Better experiment within a primary, and then work to shift a platform. America has learned the 3rd party lesson twice now. Once on the right and once on the left.
Americans haven't learned shit. The problem isn't the party system, or the politicians. The problem is the voters. And there are at least 5 posts in this thread on this small board that show the problem.
That’s why I said if a viable option emerges in message and polling, I’d look. I definitely acknowledge you point and it was on my mind when I made the post. But voting for someone that never polled above 3%, even early before people eat realistic, isn’t going to change anything, IMO.
It’s true. If a third party candidate actually captured my full attention, I might be able to do it. Particularly if I’m meh on the other two being elected or not being elected. But in ‘16, I definitely wasn’t OK with the alternative. That’s why I voted against him in the R primary that year.
It will if enough voters do it. But so long as they don't, it won't. Again, the problem is the voters, there. What you are saying when you vote one way because the alternative is the other way is that you are willing to take less than ideal so long as it isn't very much less than ideal. But here's reality, if you vote for less than ideal every time.. guess what you get? Less than ideal. Every. Friggen. Time.
True. It has to start somewhere. Can't have the whole country just saying it's a throw away vote. I think it could slowly build. If one third party candidate managed to just get 15% of the vote maybe he'd generate enough interest so that the next election people actually investigate the other options and someone gets a little more that time and so on and so forth. Hopefully a couple of decades later you've got a guy that has a real shot. Or we could just vote for giant douche and turd sandwich.
A viable third party has a shot if a popular moderate from each side of the aisle came together to form it. But it's going to have to take a gamble by established people off the bat to give it legitimacy. I don't know if one can be formed by an outsider or non-established person. Are we any closer than we were in 92? I dunno. Maybe, maybe not.
The only times I didn't vote third party was obama. This last time, those voting like me in states that were battlegrounds swung the election. If you want third parties, they start in the legislature, not in the executive
Gary is far from a moderate. If anything they went right and left fringe.He and his running mate were both Libertarians. I'm talking McCain/Biden, or something of the sort.
The executive has very little actual power, but they do have a national brand. And now everyone in party tries to move closer to the brand, and you get bad legislative politicians.
IMO the best bet would be to do what McCain should have done; McCain /Lieberman, Biden/Romney. If that does not stop the tribalism then we are screwed.
I get it. It is suboptimal. But given the starkness of outcomes I think I take suboptimal over really not good. And as you say that is the problem.
Nominations to the courts was my bigger concern in this cycle given the president would have both houses.
I haven't voted R or D in a race for any national office since I voted for Bush II. I only did that the first time. I vote independent or third-party in most races or just don't vote if I like neither candidate for an office. Unfortunately, third-party options where I've lived have been scarce. Richard Shelby had a libertarian opponent back in the early 00s who once managed to get 10% of the vote, but no Democrat ran against him.
