A third party What if

[Virginian]

What if one of the current candidates did not win the nomination from the democratic party and decided to run as an independent?

Would you stick with the party or would you stick with your candidate knowing he couldn't win?

Tin Foil hat time:
What if one of the candidates was a republican plant who doesn't expect to win the nomination. His purpose for running is just to get a Democrat following and then split that following away from electing an electable Democrat candidate?

I am so ABB, I will vote for the Democrat candidate regardless who he is. A third party candidate cannot win. I will not dilute the Democrat vote by trying to make a "statement." That was part of why we have Dubya in the White House. Please, don't let it happen again!

[overground1]

1. so you mean you think Clark will bolt?

hmmmmmmmm....

[Virginian]

7. It is a total "What if..." You DO remember Perot, right?

Do you believe that part of the reason we enjoyed the prosperity of the Clinton years was due, in part, to Perot pulling votes away from Poppy Bush? -- I do. I know a yellow dog Republican who voted for Perot.

If you want it to apply to Clark, it does.
If you want it to apply to any other candidate, it does.
Any of them could run as a third party candidate. Some are less likely than others.

Some of the supporters of the different candidates are so rabid, I wonder if they could support the nominee if it was not their man.

My favorite candidate is the one who gets the nomination, period.
I happen to like them all, including Clark. We have a fine bunch of men running. Any one of them would be a much better President than the incumbent. Only one of them will be chosen to run in the November election.

If any one of these men runs as a third party candidate, he is bypassing the process and choosing himself for selfish reasons. I will never vote for him for anything. I will spit on his name.

[Gore1FL]

2. I will never vote for a third party for one simple reason

Anyone running a third party campaign has a fundamental lack of underastanding of statistics and the U.S. electoral process.

Not only would they not get elected, not only would they split the vote, but in making such an attempt they clearly show a questionable abilility to understand the mechanisms in place, or make poor choices.

[tkmorris]

3. Everything you say is true

And it only goes to show why the mechanism is broken. The two-party political system as it exists in the United States needs to go. And soon. But it won't, which is why we won't pull away from Fascism anytime soon. Both parties are beholden to money. When races are restricted to winner-take-all brawls that take a couple hundred mill to win grass roots campaigns are impossible.

We the people, in order to maintain the state of the union, do ordain and agree to sell our souls to the devil. Which devil depends entirely upon which letter follows the name of our chosen canddate but we shall be owned by a devil regardless.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. I think that the idea of a viable third party

is growing in this country. Even though the Independents and Republicans at the Save Democracy meeting I attended all said they would vote Democratic this year, they also said that both parties are corrupted by special interests and want to start a third party-but not until Bush is out of office. They understand that only a Democrat can unseat him, and that's what they are after.

[Virginian]

8. I also like the idea of a VIABLE third party.

Having only two parties is so polarizing and not good for the unity of the nation.

Some, who like black and white issues might not like the shades of gray a third party might cause, but I would.

In an ideal third party world, no one party would have a majority and be able to force a bad bill through congress. There would have to be compromise. Compromise would cause the issues to be more reasonable and better thought out. Everything would have to be more moderate. The system of checks and balances would work.

[mmonk]

5. If Clark is a repub

then why is he more against the president's foreign policy than Lieberman, Kerry, and Edwards? A third party becomes a viable option for the future if these so called democrats don't start opposing the president more by voting against his policies.

[Rowdyboy]

6. Anyone declaring as an independent this late would face nearly

insurmountable odds in trying to get on enough state ballots to make a difference. I really don't see the threat as being credible-but its always fun to speculate.

[teevee99]

9. your theory is h-o-r-s-e-s-h-i-t

but i won't vote for any 3rd party candidates, this election is too important.

Instant Runoff Voting!
Works for me!

[Virginian]

10. It is only a "What if..." An idea when I thought of Perot.

The fact that you are so confident that the possibility is so improbable is reassuring. Thanks for hanging with me on the Anyone But Bush.

Instant runoff, where the voter gets to select a second choice is good. How does your version of it work? What triggers using the runoff votes? Can a person have the same candidate for first and second choices?