• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Third parties are polling far stronger than usual

poweRob said:
I'm just giddy that the Green Party has finally eclipsed a whole single percent... much less 7%. If we can just get the libertarian and green parties past 10% in the general election, that is usually the threshold for ballot access in many states that they won't have to worry about in the next couple of elections.
Click to expand...

The Libertarians are already on all 50 state ballots.
 
poweRob said:
It's a process. Not a one step victory. Think long-term for the gains made. This will be huge just for ballot access alone in future elections.
Click to expand...

I think in the article about the libertarian town hall, Johnson said somthing about him being perfectly fine with the libertarian party being a spoiler in the general election.

That really bugs me because I would expect a third party to actually try to amount to somthing more than being a spoiler.
 
poweRob said:
It's a process. Not a one step victory. Think long-term for the gains made. This will be huge just for ballot access alone in future elections.
Click to expand...

It's only "in process" now because the two parties put up the absolute worst candidates they could.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I think in the article about the libertarian town hall, Johnson said somthing about him being perfectly fine with the libertarian party being a spoiler in the general election.

That really bugs me because I would expect a third party to actually try to amount to somthing more than being a spoiler.
Click to expand...

I watched it and Bill Weld came across as much more presidential than Johnson did.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I think in the article about the libertarian town hall, Johnson said somthing about him being perfectly fine with the libertarian party being a spoiler in the general election.

That really bugs me because I would expect a third party to actually try to amount to somthing more than being a spoiler.
Click to expand...

It's about embracing the stupid name rather than wasting campaign resources trying to fight it. You are too hung up on words.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Third parties can not become successful unless they have a strong presence on the state and national level.
Click to expand...

It's the other way around, they need to have good local showings to convince bigger donors that their gamble on that horse is worth it.

when the green party doesn't even hold a state legislative seat in an area like Seattle or San Francisco, where their message is much well recieved, why would anyone vote them for president?

The highest office ever held by a third party candidate in recent history was Governor of Minnesota, by Jesse Ventura, he won a highly contested election, and accomplished almost nothing as governor because he wasn't able to get his policy ideas seriously considered by either party in the MN legislature.
 
Ikari said:
It's only "in process" now because the two parties put up the absolute worst candidates they could.
Click to expand...

Kind of predictable though. It's been a "lesser of two evils" all the time and it just kept getting worse and worse and worse until this happened.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
It's the other way around, they need to have good local showings to convince bigger donors that their gamble on that horse is worth it.

when the green party doesn't even hold a state legislative seat in an area like Seattle or San Francisco, where their message is much well recieved, why would anyone vote them for president?

The highest office ever held by a third party candidate in recent history was Governor of Minnesota, by Jesse Ventura, he won a highly contested election, and accomplished almost nothing as governor because he wasn't able to get his policy ideas seriously considered by either party in the MN legislature.
Click to expand...

I apologize but that was what I was trying to say.

If third parties don't have any presence on the local level, it is hard to see them winning nationally.
 
poweRob said:
Kind of predictable though. It's been a "lesser of two evils" all the time and it just kept getting worse and worse and worse until this happened.
Click to expand...

100% agree. I've been saying this for some time. But so long as we remain caught in this partisan death spiral, we aren't going to correct it.

Id love it if Green and Libertarian were allowed to compete, at the very least. But they won't be. Single party rule does not like competition.
 
poweRob said:
Latest CNN polls (1) have Clinton at 42%, Trump at 38%, Johnson at 9% (a noticeable decrease from 12%) and Stein at 7%​

https://amthirdpartyreport.com/2016/06/22/stein-added-to-national-polls-johnson-slips/

Third party's polling at this level ever much less this early is prerty astounding.
Click to expand...

In 2012 third parties, all of them received less than 2% of the entire vote. The same for 2008, 2004. The last time third parties received more than 2% was in 2000 when Ralph Nader headed the Green Party and Pat Buchanan the Reform Party plus all other third parties received 3.7% of the vote. Both advertised and the MSM covered them during the campaign leading up to the general election.

The fact depending on the poll Johnson and Stein, two unheard of candidates, totally unknown to 99% of the electorate, no money, no media coverage, no name recognition, can draw between 10-20% depending on the poll is unprecedented. Most people knew who Nader and Buchanan were, their names were recognized from being on TV most of their lives. That isn’t the case with Johnson and Stein.

What Johnson and Stein have going for them is their last name isn’t Trump or Clinton. Two very unpopular, unwanted by the general electorate as a whole outside of their supporters. Two candidates, one viewed in a negative light by about 60% of the total electorate and the other by 60% plus. A choice between two candidates the majority of Americans don’t want to make.

Rasmussen had a poll in which 24% stated they would either stay home or vote third party if their choice became down to Trump and Clinton. Quinnipiac had one in which they asked which candidates you would definitely not vote for. Leading the pack was Trump with 54% and Clinton next at 43%. The dislike of both major party candidates is very high. According to RCP averages in a 4 candidate race, Clinton has only 41% to Trump’s 35% advantage. Pretty much in line with the will not vote for numbers. If one is going to vote and they have decided to never vote for either Trump or Clinton, third parties is about the only way they can go. Especially if they want a voice in the down ticket candidates. The 10-20% for third party candidates, totally unknown candidates just goes to show you the total dislike for Trump and Clinton. A refusal of a good chunk of Americans who refuse to choose between two detested candidates.
 
Ikari said:
100% agree. I've been saying this for some time. But so long as we remain caught in this partisan death spiral, we aren't going to correct it.

Id love it if Green and Libertarian were allowed to compete, at the very least. But they won't be. Single party rule does not like competition.
Click to expand...

If I am allowed to be cynical, I am going to say this:

The Democratic and republican parties are able to compete nationally because they can appeal to voters of many different ideologies.

The libertarian party seems to be a smaller tent.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
If I am allowed to be cynical, I am going to say this:

The Democratic and republican parties are able to compete nationally because they can appeal to voters of many different ideologies.

The libertarian party seems to be a smaller tent.
Click to expand...

They compete nationally because of the golden rule. He owns the gold, rules. They structure the elections. They decide who can and can't compete with them, which not-so-remarkably is NO ONE.
 
poweRob said:
They compete nationally because of the golden rule. He owns the gold, rules. They structure the elections. They decide who can and can't compete with them, which not-so-remarkably is NO ONE.
Click to expand...

The only third party I consider being truly influential in any election was the bull moose party in the presidential race of 1912, and that is because teddy Roosevelt divided and fractured the Republican Party by taking progressive republicans with him.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
If I am allowed to be cynical, I am going to say this:

The Democratic and republican parties are able to compete nationally because they can appeal to voters of many different ideologies.

The libertarian party seems to be a smaller tent.
Click to expand...

The Dems and Repubs compete nationally because their parties came to be long ago, when competition was allowed and in the modern era solidified their control through laws and regulations that support them, and only them.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
The only third party I consider being truly influential in any election was the bull moose party in the presidential race of 1912, and that is because teddy Roosevelt divided and fractured the Republican Party by taking progressive republicans with him.
Click to expand...

So the damn near previously non-existent Republican Party formed in 1854 wasn't third party to you? Or the Whig Party that formed in 1834?

How can you, out of one side of your mouth say that third parties aren't influential, then out of the other side of your mouth say that they spoil elections? You are in deep conflict with yourself.

Then of course there's how the third parties force the top two parties to co-opt their policies to win.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Socialists popularized the women’s suffrage movement. They advocated for child labor laws in 1904 and, along with the Populist Party, introduced the notion of a 40-hour work week, which led to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

Third Parties in the U.S. Political Process | PBS NewsHour​

Yeah, that wasn't the two parties championing that stuff.
 
poweRob said:
So the damn near previously non-existent Republican Party formed in 1854 wasn't third party to you? Or the Whig Party that formed in 1834?

How can you, out of one side of your mouth say that third parties aren't influential, then out of the other side of your mouth say that they spoil elections? You are in deep conflict with yourself.

Then of course there's how the third parties force the top two parties to co-opt their policies to win.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Socialists popularized the women’s suffrage movement. They advocated for child labor laws in 1904 and, along with the Populist Party, introduced the notion of a 40-hour work week, which led to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

Third Parties in the U.S. Political Process | PBS NewsHour​

Yeah, that wasn't the two parties championing that stuff.
Click to expand...

The Whigs were not a third party, they were part of the two party system, until the party dissolved and merged with the Republican Party.

I am not saying that third parties are not influential, they are important in elections.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Well obviously
Click to expand...

Yeah, but none of them really try. It isn't popular governors or major city mayors that are getting put up as presidential candidates for most third parties, it isn't people who proved that their political ideologies actually do work in the real world, most third parties just put up people with little or no actual political experience and who have never proven they can run anything substantial. They just want the presidency, they don't want to actually earn their way there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom