Perceived Need for Third Party Reaches New High

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

60% polled feel we need a third party. Only 26% think the Republicans and Democrats are doing an adequate job.

But in the next election, 95% of these people will still vote for them.

PRINCETON, NJ -- Amid the government shutdown, 60% of Americans say the Democratic and Republicans parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. That is the highest Gallup has measured in the 10-year history of this question. A new low of 26% believe the two major parties adequately represent Americans.

In U.S., Perceived Need for Third Party Reaches New High

 

[Claudette]

We do need a third party. Unfortunately I doubt it will come to pass.

 

[amrchaos]

DTMB--how many people refuse to vote?

That is where the majority of your "We need a 3rd party" voters are.

 

[Claudette]

I disagree. I'm an Indi and I'd love to have a third party. I'm sure other Indi's would as well.

 

[Alfalfa]

And in 2008 it was 58% and in 2010 it was also 58%.

So what?

 

[Politico]

Not gonna happen. But jump on it I say.

 

[kiwiman127]

Yeah, it'd be nice to have a party that represents the center. Both major parties have already moved away from the center and just keep om moving farther and farther away from the center. This makes no sense at all. Most Americans are near the center. In election 2012 exit polls, the largest voting bloc voters classified themselves to fall into the moderate classification, yet this group has no representation.
As the Dems and the GOP have written bi-partisan legislation to protect their monopoly, they probably will never seriously be challenged. I do think the Tea Party did have a serious shot at becoming a full fledged third party, but of late they have been chasing away their large financial backers. So in order for them to succeed as a viable third party they will have to become a serious grassroots organization and expand their base greatly. That may be a huge up hill battle. Should they succeed, the center will still remain with little to no representation.

 

[HenryBHough]

Actually, a SECOND party would do just nicely now that the former GOP has become "Democrat-Lite".

 

[Politico]

Yeah let's support yet another direction so we can all be wrong over there.

 

[g5000]

60% polled feel we need a third party. Only 26% think the Republicans and Democrats are doing an adequate job.

But in the next election, 95% of these people will still vote for them.

Mmm, I think only about 50 percent will still vote for them. The rest will stay home, waiting on that viable third party to arise.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

60% polled feel we need a third party. Only 26% think the Republicans and Democrats are doing an adequate job.

But in the next election, 95% of these people will still vote for them.

Mmm, I think only about 50 percent will still vote for them. The rest will stay home, waiting on that viable third party to arise.

Interestingly, in the Virginia gubernatorial race, a couple of polls have come out with Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis pulling in right around 10% of the vote, some a little higher and some a little lower. That obviously won't be enough for him to win, but it would seems to suggest some disgust present for the duopoly. Of course, another reason why third parties have a problem competing is because the media is complicit with the Republicans and Democrats in preserving their hold on politics.

Last debate in Va. governor?s race won?t include Libertarian Robert Sarvis - The Washington Post

 

[hazlnut]

Come on Tea Partiers, MAN UP.

Sarah Palin will happily be the first head of your new official national 3rd party.

Go for it.

The GOP doesn't respect you. They're just using you.

 

[regent]

There are two types of third parties in America, one is the great-an party and the other the great idea party. If a great idea party seems to be gaining some traction with their idea one of the present parties will pick off the idea. As for the great man, we no longer seem to nominate great men for the presidency but rather what the party believes to be a great candidate. Add to that our political system discourages third parties with the electoral system.
The importance of third parties may be in their taking votes away from one of the two major parties.
But parties have changed, the conservatives began with the Federalist party, changed to the Whig and then to the Republican party. The Democratic party claims they are still the party of Jefferson.

 

[OKTexas]

The dems should purge themselves of all the leftist, socialist that want the federal government to be all things to all people and address every woe in the freaking world. Yep that should do it.

 

[Seawytch]

We have a third part...they're called Tea Baggers and they're fucking shit up.

 

[Dragonlady]

A better idea would be to eliminate PAC's and change the way elections are funded. As it stands, the politicians are beholding to those who finance their campaigns, which invariably means special interests and corporations. If the parties were funded by tax dollars, their obligation would be to the taxpayers and those in Congress and the Senate wouldn't have to spend half of their time fundraising. Corporations and the wealthy wouldn't hold the same level of influence over politicians.

Canada had a system whereby parties received $2.00 per voter and private donations were limited to $1000 per campaign, but once the Conservatives achieved a majority in the House of Commons, they cancelled the voter payment and went to a US style of fundraising, thinking they could bury the other parties financially. The taxpayer funded elections were, IMO, more democratic. There hasn't been an selection since the law was changed so there's no evidence yet as to how the system will be affected.

 

[regent]

The dems should purge themselves of all the leftist, socialist that want the federal government to be all things to all people and address every woe in the freaking world. Yep that should do it.

Yep, the Democratic party believes the government belongs to the people's and can be used for the betterment of the people.
The Republican party believes government should leave citizens on their own, but aid business.

 

[amrchaos]

60% polled feel we need a third party. Only 26% think the Republicans and Democrats are doing an adequate job.

But in the next election, 95% of these people will still vote for them.

Mmm, I think only about 50 percent will still vote for them. The rest will stay home, waiting on that viable third party to arise.

Interestingly, in the Virginia gubernatorial race, a couple of polls have come out with Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis pulling in right around 10% of the vote, some a little higher and some a little lower. That obviously won't be enough for him to win, but it would seems to suggest some disgust present for the duopoly. Of course, another reason why third parties have a problem competing is because the media is complicit with the Republicans and Democrats in preserving their hold on politics.

Last debate in Va. governor?s race won?t include Libertarian Robert Sarvis - The Washington Post

Actually, the media is complicit withwho pays their bills.

If the libertarians start slamming some serious cash, you would swear they finally got their act together. No, no, no--they just got a big money donor, which they are appalled to do.

 

[Dot Com]

it would be nice to be able to vote for a party that ISN'T beholden to monied-interests. I'd vote for candidates who represented the people as opposed to representing companies.

 

[mamooth]

As Dragonlady touched on, in our system, only those who belong to (or caucus with) big parties can bring home the bacon. So only they can get serious campaign funding, so only they can win.

Thus, for 3rd parties to be viable, campaign finance reform is required first.

And no, it won't destroy democracy. Most modern democracies use some degree of public funding, and they haven't devolved into totalitarianism.