Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Can A Third Party Win?  
User currently offlineAlias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2760 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2565 times:

There are many smaller political parties in the United States, with the Green Party and Libertarian Party being two of the most prominent, but none of these smaller parties has managed to gain any sort of momentum toward becoming a challenger to the current two parties that dominate. So how can they make up that gap and get to where their candidates are mentioned as viable candidates for major races like the presidency, U.S. Senate, House of Representatives etc...?

I'd be interested to hear any ideas for how these smaller, less well known parties can split this current duopoly the Democrats and Republicans have over the levers of power in our government.


It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
58 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15742 posts, RR: 27
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2552 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
So how can they make up that gap and get to where their candidates are mentioned as viable candidates for major races like the presidency, U.S. Senate, House of Representatives etc...?

They can't.

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
I'd be interested to hear any ideas for how these smaller, less well known parties can split this current duopoly the Democrats and Republicans have over the levers of power in our government.

They don't need to. The American system isn't built that way. The duopoly likely won't change much and it doesn't need to.

See there's a fundamental bit of idiocy that seems pervasive among voters and commentators: the fallacy that party is anything more than a party. American political parties are non-ideological. They don't stand for anything other than winning elections. In short they're like record labels, even likening them to a brand is stretching it. Get ten Republicans in the same room and chances are some of them will hate the guts of some of the others. Same for Democrats. When you go on iTunes you get the artist you want, not the record label you want and you should do the same with politicians.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10024 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2533 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
See there's a fundamental bit of idiocy that seems pervasive among voters and commentators: the fallacy that party is anything more than a party. American political parties are non-ideological. They don't stand for anything other than winning elections. In short they're like record labels, even likening them to a brand is stretching it. Get ten Republicans in the same room and chances are some of them will hate the guts of some of the others. Same for Democrats. When you go on iTunes you get the artist you want, not the record label you want and you should do the same with politicians.

While true, it's also pretty much fact that a politician has to adopt party views and pander to said party in order to even get as far as the primary, never mind being the nominee.

So you're basically able to buy whatever music the record label decides to support and promote (which we all know is not necessarily a sign of good music), and you never hear many different bands and artists that might be really good and different; you have to find them on an indie label or whatever.

Funny how analogous that is - I never thought about it before.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2518 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
So how can they make up that gap and get to where their candidates are mentioned as viable candidates for major races like the presidency, U.S. Senate, House of Representatives etc...?

It is all about voters feeling they are not throwing away a vote. Essentially there are two ways. The first is to build it up from the ground. Become viable in local elections. With enough of them become viable in state elections. With it comes national elections. A lot of time.

The second way is opportunistic. Something where the established parties insist on pushing through something big without support from voters. I don't find this scenario likely.


User currently offlinejpetekyxmd80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4389 posts, RR: 29
Reply 4, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2512 times:

A third party candidate can also win a certain election, at any level really, but a third party cannot rise up to be competitive in the long run. That's just not what how it works in our system. If a third party does rise, it will eventually supplant one of the current parties.

Individuals can win elections, but duopoly will always exist in the long run.



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2498 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
There are many smaller political parties in the United States, with the Green Party and Libertarian Party being two of the most prominent, but none of these smaller parties has managed to gain any sort of momentum toward becoming a challenger to the current two parties that dominate. So how can they make up that gap and get to where their candidates are mentioned as viable candidates for major races like the presidency, U.S. Senate, House of Representatives etc...?



You know what the biggest obstacle for Libertarians is? Libertarians.


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2495 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
I'd be interested to hear any ideas for how these smaller, less well known parties can split this current duopoly the Democrats and Republicans have over the levers of power in our government.

You should love former President George W Bush.
Green Party candidate Ralph Nader split the anti-Bush vote and siphoned off votes from Al Gore in New Hampshire and Florida thus allowing Dubya to win.
So you see, the third parties are more powerful than you think.

Not all Democrats are on the same page and not all Republicans are on the same page.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11653 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2494 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):So how can they make up that gap and get to where their candidates are mentioned as viable candidates for major races like the presidency, U.S. Senate, House of Representatives etc...?
They can't.

They can by taking money out of elections. But, those that have that in place (Republicans and Democrats) will never ever EVER get rid of money from elections. If money were taken out of elections, people would actually have to read and think and elect other parties. The two parties in power do not want that. They want their gravy train. They know a good thing when they see it and keeping the American populace dumb is just fine for them.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15742 posts, RR: 27
Reply 8, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2479 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 2):
So you're basically able to buy whatever music the record label decides to support and promote (which we all know is not necessarily a sign of good music),

The bad ones get exposed and don't stick around.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 2):
you never hear many different bands and artists that might be really good and different

The good ones all get signed and become the big label acts.

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 4):
A third party candidate can also win a certain election, at any level really, but a third party cannot rise up to be competitive in the long run.

They'll get absorbed by one of the two parties. Whoever it is that the people liked enough to vote for is still there.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
They can by taking money out of elections.

Actually the way to do it would be to divide up seats by party like some other countries do. Of course the beauty of the American system is that it keeps the nuts out. Crazy environmentalists, Communists, Skinheads, etc. all have zero chance of even becoming a county road commissioner.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
f money were taken out of elections, people would actually have to read and think and elect other parties.

I don't know what your ballots look like, but every time I vote it's names that are on the ballot and people that I'm voting for.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10024 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2478 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
The bad ones get exposed and don't stick around.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
The good ones all get signed and become the big label acts.

I would strongly disagree with both those statements.

1.) There are plenty of bad artists around, and many of them are stars.
2.) There are plenty of good artists around who haven't been signed to a major label, and never will.

Both of those points are matters of opinion, but so is politics, so it still works.

Major labels don't pick GOOD artists. They pick MARKETABLE artists. Again, the similarity to politics is amazing.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11653 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2418 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
I don't know what your ballots look like, but every time I vote it's names that are on the ballot and people that I'm voting for.

It's the run-up to elections that I am talking about. Look how much money Romney is sinking into his campaign with his "bus tour". He is able to fly to different events and stage buses. Then, there are all the commercials and robo-calls.

During our primaries here in California, the day before and day of the election, we had commercials for and against prop 29, raising taxes on tobacco to pay for cancer research. Out of six commercials, four of them would be about this. Every day in the mail I was getting at least 2 flyers about it. How much money does that cost?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
Crazy environmentalists, Communists, Skinheads, etc. all have zero chance of even becoming a county road commissioner.

Two part response:

1. Just like the tea people, not every single one of them are crazy. Just the loud and obnoxious ones. The non-crazy ones sometimes have good ideas.
2. If they don't have good ideas, others will help shape the crazy idea and compromise until it becomes something we can all agree on.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
I'd be interested to hear any ideas for how these smaller, less well known parties can split this current duopoly the Democrats and Republicans have over the levers of power in our government.

It would need a Constitutional Amendment, which would allow proportional representation state-wide, rather than individual district-by district elections. You would no longer vote for a particular person, but for a Party, and if 10% of California voted for the Libertarian list, then the Libertarian Party would nominate 10% of California's 53 seats. (obviously rounding is an issue to sort out).

That's pretty much the only way to overcome the current 2-party system.

The only other way is if one of the two parties implode. That is how the Republican Party got started. Prior to the GOP, it was the Democrats against the Whigs, and the Whig Party imploded because of the slavery issue. The Democrats supported slavery, as did many in the Whig leadership. The anti-slavery Whigs finally split away to form the Republican Party, and the former Whig leadership was left without anyone to lead, and died off.

But it took nearly a decade after that for the GOP to win its first presidential election (Lincoln). That was the discussion about the Tea Party - if it actually became a proper party, I think it would probably eventually become huge - a party that cares simply about Constitutional limits and fiscal responsibility and not weighed down by all the Social Conservatism would find supporters from both Democrats and Republicans. But if that were to happen, the chaos that followed would mean the Democrats control the country for at least another decade (The GOP won't die quietly), and that is something we simply cannot afford at this point. That is why the Tea Party conversion to an actual party never gained any momentum



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7521 posts, RR: 23
Reply 12, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2402 times:

Exerpt of my post from seb146's "Voters: What Would Happen If..." thread http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ms/non_aviation/read.main/2433897/, which could easily apply for this thread:

In recent history, Ross Perot has been the only Independent/3rd party candidate to actually trigger a "snap-shot" poll during the '92 campaign that if the election were held when that poll was taken (June); his presence in the race would deny both President Bush (41) and then-Governor Bill Clinton of the needed 270 electoral votes. Perot's reaction to that poll (he dropped out the the race but later re-entered roughly 2 months later), in retrospect, was the biggest mistake he made in his political campaign/career. Had he continued his campaign in full force; then a vote for Perot would've indeed been viewed as a vote for Perot rather than (as most believed) a spoiler vote for Clinton.

In 2000, the Florida recount issue aside; many viewed Green Party Ralph Nader's presence in the race as a spolier vote for Bush 43 and Reform Party Pat Buchanan's presence as a spoiler vote for Gore. That's probably one case where one had two different 3rd party spoilers essentially cancelling each other out.

Nonetheless, if a 3rd party/Independent wants to actually get elected President in 2016; they pretty much have to start laying the groundwork for a campaign this year.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8269 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2379 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
Of course the beauty of the American system is that it keeps the nuts out.

Ya gotta be kidding!

Look at the flakes in Congress right now.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 9):
I would strongly disagree with both those statements.

1.) There are plenty of bad artists around, and many of them are stars.
2.) There are plenty of good artists around who haven't been signed to a major label, and never will.

Now that is the truth. We say The Jersey Boys this past week and the talent on stage was outstanding. It was a Broadway touring company and, when the tour is over, it will be back to hitting the auditions. Probably asking if you want fries with that until you hit the next job. (Outstanding show, BTW. Try to see it if you get the chance.)


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2362 times:

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 12):
In 2000, the Florida recount issue aside; many viewed Green Party Ralph Nader's presence in the race as a spolier vote for Bush 43 and Reform Party Pat Buchanan's presence as a spoiler vote for Gore. That's probably one case where one had two different 3rd party spoilers essentially cancelling each other out.

Buchanan's support wasn't large enough to cancel out Ralph Nader.
Ralph Nader was winning 4 - 5 % in Florida & New Hampshire. 2/3rds of all Nader supporters said they would have voted for Gore had Nader not ran. 2/3rds of the 84,000+ Nader votes won in Florida would be more than enough to overtake the 537 vote margin the US Supreme Court allowed Dubya to have.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15742 posts, RR: 27
Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2347 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):
How much money does that cost?

It's not my money so I don't care.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):
Just like the tea people, not every single one of them are crazy.

The ones that aren't are just everyday politicians.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 13):
Ya gotta be kidding!

Look at the flakes in Congress right now.

Then tell me how many seats the Communist party won in the last election.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAlias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2760 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2316 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
See there's a fundamental bit of idiocy that seems pervasive among voters and commentators: the fallacy that party is anything more than a party. American political parties are non-ideological. They don't stand for anything other than winning elections.

Then why do they adopt party platforms? Seems ideological to me.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
It would need a Constitutional Amendment, which would allow proportional representation state-wide, rather than individual district-by district elections.

Why would proportional representation state-wide be necessary? Why couldn't you see a majority caucus built in the House of Representatives or Senate around members from multiple parties in our system?



It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2724 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2310 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
How Can A Third Party Win?

They can win on a local level but at the National level it would take some time. The two main parties would have to fracture fighting for control like with the Tea Party slowly changing the RNC. If the far right get's tired of the RNC RINO's they can break away.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15742 posts, RR: 27
Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2290 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 16):
Then why do they adopt party platforms?

To get the name and support of the right people.

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 16):
Seems ideological to me.

It's not. First, what single meaningful parameter could you use to rank a politician? There isn't one. They can be right wing on one issue and left wing on another. There is no way you can look at anything about a politician and use that to throw them into some bin. And chances are you could use some other equally valid, or invalid really, classification and put them into a completely different bin with different people who may be diametrically opposed on some other issue.

Secondly, it isn't even a continuum. Other than the impossibility of finding a catch-all, meaningful way of classification, you can't even rank people where Republicans begin where Democrats end. There would actually be a ton of overlap. It's just a big blob.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3375 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2246 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Thread starter):
So how can they make up that gap and get to where their candidates are mentioned as viable candidates for major races like the presidency, U.S. Senate, House of Representatives etc...?

The US system isn't really designed for it as their is no minority option available in a general election. If no party hits 270 then the new congress decided the president through state delegations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth..._to_the_United_States_Constitution

You can potentially get a minority situation in congress where no one party has a majority and there is a balance of power such as parliamentary systems. This is very viable.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 6):
Green Party candidate Ralph Nader split the anti-Bush vote and siphoned off votes from Al Gore in New Hampshire and Florida thus allowing Dubya to win.

If Ron Paul were to enter the race this year as an Independent then the same thing could happen to the GOP.

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 5):
You know what the biggest obstacle for Libertarians is? Libertarians.

  

A lot of them are actually anarchists.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2133 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):


A lot of them are actually anarchists.

You know what they say about libertarianism, it's anarchy for rich people. Or my personal favorite, everyone is a libertarian when they have a job. Reminds me of a family memeber who claims to be a libertarian who also collected unemployment for almost a year. Irony.


User currently offlineakiss20 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 609 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2118 times:

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 20):
Reminds me of a family memeber who claims to be a libertarian who also collected unemployment for almost a year. Irony.

I think the word you are looking for is "hypocrisy"



Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2103 times:

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 5):
You know what the biggest obstacle for Libertarians is? Libertarians.



What's wrong with Libertarians?
Here is the only Libertarian I ever voted for; 'Starchild'.
Starchild is the most prominent, conservative/libertarian voice in San Francisco.
Starchild simply wants the government off his back.

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 20):
You know what they say about libertarianism, it's anarchy for rich people. Or my personal favorite, everyone is a libertarian when they have a job. Reminds me of a family memeber who claims to be a libertarian who also collected unemployment for almost a year. Irony.



To be fair, very few people are "pure Democrat" or "pure Republican" so it's unfair to beat up on Libertarians for not being "pure Libertarian".
I know lots of people who are unemployed Libertarians. Most of your Occupy Wall Street crowd are your unemployed Libertarians. They are the social Libertarians.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 23, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2095 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 22):
I know lots of people who are unemployed Libertarians. Most of your Occupy Wall Street crowd are your unemployed Libertarians. They are the social Libertarians.

You can't want free stuff from the government and be a Libertarian.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 24, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2087 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 23):
You can't want free stuff from the government and be a Libertarian.

Notice how I said "social" Libertarians, not 'fiscal' conservatives.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2525 posts, RR: 7
Reply 25, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
Get ten Republicans in the same room and chances are some of them will hate the guts of some of the others. Same for Democrats.

And yet they stick together like glue when voting on bills in congress. Over the last eight to ten years, votes in congress have been almost uniformly along party lines which has lead to the gridlock that so many are frustrated by.


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 26, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2098 times:

Quoting ER757 (Reply 25):
And yet they stick together like glue when voting on bills in congress.

Well they can only vote 'Yay' or 'Ney'.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineaa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 27, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

I think Bloomberg would have a pretty decent shot if he were to run. He has a strong name and could probably finance his campaign using just his own funds. I also think that some of his positions would be popular among the electorate.

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 20):
Reminds me of a family memeber who claims to be a libertarian who also collected unemployment for almost a year. Irony.

I don't see too much irony there, since you have to pay into the unemployment insurance pool. Since you have to pay for the premiums, why should you not use the benefits?


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 28, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2094 times:

Quoting aa757first (Reply 27):
I think Bloomberg would have a pretty decent shot if he were to run.


Bloomberg is a frikkin' lunatic that should be put in away in an insane asylum!

Quoting aa757first (Reply 27):
I also think that some of his positions would be popular among the electorate.


Where have you been lately?



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineaa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 29, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2087 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 28):
Bloomberg is a frikkin' lunatic that should be put in away in an insane asylum!
Quoting Superfly (Reply 28):
Where have you been lately?

I'm not saying I like him. I'm saying he might be popular enough with the general population to be at least a viable candidate.


User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2839 posts, RR: 12
Reply 30, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2085 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 19):
The US system isn't really designed for it as their is no minority option available in a general election.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
They don't need to. The American system isn't built that way. The duopoly likely won't change much and it doesn't need to.

I'd argue you're both wrong. In May of 1992 Ross Perot was ahead in the presidential polls in Texas and California running as a third party candidate. Although in the end he didn't win, mostly because of his own doing, he was a serious contender for the presidency. If Wiki is to be believed he had nearly 19% of the popular vote.

I think a 3rd party candidate could win the presidency, we just haven't seen the right 3rd party candidate yet.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlineER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2525 posts, RR: 7
Reply 31, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2085 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 26):
Well they can only vote 'Yay' or 'Ney'.

Well of course, but my point is that they ALL vote the same way as a party.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21625 posts, RR: 55
Reply 32, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2074 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
The bad ones get exposed and don't stick around.

In politics they do stick around, for a couple of reasons. First is the fact that, unlike the music industry, where you can get exposed at any time, in politics it can only happen in elections. If you're popular when an election happens to be going on, you're golden, and then people are stuck with you for a while, no matter how mediocre you might be. Second is the power of incumbency, especially in elections for lower positions like the Senate or the House, to say nothing of state and local positions. It's really hard to lose re-election bids there. So it really amounts to a one-time popularity contest in most cases.

Imagine if the way the Top 40 charts are today determined what we'd be listening to on the radio for the next four years. We'd have to listen to One Direction and Justin Bieber on loop, no matter what other good artists were putting out stuff. It would be a disaster.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
The good ones all get signed and become the big label acts.

If you know anything at all about music, you know this isn't true. Big label acts are big label acts because they're marketable, not because they're good. Sure, there are plenty of examples of acts that are both good and popular, but turn on the radio for an hour and you'll hear mostly manufactured drivel that will be forgotten in a couple of years.

Quoting aa757first (Reply 27):
I think Bloomberg would have a pretty decent shot if he were to run. He has a strong name and could probably finance his campaign using just his own funds. I also think that some of his positions would be popular among the electorate.

I would have agreed at one point. He still has a strong name, he still has lots of money, he still has lots of executive experience, but I don't think the national electorate would take kindly to how he gave himself a third term in office, and I know there would be a lot of people who think he's too controlling (such as with his drink size law). So I think his presidential aspirations, if he ever had them, are shot.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 33, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2062 times:

Quoting ER757 (Reply 31):
Well of course, but my point is that they ALL vote the same way as a party.



That's not true at all.

Quoting aa757first (Reply 29):
I'm not saying I like him. I'm saying he might be popular enough with the general population to be at least a viable candidate.


Bloomberg is ab out as popular as a used 32oz big gulp at the bottom of a trash heap.
He embodies everything that is wrong both parties. He wants to implement left-wing nutritionist ideas but enforced with right-wing law enforcement tactics. Bloomberg is America's Stalin.
I'd rather bring back Dubya than have Bloomberg in power!



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineaa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 34, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2033 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
I would have agreed at one point. He still has a strong name, he still has lots of money, he still has lots of executive experience, but I don't think the national electorate would take kindly to how he gave himself a third term in office, and I know there would be a lot of people who think he's too controlling (such as with his drink size law). So I think his presidential aspirations, if he ever had them, are shot.

You could be right, but I think there's enough of a chance for him to seriously consider a run. Even if he didn't win a single electoral vote, he'd still garner a sizable portion of the popular vote. I also think his candidacy would potentially open the door for other third party candidates.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 33):
He embodies everything that is wrong both parties. He wants to implement left-wing nutritionist ideas but enforced with right-wing law enforcement tactics. Bloomberg is America's Stalin.

You're preaching to the choir. I used to be pretty ambivalent about him until recently, when I started to dislike his policies. But he still seems to be the most viable third party candidate around.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15742 posts, RR: 27
Reply 35, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2027 times:

Quoting ER757 (Reply 25):
And yet they stick together like glue when voting on bills in congress.

The thing is that they haven't. There is plenty of crossover and with so many issues at hand you simply cannot divide politicians into two bins in any meaningful way.

Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
First is the fact that, unlike the music industry, where you can get exposed at any time, in politics it can only happen in elections. If you're popular when an election happens to be going on, you're golden, and then people are stuck with you for a while, no matter how mediocre you might be.

It's the same mechanism at work, it just works more slowly in politics. Incumbency has no parallel since you can listen to as many people as you want.

Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
Big label acts are big label acts because they're marketable, not because they're good.

That's "good" in your opinion. In reality, what possible objective measure of how "good" a musician is other than how many record sales/downloads/radio plays they get, in other words, how marketable they are? For that matter, what objective measure of a politician's success is there besides how many votes they get?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21625 posts, RR: 55
Reply 36, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2020 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 35):
Incumbency has no parallel since you can listen to as many people as you want.

Not from the national media. You can't just request any song you want from a radio station.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 35):
In reality, what possible objective measure of how "good" a musician is other than how many record sales/downloads/radio plays they get, in other words, how marketable they are?

Are you trying to objectively measure art?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 35):
For that matter, what objective measure of a politician's success is there besides how many votes they get?

By that logic, Obama looks pretty damn good. Of course, I'd prefer to use their record in office to determine their success.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15742 posts, RR: 27
Reply 37, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2019 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 36):
Not from the national media. You can't just request any song you want from a radio station.

The parallel cannot apply to incumbency at all really. For a challenger to win, most voters have to believe that the challenger will do a better job than the incumbent, which is something of a risk. Better the devil you know or whatever.

It completely breaks down to compare it to music because unlike elections, downloading Kanye West to your iPod doesn't delete the Jay Z songs already there.

Quoting Mir (Reply 36):
Are you trying to objectively measure art?

You can't do that. Only how much people like it. Same with politicians.

Quoting Mir (Reply 36):
Of course, I'd prefer to use their record in office to determine their success.

Which isn't the least bit objective. You could find people who think Hitler had a great record in office.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21625 posts, RR: 55
Reply 38, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2008 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37):
You can't do that. Only how much people like it.

And anyone who knows music will tell you that whether people like something, at its time of production, is completely irrelevant to how good it is.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37):
Which isn't the least bit objective. You could find people who think Hitler had a great record in office.

You could. You could find a lot more people who think he was a disaster.

Also, since Godwin's Law has just been invoked, I'll be taking my leave from this thread for a while.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10024 posts, RR: 26
Reply 39, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1999 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 35):
That's "good" in your opinion. In reality, what possible objective measure of how "good" a musician is other than how many record sales/downloads/radio plays they get, in other words, how marketable they are? For that matter, what objective measure of a politician's success is there besides how many votes they get?

Ahhh, I think I see what you're saying, and I actually agree with you.

I read articles about artists' record sales, and then read the comments on the article, where everyone invariably says something like "record sales don't mean a band is good!" or something similar.

But you're right - really, the only objective way to measure an artist is by how well they do in the marketplace. That obviously doesn't say anything about talent or musicianship (it actually says more about the record company and marketing people than the artist, I think), but it pretty much is the only quantifiable measure.

Despite that, I still stand by what I said earlier as well.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15742 posts, RR: 27
Reply 40, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1974 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 38):
You could. You could find a lot more people who think he was a disaster.

Also, since Godwin's Law has just been invoked, I'll be taking my leave from this thread for a while.

The point is that "record while in office" can only be used to determine whether or not you think someone is a success, not an objective measure of success.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 39):
That obviously doesn't say anything about talent or musicianship (it actually says more about the record company and marketing people than the artist, I think), but it pretty much is the only quantifiable measure.

Of course, a musician that only a few people like is still reasonably useful. But what good is a politician that few people vote for, no matter how "good" he is?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 41, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1971 times:

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 20):
You know what they say about libertarianism, it's anarchy for rich people. Or my personal favorite, everyone is a libertarian when they have a job. Reminds me of a family memeber who claims to be a libertarian who also collected unemployment for almost a year. Irony.

And when you lose that job, you become a Democrat with your hand held out.

A 3rd party could never win in an election because we only ever allow 2 parties to be involved in debates or have coverage. Even Ron Paul running as part of the GOP didn't get near the press he should have. He only got the attention that he did because of running at a Republican. Running as Libertarian or Constitutionalist, he would have seen zero attention.



Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3375 posts, RR: 9
Reply 42, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1968 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 30):
I'd argue you're both wrong. In May of 1992 Ross Perot was ahead in the presidential polls in Texas and California running as a third party candidate. Although in the end he didn't win, mostly because of his own doing, he was a serious contender for the presidency. If Wiki is to be believed he had nearly 19% of the popular vote.

Perot might have been a contender in 1992 but unless there is an change in the Electoral college so a 3rd party or the two major ones can still secure the presidency with the most delegation even if 270 isn't reached. I know there is a process for it but I do not think it guarantees that the party that won the most electoral votes gets in the white house. I could be mistaken though.

In congress there is no issue as a majority is a majority and a minority congress is possible in both houses.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 43, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1957 times:

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 41):
Running as Libertarian or Constitutionalist, he would have seen zero attention.



Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian in 1988.
His best showing was in Alaska where he won 2.74% of the vote. His campaign did receive some attention after George H. Bush picked Dan Quayle as his running mate. Conservatives where never thrilled about George H. Bush. They liked Quayle's conservative views but didn't like his obvious shortcomings in front of the camera.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 44, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1840 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 22):
Starchild simply wants the government off his back.

Interesting choice of words.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 22):
To be fair, very few people are "pure Democrat" or "pure Republican" so it's unfair to beat up on Libertarians for not being "pure Libertarian".

Tell a self proclaimed Libertarian that, or try telling them that. You either get a long drawn out rant or a deer in the head lights look. That's the problem I have with them, they just come across a tad bit obnoxious.

Quoting aa757first (Reply 27):
I don't see too much irony there, since you have to pay into the unemployment insurance pool. Since you have to pay for the premiums, why should you not use the benefits?

That seems to be the standard reponse from Libertarians. "I paid into it so I should at least get my money back". Wonder how they would respond if benefits were cut off at the amount you paid in. Which should not take very long since there are only three states that collect for state unemployment insurance. The federal government does not deduct from individuals paychecks for it. Only employers pay it.

Now you could make the argument that it's out tax dollars that pay for it therefore we do pay into it, true enough. However when you look at the size of the federal budget and what is spent on unemplyment benefits the amount a person pays into it is rather small. Assuming they are not a percentage of the population that ends up not paying income tax. In which case collecting unemployment trully is a freebe.


User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 45, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1834 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 33):
Bloomberg is America's Stalin.



Stalin murdered millions of his own people, imprisoned millions more and all the others lived in fear of having it happen to them. Bloomberg signed a silly law about the size of sodas. Oh yeah, I see the similarities.  


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 46, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1832 times:

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 44):
Tell a self proclaimed Libertarian that, or try telling them that. You either get a long drawn out rant or a deer in the head lights look. That's the problem I have with them, they just come across a tad bit obnoxious.

I consider myself a moderate libertarian. There are a couple ideas that are conservative (and neither libertarian nor liberal) that I like, and there are some non-libertarian liberal ideas I like. I think many people are this way... when someone says libertarian they automatically assume very little government / free for all kind of attitude. I liked Paul but he was what many would consider extreme, but I also like the Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, and if he had equal airtime and consideration as Romney or the President, I think he'd do very well. He's for civil rights, less government, but also recognizes that we need some government, the pitfall of many Libertarian candidates.

That being said, I doubt he'll do well  



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1825 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 6):
Not all Democrats are on the same page and not all Republicans are on the same page.

I'd disagree with this statement, specifically with the Democrats. For example, you NEVER hear of any pro-life Democrats (unlike pro-choice Republicans), nor do you ever hear of Democrats supporting nuclear power. Fact is, the Democratic Party is generally intolerant of any opposing views that aren't in-line with their party.



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7521 posts, RR: 23
Reply 48, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1788 times:

Quoting aa757first (Reply 34):
You could be right, but I think there's enough of a chance for him to seriously consider a run. Even if he didn't win a single electoral vote, he'd still garner a sizable portion of the popular vote. I also think his candidacy would potentially open the door for other third party candidates.

That above-scenario you describe for a Bloomberg candidacy would paint him as a spoiler (for Obama if he ran this year) rather than an actual alternative candidate. Keep in mind, if no candidate reaches the required 270 minimum electoral votes, the election is ultimately decided by the U.S. House of Representatives.

Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
I don't think the national electorate would take kindly to how he gave himself a third term in office

IMHO, that's an automatic deal-breaker.

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 41):
A 3rd party could never win in an election because we only ever allow 2 parties to be involved in debates or have coverage.

Based on your profile, you're too young to remember that both Ross Rerot and his VP running mate (James Stockdale) participated in the fall '92 debates along with Bush 41 & Clinton (Perot), and Quayle & Gore (Stockdale).

Stockdale's infamous opening line at the VP debate, "Who am I and why am I here?" was both comical and pathetic at the same time and did the Perot/Stockdale ticket no favors.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 47):
For example, you NEVER hear of any pro-life Democrats (unlike pro-choice Republicans), nor do you ever hear of Democrats supporting nuclear power. Fact is, the Democratic Party is generally intolerant of any opposing views that aren't in-line with their party.

Or if you do, they get chastised for it big time.

Examples:

1. PA Governor Bob Casey, Sr., a staunch pro-life in his belief that criticized the DNC's pro-choice platform views and was barred from speaking at the 1992 DNC convention. In contrast, MA Gov. Bill Weld (who's a pro-choice Republican), was allowed to speak at the 1992 RNC convention.

2. Sen. Joe Liebermann of CT, being a supporter of the Iraq war, lost the 2006 Democratic primary battle against a more liberal opponent Ned Lamont. Granted, he did win his seat in the general election as an Independent and still caucusses w/the Democrats most of the time. If he still a Democrat when he backed McCain 4 years ago; he'd be facing another primary challenge this year.

With regards to nuclear power; during the '92 Democratic primary, Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, actually went after former-Senator Paul Tsongas (of Massachusetts) for his supportive stance on nuclear power.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 49, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1779 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 47):
For example, you NEVER hear of any pro-life Democrats (
Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 48):
Or if you do, they get chastised for it big time.

Examples:

1. PA Governor Bob Casey, Sr., a staunch pro-life in his belief that criticized the DNC's pro-choice platform views and was barred from speaking at the 1992 DNC convention. In contrast, MA Gov. Bill Weld (who's a pro-choice Republican), was allowed to speak at the 1992 RNC convention.


  
About 1/3rd of all Democrats in Congress vote anti-abortion consistently but the press plays that down.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 50, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1739 times:

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 44):
Tell a self proclaimed Libertarian that, or try telling them that. You either get a long drawn out rant or a deer in the head lights look. That's the problem I have with them, they just come across a tad bit obnoxious.

As a Libertarian, you don't know what in the world you are talking about. Superfly is correct. Just like there are some on both sides that are not 100% following party lines and beliefs, the Libertarians have people that lean both left and right.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 47):
For example, you NEVER hear of any pro-life Democrats

Sure you do, they just arn't called pro-life Dems...just flip floppers  
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 46):
I liked Paul but he was what many would consider extreme

Couldn't disagree more. Many on the Libertarian side would say that is wasn't extreme at all but more moderate.



Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13113 posts, RR: 12
Reply 51, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1735 times:

One problem that usually destroys any significant 3rd parties is that eventually one of the two major parties take on some of their key beliefs, especially Nationally and in some larger states. That makes it impossible for a 'third party' to gain enough support to grow to become a viable, truly major party and win only a few significant offices.

User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 52, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1719 times:

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 50):
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 46):
I liked Paul but he was what many would consider extreme

Couldn't disagree more. Many on the Libertarian side would say that is wasn't extreme at all but more moderate.

I meant many non-libertarians thought he was extreme. Just ask some of the posters here...



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 53, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1716 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 52):
I meant many non-libertarians thought he was extreme. Just ask some of the posters here...

Noted now...non-libertarians would put him in the category of extreme. I would say though if Republicans realized what true conservatism is, they would realize he is what they should be. The GOP has gotten so screwed up that they tout conservatism but yet create birds nest of a mess in ideas. A lot of "I agree BUT..." And to be fair, many Democrats are the same exact way, "We should have regulation and taxes raised BUT..." I believe Ron Paul is probably one of the most consistent people that has run for President in quite some time (on the main stage) that has actually opened people's eyes to problems and not just story time.



Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 54, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1713 times:

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 53):
has actually opened people's eyes to problems

That's what I wish a 3rd party would really do. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a 3rd party come and stay or even replace one of the 2 parties now, but I want people to be aware of how much alike Democrats and Republicans are... well, not even the people, the parties. They are 2 flavors of the big government party. Who would've thought both parties would be so alike? TSA, Patriot Act, NDAA (I'm sure the GOP would've passed it,) expanding government irresponsibly, etc. I see these 2 parties as more alike than more apart



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3375 posts, RR: 9
Reply 55, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1708 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 47):
I'd disagree with this statement, specifically with the Democrats. For example, you NEVER hear of any pro-life Democrats (unlike pro-choice Republicans), nor do you ever hear of Democrats supporting nuclear power. Fact is, the Democratic Party is generally intolerant of any opposing views that aren't in-line with their party.

I'm having problems following what you are saying here, as the democrats hardly walk in lock step. The party might have a platform but not all democrats agree on everything if that were the case then then Obama care would have passed with ease. The biggest issue of it being watered down so much wasn't the GOP it was moderate or Blue Dog democrats.

The GOP usually is the party that votes in line. Until the tea party really became effective in unseating long time GOP senators and congressman (creating a divide)



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 56, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1675 times:

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 50):
As a Libertarian, you don't know what in the world you are talking about. Superfly is correct. Just like there are some on both sides that are not 100% following party lines and beliefs, the Libertarians have people that lean both left and right.


First, thank you for proving what I said earlier about Libertarians. Second, I assure you while you may call yourself a libertarian you are not. And that's the thing, most people when pressed on the issue are not Libertarians. True Libertairans are few and far between.


User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3178 posts, RR: 4
Reply 57, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1610 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 6):
You should love former President George W Bush.
Green Party candidate Ralph Nader split the anti-Bush vote and siphoned off votes from Al Gore in New Hampshire and Florida thus allowing Dubya to win.
So you see, the third parties are more powerful than you think.

More effective was Ross Perot in 1992 in taking away a lot of Republican votes from Bush Sr.

Ron Paul should run as a Libertarian, he has quite a following and his views are more Libertarian than Republican. I think he could get as high as 30% of the overall vote. The only reason he didn't do better in the primaries was because most states had closed primaries that didn't allow non Republicans to vote in the primaries. Most of Ron Paul's voting base comes from other parties.


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39881 posts, RR: 74
Reply 58, posted (2 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1512 times:

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 57):
More effective was Ross Perot in 1992 in taking away a lot of Republican votes from Bush Sr.



Perot siphoned off votes from Clinton too.
Although Perot was fiscally conservative, he was more liberal than Clinton on social issues (at least more liberal than Clinton's record as governor of Arkansas).
People forget that Clinton was not a liberal when he was governor of Arkansas. Liberals can't win statewide office in the conservative southern state of Arkansas. Clinton supported and carried out the death penalty - including 1 mentally ill inmate. That is illegal today.
Ross Perot overall was a moderate with appeal to both sides. He could have just as easily ran as a Republican or Democrat. Ralph Nader on the other-hand was a far left-wing extremist and had zero appeal to conservatives, or even moderates that would have voted for Papa Bush.
Therefore you should be a huge fan of George W. Bush. He was the bi-product of a true 3rd party candidate.
I don't see what the big deal is of a 3rd. party if they're going to do the same crap the two major parties are doing.



Bring back the Concorde
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Can Tiger Woods Win The Masters? posted Thu Apr 8 2010 05:19:35 by fxramper
How Can I Record ATClive Conversations? posted Sun Mar 28 2010 13:24:00 by mozart
How Can Hyrodgen Peroxide Expire? posted Wed Sep 30 2009 08:47:20 by Cmk10
How Can I Get Rid Of An Unwanted House Guest? posted Wed Jul 8 2009 15:21:40 by Springbok747
How Can People Do This?!?! posted Wed May 6 2009 00:46:55 by FRAspotter
How Can We Change Politics? posted Thu Mar 26 2009 14:53:40 by Kaitak
How Can US Tourists Make The Best Impression? posted Mon Nov 3 2008 11:44:43 by LHMARK
How Can I Find Out If A Graphic Is Copyrighted? posted Tue Feb 26 2008 20:30:02 by Nirmalmakadia
How Can People Be Vile Like This? posted Sun Nov 25 2007 18:36:59 by Tsaord
How Can Some Hunters Be So Stupid? posted Mon Nov 19 2007 19:24:26 by Continental