know from the third party supporters (any of them), is why do they think a third party candidate would do so well to run the country if they can’t even figure out how to win a marginal amount of votes?

One way to get more votes is to compromise on your ideals.

For example, a person might pretend to be pro choice just to get the democratic ticket. Or a conservative who drifts to the center to go after the mushy moderate vote.

Another way to get more votes is to puff up your speeches with empty rhetoric and flatter your listeners.

Another way to get more votes is to promise voters a welfare check.

Politics of fear is also quite effective, at least for incumbents.

Another way to get more votes is to adopt policies that resonate well with concentrated economic power, thus attracting obscene donations that allow you to run more advertisements and reach more people.

But some people, knowing these things, choose not to use such tactics and instead run a campaign of integrity.

[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
I originally put this question in the “So, What’s Next?” thread, but probably shouldn’t have because it had nothing to do with that subject.

What I wanted to know from the third party supporters (any of them), is why do they think a third party candidate would do so well to run the country if they can’t even figure out how to win a marginal amount of votes?[/quote]
Derrrrr I don’t know, maybe it has something to do with the closed presidential debates? Those which exclude 3rd party candidates unless they average something along the lines of 15% in national polls? Maybe it’s the nearly complete lack of coverage of third parties in mainstream media?

Yeah, I’d say those 2 are pretty big and pretty much guarantee that no one other than a democrat or republican will ever take the white house. The two party system has a stranglehold on US politics and they’re not about to give it up. And of course now that it’s too late everyone will start to realize they’re reaping what they’ve sewn with unchecked power in DC and voting in lifetime politicians. Way to go America.

[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
SouthernGypsy wrote:
I originally put this question in the “So, What’s Next?” thread, but probably shouldn’t have because it had nothing to do with that subject.

What I wanted to know from the third party supporters (any of them), is why do they think a third party candidate would do so well to run the country if they can’t even figure out how to win a marginal amount of votes?
Derrrrr I don’t know, maybe it has something to do with the closed presidential debates? Those which exclude 3rd party candidates unless they average something along the lines of 15% in national polls? Maybe it’s the nearly complete lack of coverage of third parties in mainstream media?

Yeah, I’d say those 2 are pretty big and pretty much guarantee that no one other than a democrat or republican will ever take the white house. The two party system has a stranglehold on US politics and they’re not about to give it up. And of course now that it’s too late everyone will start to realize they’re reaping what they’ve sewn with unchecked power in DC and voting in lifetime politicians. Way to go America.[/quote]

Inner Hulk is correct.

Additionally, there is the propaganda spouted each election year that this election is of utmost importance, that a victory by the other party would be an absolute disaster for the country. So right now, we can’t afford to mess around voting for third parties that will not win. It’s too costly right now.

Of course, they will always say this.

Instant run off voting would solve this concern, but all efforts to implement it have been destroyed by the two parties. In one town (can’t remember the name) that implemented instant runoff voting, this caused the republican candidate to lose. At the next election cycle, the republicans returned to power and overthrew instant runoff voting.

“Strangle hold” is the correct way to put it.

Third party candidates get next to no coverage whatsoever, and the little coverage they do get is generally limited to “Why are you doing this? Don’t you realize you will spoil the election for so and so?”

And after the ten minutes of discussing the effect that the third party candidate will have on the horse race, the media will resume discussing more serious things, like lipstick.

[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
I originally put this question in the “So, What’s Next?” thread, but probably shouldn’t have because it had nothing to do with that subject.

What I wanted to know from the third party supporters (any of them), is why do they think a third party candidate would do so well to run the country if they can’t even figure out how to win a marginal amount of votes?[/quote]

I know you responded to me in the other post so I will respond here.

I said what I said because the more I get interested and learn about politics as an independent I learn how much crap you need to filter through before you really learn that both sides are the same but in exactly different ways.

Now if I truely want the thing that I value heading into the election to become true such as:

No legislating morality or values
Much smaller budget
Keeping our asses out of foreign conflicts

Now those are only 3 of the many more views I have obviously.

Do you really think either party will come close to addressing this issue? I think not. We’ll see more legislation, more spending (albeit in different areas), and still poking our noses into others business.

I think what has turned me into this line of thought is the disintigration of the republican party and their core values as a small government, less regulation, less intervention party. People will argue that republicans still hold their core beliefs of pro-life, no gay marriage, etc…

Now those values are not, in my opinion what republicans should call conservative. The fact that it was even being mentioned of putting marriage between a man and a woman as an ammendment should make conservatives sick. That is not conservative, that’s as a radical of a thought as you can get. Conservative in my opinion is keeping the governments nose out of that type of business and letting the people decide themselves what they want. In other words conservative is holding the true constitutional values and not trying to change it or interpret it in other ways (what liberal would be).

While I think each party has it’s place, I don’t think you really are getting a true choice out of the parties. Yes both candidates are very different, but I really don’t think that either can spur any REAL change.

Now to the topic of them not being able to get into office. If you think the attitude of wasted vote went out the window and they grabbed a little more of the vote each election do you think that they would get more and more coverage? I believe so.

Also to finish this off…

With a good percentage of people out there claiming they are voting the “the lesser of two evils” doesn’t that just scream that something is really fucked up with how things are going?

So now I ask you, what choice do I have if I want what I value to be in place?

[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
What I wanted to know from the third party supporters (any of them), is why do they think a third party candidate would do so well to run the country if they can’t even figure out how to win a marginal amount of votes?[/quote]

Republicans and Democrats are the established parties. It does not follow that the established parties are any more suited to “run” the country than anyone else. If you count the actual number of voters who vote in this country you can see that it is a difficult thing to get one’s ideas into the mainstream because most people do not care enough to inform themselves and or are so ignorant on the issues they just assume what they are told in the news is all there is to know on the subject.

Third party candidates still must compete for air time in the media; the media is in a catch-22 situation because it must cater to its market base and therefore will not spend as much time presenting alternative ideas.

I think it would be a beautiful thing if a majority would vote third party (any party) and not think about voting for the establishment candidates. Also, I would hope that people do not think in terms of partisan politics but rather the individual presenting the ideas. It is very hard for an individual to represent the ideas of many other individuals.

I’m writing in Ron Paul or I am not voting.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I’m writing in Ron Paul[/quote]
I’m right there with ya.

My current voting plans:

I’m going to smoke some very good shit, stumble into the voting booth, and write in the Kermit/Snarff ticket.

Kermit knows how hard it is to be green. His environmental plan is absolutely brilliant. And Snarffs Liono-defense policies are top notch. Hey, with Sight BEYOND Sight, how can we lose? That’s what I call foresight my friends.

Plus, Panthra is basically Samuel L Jackson… as a muthafuckin Panther! No terrorists will mess with that shit.

(To be honest, none of the third party candidates have caught my eye. Is there a site somewhere with a list of them or something?)

[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
I originally put this question in the “So, What’s Next?” thread, but probably shouldn’t have because it had nothing to do with that subject.

What I wanted to know from the third party supporters (any of them), is why do they think a third party candidate would do so well to run the country if they can’t even figure out how to win a marginal amount of votes?[/quote]

You haven’t figured out the system is rigged yet?

[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
I originally put this question in the “So, What’s Next?” thread, but probably shouldn’t have because it had nothing to do with that subject.

What I wanted to know from the third party supporters (any of them), is why do they think a third party candidate would do so well to run the country if they can’t even figure out how to win a marginal amount of votes?[/quote]

The point of voting third-party is of course to get the candidate elected, but more realistically the point is to get the major parties to stop marginalizing the issues that the third party candidate stands for. If enough people vote third party, the big parties will start to pay attention.