The Third Rail -- 3rd Party Thread

[flacaltenn]

Unfortunately the Green Party and others will likely NOT be on enough state ballots to represent the 270 electoral needed to win. But the LP will be. And I've worked closely with the Green Party on mutual ballot/debate access issues.

If the Johnson ticket polls 15% and the DNC/RNC crybabies STILL throw a fit --- it will be the BEST media coverage we could ever hope for.

If anyone wants a CURRENT view of Johnson/Weld -- CNN just did a 1 hour Libertarian Town Hall and ran the 2 guys through the wringer on everything from ISIS to prison reform and drug war policy. Easy to find the PodCasts or the summary on the web..

Unfortunately the Green Party and others will likely NOT be on enough state ballots to represent the 270 electoral needed to win.

False, the Green Party currently has access to 20 state ballots representing a total of 296 electoral votes.

Sorry about that.. I didn't add up the numbers. Time is VERY short and I doubt they will make 40 states..

They have roughly another month to gain more ballot access, but even if they don't maybe it isn't all that critical. The key is to garner 5% of the vote, winning obviously isn't realistic.

They need to aim higher than 5%. Because part of LP strategy is to do well enough THIS cycle to avoid petitioning the NEXT time. And with 10 to 15% --- it's saves 100s of THOUSANDS of volunteer hours, $$$, and court fees. So WE (yes kimosabe) should be encouraging voters to help 3rd party politics by casting votes just BECAUSE it makes it easier and less costly for the next cycle.

 

[Asclepias]

I dont think the point is to obtain a hollow victory. Your actions have consequences outside of you making an idealistic point. You can resist binary thinking without cutting off your nose to spite your face. At some point there is a reality that needs to be addressed. The person that gets elected will appoint judges that interpret laws. They will also represent your country internationally. i always tell people to register as an independent if you want to make a point.

And what makes you think that only PEDIGREED people with an R or D after their names are CAPABLE of making logical and reasoned choices? In FACT -- if you ARE a R or a D -- we pretty much know your choices will be based on maintaining POWER and CONTROL and NOT in general best interests of the country.,.

What in my post made you assume I thought that? Youre reading comprehension seems to have fallen several levels since we last tangled.

What was all that bluster aimed at then? If not that any choice OTHER than the 2 poor choices is "cutting off your nose to spite your face"? You think it's a WASTED vote? 49% of Americans ALWAYS cast wasted votes. You think those Sup CT. appointments could not be made by a 2 term governor of a MODERATE state?

What bluster are you talking about? Yeah if you vote for someone that has no chance of winning then your vote is wasted. No one but you knows or cares that you voted for someone that wasnt even a blip on the radar. Where did you get this 49% figure? Did you just make that up? Governors dont appoint federal SP judges. What made you think they could?

FAQs: Federal Judges

"Supreme Court justices, court of appeals judges, and district court judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the United States Senate, as stated in the Constitution. "

Just not connecting here at all. I'll check my translations.. The 49% who WASTE their votes are the 49% who get "creamed" by the 51% in a stogey 2 way race. But of course you will say ---- .... "but they did that on PRINCIPLE".. Well of course. PRINCIPLED people are used to losing in politics. My LP has been 30 years AHEAD of policy and politics in America. We nominated an openly gay man as our FIRST candidate for Prez in the 70s. We were in favor of ending the War on drugs and replacing it with prison reform, medical supervision, and RATIONAL sentencing decades ago. We were called faggot lovers and dopers back then. And when we spoke out against war in Iraq and clearly said that Saddam should be let out of containment and the daily bombing of Iraq should end -- we were called ____ well you get the picture..

In those issues and in asset forfeiture, education choice, and ending corporate/govt collusion -- we've never changed. But America has consistently moved closer to our principles.

As far as the SupCt nominations you felt were too sensitive to jeopardize with trusting to a person without an R or D after their name. I was only saying that 2 moderate governors would likely choose a candidate that modeled America's values over the extreme PARTISAN values that you would get with a partisan party power whore. The kinda choice --- you prefer to follow over the cliff..

This election will help us. Since we're not afraid of losing. We can't. We are what we are. And even getting 10 or 15% in most states will save us $MILLs of dollars on ballot access for the next round. And MAYBE open up the American political process so that it is NOT the "duopoly" that the OP is talking about. We are looking forward, not to gain POWER --- but to present a clear clear choice to the electorate. We won't ever pander for votes.

No but I will say that 49% actually had a chance to see their person hit the WH whereas in a critical election year your 1% voting on principle is wasting their vote and maybe for the worst. Youre trying to fix the 2 party system by pretending your vote for a 3rd party will someday pay off. It wont. As a matter of fact its going to get worse. Of course it will fluctuate up and down but it steadily will become a thing of the past. As they figure out more and more how to manipulate your voting more and more will leave the 3rd party and go to one side or another of the 2 way party. What will happen is one of the 2 parties will become your party ideologically but make no mistake they will gain more and more control. Its a rig up and the only way you can change it is for humans to suddenly stop reacting to politics in the way that decades of science has already proven they cant stop reacting to it.

I dont really care who appoints the SP justices as long as they are liberals. I dont really trust democrats and i for damn sure do not support republicans. Thats why I am an independent.

 

[flacaltenn]

And what makes you think that only PEDIGREED people with an R or D after their names are CAPABLE of making logical and reasoned choices? In FACT -- if you ARE a R or a D -- we pretty much know your choices will be based on maintaining POWER and CONTROL and NOT in general best interests of the country.,.

What in my post made you assume I thought that? Youre reading comprehension seems to have fallen several levels since we last tangled.

What was all that bluster aimed at then? If not that any choice OTHER than the 2 poor choices is "cutting off your nose to spite your face"? You think it's a WASTED vote? 49% of Americans ALWAYS cast wasted votes. You think those Sup CT. appointments could not be made by a 2 term governor of a MODERATE state?

What bluster are you talking about? Yeah if you vote for someone that has no chance of winning then your vote is wasted. No one but you knows or cares that you voted for someone that wasnt even a blip on the radar. Where did you get this 49% figure? Did you just make that up? Governors dont appoint federal SP judges. What made you think they could?

FAQs: Federal Judges

"Supreme Court justices, court of appeals judges, and district court judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the United States Senate, as stated in the Constitution. "

Just not connecting here at all. I'll check my translations.. The 49% who WASTE their votes are the 49% who get "creamed" by the 51% in a stogey 2 way race. But of course you will say ---- .... "but they did that on PRINCIPLE".. Well of course. PRINCIPLED people are used to losing in politics. My LP has been 30 years AHEAD of policy and politics in America. We nominated an openly gay man as our FIRST candidate for Prez in the 70s. We were in favor of ending the War on drugs and replacing it with prison reform, medical supervision, and RATIONAL sentencing decades ago. We were called faggot lovers and dopers back then. And when we spoke out against war in Iraq and clearly said that Saddam should be let out of containment and the daily bombing of Iraq should end -- we were called ____ well you get the picture..

In those issues and in asset forfeiture, education choice, and ending corporate/govt collusion -- we've never changed. But America has consistently moved closer to our principles.

As far as the SupCt nominations you felt were too sensitive to jeopardize with trusting to a person without an R or D after their name. I was only saying that 2 moderate governors would likely choose a candidate that modeled America's values over the extreme PARTISAN values that you would get with a partisan party power whore. The kinda choice --- you prefer to follow over the cliff..

This election will help us. Since we're not afraid of losing. We can't. We are what we are. And even getting 10 or 15% in most states will save us $MILLs of dollars on ballot access for the next round. And MAYBE open up the American political process so that it is NOT the "duopoly" that the OP is talking about. We are looking forward, not to gain POWER --- but to present a clear clear choice to the electorate. We won't ever pander for votes.

No but I will say that 49% actually had a chance to see their person hit the WH whereas in a critical election year your 1% voting on principle is wasting their vote and maybe for the worst. Youre trying to fix the 2 party system by pretending your vote for a 3rd party will someday pay off. It wont. As a matter of fact its going to get worse. Of course it will fluctuate up and down but it steadily will become a thing of the past. As they figure out more and more how to manipulate your voting more and more will leave the 3rd party and go to one side or another of the 2 way party. What will happen is one of the 2 parties will become your party ideologically but make no mistake they will gain more and more control. Its a rig up and the only way you can change it is for humans to suddenly stop reacting to politics in the way that decades of science has already proven they cant stop reacting to it.

I dont really care who appoints the SP justices as long as they are liberals. I dont really trust democrats and i for damn sure do not support republicans. Thats why I am an independent.

Voting for Brand names in politics is pretty stupid. As soon as that stupidity ends and people vote according to issues and principles --- things will change. And we'll still be around.

In the meantime --- we'll be happy to get 8 or 10% in most states (which we will) and just be there to remind people what voting for issues and principles is all about...

HOWEVER --- I believe that 20 to 35 electoral votes is NOT unexpected. New Mexico, Colo, New Hampshire, Alaska, maybe Nevada and some of the e-votes in the 2 states where the winner does not get all. .

Taking 28 e-votes means that if the 2 meglomaniacs are CLOSE --- one of them needs to win by 29.. And so on.. If we got 35 -- the "winner" would have to win by 36. First chance in a century for an election result to go to the House. Not an accomplishment to be proud of --- but at LEAST --- the 2 parties had to work a little harder for their power fix....

 

[Asclepias]

What in my post made you assume I thought that? Youre reading comprehension seems to have fallen several levels since we last tangled.

What was all that bluster aimed at then? If not that any choice OTHER than the 2 poor choices is "cutting off your nose to spite your face"? You think it's a WASTED vote? 49% of Americans ALWAYS cast wasted votes. You think those Sup CT. appointments could not be made by a 2 term governor of a MODERATE state?

What bluster are you talking about? Yeah if you vote for someone that has no chance of winning then your vote is wasted. No one but you knows or cares that you voted for someone that wasnt even a blip on the radar. Where did you get this 49% figure? Did you just make that up? Governors dont appoint federal SP judges. What made you think they could?

FAQs: Federal Judges

"Supreme Court justices, court of appeals judges, and district court judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the United States Senate, as stated in the Constitution. "

Just not connecting here at all. I'll check my translations.. The 49% who WASTE their votes are the 49% who get "creamed" by the 51% in a stogey 2 way race. But of course you will say ---- .... "but they did that on PRINCIPLE".. Well of course. PRINCIPLED people are used to losing in politics. My LP has been 30 years AHEAD of policy and politics in America. We nominated an openly gay man as our FIRST candidate for Prez in the 70s. We were in favor of ending the War on drugs and replacing it with prison reform, medical supervision, and RATIONAL sentencing decades ago. We were called faggot lovers and dopers back then. And when we spoke out against war in Iraq and clearly said that Saddam should be let out of containment and the daily bombing of Iraq should end -- we were called ____ well you get the picture..

In those issues and in asset forfeiture, education choice, and ending corporate/govt collusion -- we've never changed. But America has consistently moved closer to our principles.

As far as the SupCt nominations you felt were too sensitive to jeopardize with trusting to a person without an R or D after their name. I was only saying that 2 moderate governors would likely choose a candidate that modeled America's values over the extreme PARTISAN values that you would get with a partisan party power whore. The kinda choice --- you prefer to follow over the cliff..

This election will help us. Since we're not afraid of losing. We can't. We are what we are. And even getting 10 or 15% in most states will save us $MILLs of dollars on ballot access for the next round. And MAYBE open up the American political process so that it is NOT the "duopoly" that the OP is talking about. We are looking forward, not to gain POWER --- but to present a clear clear choice to the electorate. We won't ever pander for votes.

No but I will say that 49% actually had a chance to see their person hit the WH whereas in a critical election year your 1% voting on principle is wasting their vote and maybe for the worst. Youre trying to fix the 2 party system by pretending your vote for a 3rd party will someday pay off. It wont. As a matter of fact its going to get worse. Of course it will fluctuate up and down but it steadily will become a thing of the past. As they figure out more and more how to manipulate your voting more and more will leave the 3rd party and go to one side or another of the 2 way party. What will happen is one of the 2 parties will become your party ideologically but make no mistake they will gain more and more control. Its a rig up and the only way you can change it is for humans to suddenly stop reacting to politics in the way that decades of science has already proven they cant stop reacting to it.

I dont really care who appoints the SP justices as long as they are liberals. I dont really trust democrats and i for damn sure do not support republicans. Thats why I am an independent.

Voting for Brand names in politics is pretty stupid. As soon as that stupidity ends and people vote according to issues and principles --- things will change. And we'll still be around.

In the meantime --- we'll be happy to get 8 or 10% in most states (which we will) and just be there to remind people what voting for issues and principles is all about...

HOWEVER --- I believe that 20 to 35 electoral votes is NOT unexpected. New Mexico, Colo, New Hampshire, Alaska, maybe Nevada and some of the e-votes in the 2 states where the winner does not get all. .

Taking 28 e-votes means that if the 2 meglomaniacs are CLOSE --- one of them needs to win by 29.. And so on.. If we got 35 -- the "winner" would have to win by 36. First chance in a century for an election result to go to the House. Not an accomplishment to be proud of --- but at LEAST --- the 2 parties had to work a little harder for their power fix....

This is where your argument falls down. The "stupidity" will never end. Its human nature. Politics has always been about brand appeal. Youre selling the population on the fact that you can lead. No one is going to follow a person that doesn't have a brand. No one is going to follow a person that doesnt market themselves Those people regardless of party typically crash and burn. Politics is about generating passion and painting a picture. You cant do that being vanilla. It doesnt move the crowd. People that dont understand group dynamics always make this critical mistake. Its not what you say but how you make them feel when you say it.

Youre scenario will never happen. I can pretty much guarantee you that. Power does not concede anything without demand. It never has and it never will. There is literally going to have to be a revolution to fix the 2 party system.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The libertarian party platform places no trust in government or elected officials. . Instead, it entrusts corporations and unelected leaders with the steering wheel.

It demands that government stay out of contractual agreements between individuals or other entities.....which ignores the fact that contracts don't exist without government's ability to enforce them.

Fun stuff. But not practical.

This is the type of general ignorance that is gonna DISAPPEAR once the process is OPENED to 3rd parties.. Too many people spouting off crap like "... it entrusts corporations and unelected leaders with the steering wheel":.

Here's a bit of reality for you.. Libertarian politicians have ALWAYS been adamant about COMPLETELY de-rooting Corporate welfare and handouts. You will not find people or candidates more signed up to do that job. NOTHING that exists on the markets already should be subsidize for corporations. The government should NEVER be picking winners and losers in the marketplace. THAT'S where the corporate -- govt collusion starts. And WE -- unlike your pansy 2 parties would end all that tomorrow. We are COMPLETELY in agreement with Bernie on those plans..

Sorry. The platform is clear. No PA laws. No Social Security. No regulations on health insurance providers. No pollution regulations.

It's a fantasy land where the public good is magically aligned with the profit motive.....and corporations do the right thing for society out of self interest.

It isn't practical. Go ahead and get pissy about it.

No one EVER said that SS is off the table. Certainly not for those who are expecting it. But the American public needs to know that the SS shortfalls are a MAJOR component of the yearly deficit right now. We are IN the crisis that everyone knew was coming 30 years ago. And instead of bleeding $15 to $30Bill a year right now, we could have REDUCED that substantially while the fund was running surpluses --- by stopping Congress from STEALING from it.

Pollution reduction would IMPROVE -- if plant operators were allowed to make INCREMENTAL changes to their plants -- rather than being required to incorporate in EVERY damn change if they apply for PERMISSION to make changes. And the states are MORE than capable of litigating pollution cases. In fact -- their motivations are HIGHER than having the litigation centered at the Federal level. Storm run-off is a great example. Laws written for highly developed, highly URBAN states cost other states $BILLs per year to comply to "one size fits all" edicts from up high..

Blah.....blah...blah. It's all in the platform.

 

[flacaltenn]

The libertarian party platform places no trust in government or elected officials. . Instead, it entrusts corporations and unelected leaders with the steering wheel.

It demands that government stay out of contractual agreements between individuals or other entities.....which ignores the fact that contracts don't exist without government's ability to enforce them.

Fun stuff. But not practical.

This is the type of general ignorance that is gonna DISAPPEAR once the process is OPENED to 3rd parties.. Too many people spouting off crap like "... it entrusts corporations and unelected leaders with the steering wheel":.

Here's a bit of reality for you.. Libertarian politicians have ALWAYS been adamant about COMPLETELY de-rooting Corporate welfare and handouts. You will not find people or candidates more signed up to do that job. NOTHING that exists on the markets already should be subsidize for corporations. The government should NEVER be picking winners and losers in the marketplace. THAT'S where the corporate -- govt collusion starts. And WE -- unlike your pansy 2 parties would end all that tomorrow. We are COMPLETELY in agreement with Bernie on those plans..

Sorry. The platform is clear. No PA laws. No Social Security. No regulations on health insurance providers. No pollution regulations.

It's a fantasy land where the public good is magically aligned with the profit motive.....and corporations do the right thing for society out of self interest.

It isn't practical. Go ahead and get pissy about it.

No one EVER said that SS is off the table. Certainly not for those who are expecting it. But the American public needs to know that the SS shortfalls are a MAJOR component of the yearly deficit right now. We are IN the crisis that everyone knew was coming 30 years ago. And instead of bleeding $15 to $30Bill a year right now, we could have REDUCED that substantially while the fund was running surpluses --- by stopping Congress from STEALING from it.

Pollution reduction would IMPROVE -- if plant operators were allowed to make INCREMENTAL changes to their plants -- rather than being required to incorporate in EVERY damn change if they apply for PERMISSION to make changes. And the states are MORE than capable of litigating pollution cases. In fact -- their motivations are HIGHER than having the litigation centered at the Federal level. Storm run-off is a great example. Laws written for highly developed, highly URBAN states cost other states $BILLs per year to comply to "one size fits all" edicts from up high..

Blah.....blah...blah. It's all in the platform.

I'm happy with the public truths in the platforms. Especially the enviro plank. It merely states the obvious that "The Nature Conservancy" is a better steward of the land than the BLM or Dept Forestry. Ask any enviro-nut whom they trust MORE to WISELY manage critical habitat and resources. And the Nature Conservancy doesn't rely on threats and intimidation. They GAIN landowner trust and make it worthwhile for them to cooperate.

The conservation plan in Africa was failing badly before LOCALS were incorporated into the plans. They built a fabulous eco-trade in tourism, science, and resource management. Poaching declined, economies were boosted, etc. Same with fishery leasing. When you OWN the temporary right to an area -- you tend to IMPROVE it and not EXPLOIT it. Avoids "tragedy of the commons" in a lot of cases.

And as I said -- the states have largely DUPLICATED the protections and monitoring that the Feds do with brute force -- one size fits all -- EDICTS and unfunded mandates.

 

[Two Thumbs]

OK, since the site seems to be channeling attention into the Clinton/Trump Duopoly, a/k/a Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dumb, and since said Republicrat/Demoblican Duopoly is in dire need of some outside energy to challenge it, rather than just obsequiously follow along going "yes masters, may we have more of the same old thing", now therefore let us create this alternative channel for the candidates that are not named Clinton or Trump. Let this be the wellspring to make the case for, or simply to inform about, any candidates outside the System.

Some facts first:

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump have been nominated by a party. The respective parties must take that step at their conventions. In the Democrats' case Bernie Sanders is still running in hopes of usurping "pledged" Clinton delegates; in the case of the Republicans a similar "conscience" vote may nullify the primary results depending on how they address their own rules (they did something similar in 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt breezed through primary elections winning most of the states but was snubbed at the convention).

This thread will not be intended for those points; just pointing out the fact.

Fact Two: since the 1988 election, national televised debates have been run under the auspices of something called the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is an outright collusion by the two major party (singular intentional) to ensure that they can jointly negotiate what topics and what alternative candidates will be avoided, thus ensuring nobody who challenges their supreme Duopoly will get a voice in it. Hence the pressing need to bring those alternative voices out.

So bring forth your Gary Johnsons and your Jill Steins, your Darrell Castles and your Gloria LaRivas. Show us what they're about, and more importantly ---- what the issues and views are that the Duopoly doesn't want us to know about. As well, tell us who should be running as 3P if they didn't get the nomination of the Duopoly Party.

​

flacaltenn
Lucy Hamilton
boedicca

Gary is going to run and Bern should run as well, either as an (I) or SP.

Gary has no chance of doing more than 3% of the vote with the +/- 3%.

Trump actually is 3rd party; he's blending some con views with liber, but really he's a liberal.

The rest of the out parties have no chance, ever, unless we rid ourselves of the political process that forces the 2 party system on us.

every pary should have an equal shot and equal say in the debates.

If that means there are 50 people running for Pres, then so be it.

Truth of the matter is --- The LP ticket is official. It contains 2 governors that are READY to make D.C. functional again. And they combine the BEST ideas from both the Left and the Right. Put the LP in the race and watch the train get established. ESPECIALLY after the horseshit that's gonna happen at both of the jackass conventions..

OR -- when the RNC/DNC starts whining like babies when Johnson/Weld starts polling 15% and they SHOULD be included in the debates.

I'd love to see LP gain some actual ground and be something other than 'also ran'

but it won't happen this time. trump is to loud and gets tons of attention and the leftist MUST elect the first female.

 

[Pogo]

OK, since the site seems to be channeling attention into the Clinton/Trump Duopoly, a/k/a Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dumb, and since said Republicrat/Demoblican Duopoly is in dire need of some outside energy to challenge it, rather than just obsequiously follow along going "yes masters, may we have more of the same old thing", now therefore let us create this alternative channel for the candidates that are not named Clinton or Trump. Let this be the wellspring to make the case for, or simply to inform about, any candidates outside the System.

Some facts first:

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump have been nominated by a party. The respective parties must take that step at their conventions. In the Democrats' case Bernie Sanders is still running in hopes of usurping "pledged" Clinton delegates; in the case of the Republicans a similar "conscience" vote may nullify the primary results depending on how they address their own rules (they did something similar in 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt breezed through primary elections winning most of the states but was snubbed at the convention).

This thread will not be intended for those points; just pointing out the fact.

Fact Two: since the 1988 election, national televised debates have been run under the auspices of something called the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is an outright collusion by the two major party (singular intentional) to ensure that they can jointly negotiate what topics and what alternative candidates will be avoided, thus ensuring nobody who challenges their supreme Duopoly will get a voice in it. Hence the pressing need to bring those alternative voices out.

So bring forth your Gary Johnsons and your Jill Steins, your Darrell Castles and your Gloria LaRivas. Show us what they're about, and more importantly ---- what the issues and views are that the Duopoly doesn't want us to know about. As well, tell us who should be running as 3P if they didn't get the nomination of the Duopoly Party.

​

flacaltenn
Lucy Hamilton
boedicca

Gary is going to run and Bern should run as well, either as an (I) or SP.

Gary has no chance of doing more than 3% of the vote with the +/- 3%.

Trump actually is 3rd party; he's blending some con views with liber, but really he's a liberal.

The rest of the out parties have no chance, ever, unless we rid ourselves of the political process that forces the 2 party system on us.

every pary should have an equal shot and equal say in the debates.

If that means there are 50 people running for Pres, then so be it.

Truth of the matter is --- The LP ticket is official. It contains 2 governors that are READY to make D.C. functional again. And they combine the BEST ideas from both the Left and the Right. Put the LP in the race and watch the train get established. ESPECIALLY after the horseshit that's gonna happen at both of the jackass conventions..

OR -- when the RNC/DNC starts whining like babies when Johnson/Weld starts polling 15% and they SHOULD be included in the debates.

I'd love to see LP gain some actual ground and be something other than 'also ran'

but it won't happen this time. trump is to loud and gets tons of attention and the leftist MUST elect the first female.

"The leftist"?

Which one?

 

[flacaltenn]

OK, since the site seems to be channeling attention into the Clinton/Trump Duopoly, a/k/a Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dumb, and since said Republicrat/Demoblican Duopoly is in dire need of some outside energy to challenge it, rather than just obsequiously follow along going "yes masters, may we have more of the same old thing", now therefore let us create this alternative channel for the candidates that are not named Clinton or Trump. Let this be the wellspring to make the case for, or simply to inform about, any candidates outside the System.

Some facts first:

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump have been nominated by a party. The respective parties must take that step at their conventions. In the Democrats' case Bernie Sanders is still running in hopes of usurping "pledged" Clinton delegates; in the case of the Republicans a similar "conscience" vote may nullify the primary results depending on how they address their own rules (they did something similar in 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt breezed through primary elections winning most of the states but was snubbed at the convention).

This thread will not be intended for those points; just pointing out the fact.

Fact Two: since the 1988 election, national televised debates have been run under the auspices of something called the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is an outright collusion by the two major party (singular intentional) to ensure that they can jointly negotiate what topics and what alternative candidates will be avoided, thus ensuring nobody who challenges their supreme Duopoly will get a voice in it. Hence the pressing need to bring those alternative voices out.

So bring forth your Gary Johnsons and your Jill Steins, your Darrell Castles and your Gloria LaRivas. Show us what they're about, and more importantly ---- what the issues and views are that the Duopoly doesn't want us to know about. As well, tell us who should be running as 3P if they didn't get the nomination of the Duopoly Party.

​

flacaltenn
Lucy Hamilton
boedicca

Gary is going to run and Bern should run as well, either as an (I) or SP.

Gary has no chance of doing more than 3% of the vote with the +/- 3%.

Trump actually is 3rd party; he's blending some con views with liber, but really he's a liberal.

The rest of the out parties have no chance, ever, unless we rid ourselves of the political process that forces the 2 party system on us.

every pary should have an equal shot and equal say in the debates.

If that means there are 50 people running for Pres, then so be it.

Truth of the matter is --- The LP ticket is official. It contains 2 governors that are READY to make D.C. functional again. And they combine the BEST ideas from both the Left and the Right. Put the LP in the race and watch the train get established. ESPECIALLY after the horseshit that's gonna happen at both of the jackass conventions..

OR -- when the RNC/DNC starts whining like babies when Johnson/Weld starts polling 15% and they SHOULD be included in the debates.

I'd love to see LP gain some actual ground and be something other than 'also ran'

but it won't happen this time. trump is to loud and gets tons of attention and the leftist MUST elect the first female.

Well OK THEN.. America is pretty much screwed going forward. If POWER and DEFEATING "the other" is the plan. Carry on.. Don't blame us...

We are offering stability, sanity and government reform. If we can't make a sale on that -- then it's Idiocracy the movie in our lifetimes. What will happen THIS time -- is that we are offering the BEST ticket in the race. We don't pander or slander to get elected.

 

[Two Thumbs]

OK, since the site seems to be channeling attention into the Clinton/Trump Duopoly, a/k/a Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dumb, and since said Republicrat/Demoblican Duopoly is in dire need of some outside energy to challenge it, rather than just obsequiously follow along going "yes masters, may we have more of the same old thing", now therefore let us create this alternative channel for the candidates that are not named Clinton or Trump. Let this be the wellspring to make the case for, or simply to inform about, any candidates outside the System.

Some facts first:

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump have been nominated by a party. The respective parties must take that step at their conventions. In the Democrats' case Bernie Sanders is still running in hopes of usurping "pledged" Clinton delegates; in the case of the Republicans a similar "conscience" vote may nullify the primary results depending on how they address their own rules (they did something similar in 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt breezed through primary elections winning most of the states but was snubbed at the convention).

This thread will not be intended for those points; just pointing out the fact.

Fact Two: since the 1988 election, national televised debates have been run under the auspices of something called the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is an outright collusion by the two major party (singular intentional) to ensure that they can jointly negotiate what topics and what alternative candidates will be avoided, thus ensuring nobody who challenges their supreme Duopoly will get a voice in it. Hence the pressing need to bring those alternative voices out.

So bring forth your Gary Johnsons and your Jill Steins, your Darrell Castles and your Gloria LaRivas. Show us what they're about, and more importantly ---- what the issues and views are that the Duopoly doesn't want us to know about. As well, tell us who should be running as 3P if they didn't get the nomination of the Duopoly Party.

​

flacaltenn
Lucy Hamilton
boedicca

Gary is going to run and Bern should run as well, either as an (I) or SP.

Gary has no chance of doing more than 3% of the vote with the +/- 3%.

Trump actually is 3rd party; he's blending some con views with liber, but really he's a liberal.

The rest of the out parties have no chance, ever, unless we rid ourselves of the political process that forces the 2 party system on us.

every pary should have an equal shot and equal say in the debates.

If that means there are 50 people running for Pres, then so be it.

Truth of the matter is --- The LP ticket is official. It contains 2 governors that are READY to make D.C. functional again. And they combine the BEST ideas from both the Left and the Right. Put the LP in the race and watch the train get established. ESPECIALLY after the horseshit that's gonna happen at both of the jackass conventions..

OR -- when the RNC/DNC starts whining like babies when Johnson/Weld starts polling 15% and they SHOULD be included in the debates.

I'd love to see LP gain some actual ground and be something other than 'also ran'

but it won't happen this time. trump is to loud and gets tons of attention and the leftist MUST elect the first female.

Well OK THEN.. America is pretty much screwed going forward. If POWER and DEFEATING "the other" is the plan. Carry on.. Don't blame us...

We are offering stability, sanity and government reform. If we can't make a sale on that -- then it's Idiocracy the movie in our lifetimes. What will happen THIS time -- is that we are offering the BEST ticket in the race. We don't pander or slander to get elected.

what will happen this time;

hillary get elected, mostly b/c she has the absolute support of the media, so anything she says or does wrong will be ignored or blamed on someone else.
nothing important will be discussed, useless issues will lead.

that's been the pattern for the last 4-6 cycles.

we will lose more freedom and more rights, we will be forced to pay more for those that do nothing.
AA will be enforced to such a degree that white males will need degrees to push a broom.
the debt will grow and the left won't care


same ol' same ol'

 

[flacaltenn]

OK, since the site seems to be channeling attention into the Clinton/Trump Duopoly, a/k/a Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dumb, and since said Republicrat/Demoblican Duopoly is in dire need of some outside energy to challenge it, rather than just obsequiously follow along going "yes masters, may we have more of the same old thing", now therefore let us create this alternative channel for the candidates that are not named Clinton or Trump. Let this be the wellspring to make the case for, or simply to inform about, any candidates outside the System.

Some facts first:

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump have been nominated by a party. The respective parties must take that step at their conventions. In the Democrats' case Bernie Sanders is still running in hopes of usurping "pledged" Clinton delegates; in the case of the Republicans a similar "conscience" vote may nullify the primary results depending on how they address their own rules (they did something similar in 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt breezed through primary elections winning most of the states but was snubbed at the convention).

This thread will not be intended for those points; just pointing out the fact.

Fact Two: since the 1988 election, national televised debates have been run under the auspices of something called the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is an outright collusion by the two major party (singular intentional) to ensure that they can jointly negotiate what topics and what alternative candidates will be avoided, thus ensuring nobody who challenges their supreme Duopoly will get a voice in it. Hence the pressing need to bring those alternative voices out.

So bring forth your Gary Johnsons and your Jill Steins, your Darrell Castles and your Gloria LaRivas. Show us what they're about, and more importantly ---- what the issues and views are that the Duopoly doesn't want us to know about. As well, tell us who should be running as 3P if they didn't get the nomination of the Duopoly Party.

​

flacaltenn
Lucy Hamilton
boedicca

Gary is going to run and Bern should run as well, either as an (I) or SP.

Gary has no chance of doing more than 3% of the vote with the +/- 3%.

Trump actually is 3rd party; he's blending some con views with liber, but really he's a liberal.

The rest of the out parties have no chance, ever, unless we rid ourselves of the political process that forces the 2 party system on us.

every pary should have an equal shot and equal say in the debates.

If that means there are 50 people running for Pres, then so be it.

Truth of the matter is --- The LP ticket is official. It contains 2 governors that are READY to make D.C. functional again. And they combine the BEST ideas from both the Left and the Right. Put the LP in the race and watch the train get established. ESPECIALLY after the horseshit that's gonna happen at both of the jackass conventions..

OR -- when the RNC/DNC starts whining like babies when Johnson/Weld starts polling 15% and they SHOULD be included in the debates.

I'd love to see LP gain some actual ground and be something other than 'also ran'

but it won't happen this time. trump is to loud and gets tons of attention and the leftist MUST elect the first female.

Well OK THEN.. America is pretty much screwed going forward. If POWER and DEFEATING "the other" is the plan. Carry on.. Don't blame us...

We are offering stability, sanity and government reform. If we can't make a sale on that -- then it's Idiocracy the movie in our lifetimes. What will happen THIS time -- is that we are offering the BEST ticket in the race. We don't pander or slander to get elected.

what will happen this time;

hillary get elected, mostly b/c she has the absolute support of the media, so anything she says or does wrong will be ignored or blamed on someone else.
nothing important will be discussed, useless issues will lead.

that's been the pattern for the last 4-6 cycles.

we will lose more freedom and more rights, we will be forced to pay more for those that do nothing.
AA will be enforced to such a degree that white males will need degrees to push a broom.
the debt will grow and the left won't care


same ol' same ol'

To avoid your nightmare old bud -- all that has to happen in a close 3 way race is for the LP ticket to get 34% or MORE in each state leading up to 270 electoral votes. Not in OUR hands. What NEEDS to happen is for voters to DEMAND choices on the ballot, realize the rigormortis that has set into the 2 party system, and DEMAND a place on the debate stage for qualified tickets and fair ballot access.

And the awful choice THIS time will frighten enough voters to open up 3rd party access to politics. Trust me. The panic is yet to be seen...

 

[flacaltenn]

If either of the 2 re-tred power whores self-destructs before November -- the LP is GONNA be the nation's Insurance Policy. And people will be thanking their lucky stars that we are in it. It would become a Trump -- Johnson or Hilliary - Johnson battle. Anything at this point with 2 very weak candidates is possible.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'd like to see johnson say he wants trump as his veep

 

[JoeB131]

The underlying problem is that the 12th Amendment is an automatic backstop to a third party.

Even if a Third party got enough votes to win a couple of states, the worst thing it could do is throw the election into Congress. The last time this happened was 1824, with the "Corrupt Bargain" that allowed John Q. Adams to take the presidency (which he didn't win).

Let us say by some miracle, Gary Johnson got 35% of the vote with Hillary and The Donald getting 30% each. What would happen. Well, the election would get thrown into Congress.

Each state would have one vote in the House for President, which means the House could elect a Republican (don't worry, it wouldn't be Trump) and you'd have the same problem all over again. Worse, the Senate which might be in Democratic hands after November, would vote in the Veep. Which means you could have unelected President Ryan with Hillary's running mate.

That would be all manner of messed up.

Now, that said, I'm probably voting for Johnson both as a protest against both parties and because giving the Libertarians matching funds for a couple of cycles would be hilarious.

 

[JoeB131]

If either of the 2 re-tred power whores self-destructs before November -- the LP is GONNA be the nation's Insurance Policy. And people will be thanking their lucky stars that we are in it. It would become a Trump -- Johnson or Hilliary - Johnson battle. Anything at this point with 2 very weak candidates is possible.

Yeah, but it never works that way. People talk a good game about voting a third party, and every time, that support melts away at the last minute when the specter of one of the main party guys getting in rears its ugly head.

Nobody wants to be the next Ralph Nader.

 

[flacaltenn]

I'd like to see johnson say he wants trump as his veep

THAT-- would be a Trump-like move. In the CNN Town Hall, Johnson was ribbing the moderator for a stupid question about reversing the ticket. Making Weld the candidate.. Try asking Trump that question once he has "adopted" a running mate..

 

[bendog]

OK, since the site seems to be channeling attention into the Clinton/Trump Duopoly, a/k/a Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dumb, and since said Republicrat/Demoblican Duopoly is in dire need of some outside energy to challenge it, rather than just obsequiously follow along going "yes masters, may we have more of the same old thing", now therefore let us create this alternative channel for the candidates that are not named Clinton or Trump. Let this be the wellspring to make the case for, or simply to inform about, any candidates outside the System.

Some facts first:

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump have been nominated by a party. The respective parties must take that step at their conventions. In the Democrats' case Bernie Sanders is still running in hopes of usurping "pledged" Clinton delegates; in the case of the Republicans a similar "conscience" vote may nullify the primary results depending on how they address their own rules (they did something similar in 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt breezed through primary elections winning most of the states but was snubbed at the convention).

This thread will not be intended for those points; just pointing out the fact.

Fact Two: since the 1988 election, national televised debates have been run under the auspices of something called the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is an outright collusion by the two major party (singular intentional) to ensure that they can jointly negotiate what topics and what alternative candidates will be avoided, thus ensuring nobody who challenges their supreme Duopoly will get a voice in it. Hence the pressing need to bring those alternative voices out.

So bring forth your Gary Johnsons and your Jill Steins, your Darrell Castles and your Gloria LaRivas. Show us what they're about, and more importantly ---- what the issues and views are that the Duopoly doesn't want us to know about. As well, tell us who should be running as 3P if they didn't get the nomination of the Duopoly Party.

​

flacaltenn
Lucy Hamilton
boedicca

One pertinent question. If you had to choose between Twiddly dee or dum who would you feel is the lesser of two evils? As much as I dislike Clinton I dont think voting 3rd party this year is wise. We simply dont have the numbers. Every non vote for Clinton is a vote for Trump.

Well, that depends on where you live on Election Day. The fact is, because of the way the Electoral College is set up, anybody who lives in a red state or a blue state --- literally cannot cast a vote that has any meaning. Because if your state is going (for example) blue, then it matters not a whit whether you vote blue, vote red, or stay home and don't vote at all. It makes no difference to a predetermined outcome. So you might as well make a statement.

There's a lot of water to run under the bridge yet before that point comes. We don't even have candidates yet.

They're not going to dump Donald, though perhaps Norquist and the birthers will be shown the door in 20. The dems are stuck with the worst candidate since McGovern. I'd say Mondale, but in 84 he told the truth about taxes and deficits .... but it was the first time he'd ever told the truth.

If your vote doesn't count, there's no reason to stick with either of these loathsome people.

 

[flacaltenn]

If either of the 2 re-tred power whores self-destructs before November -- the LP is GONNA be the nation's Insurance Policy. And people will be thanking their lucky stars that we are in it. It would become a Trump -- Johnson or Hilliary - Johnson battle. Anything at this point with 2 very weak candidates is possible.

Yeah, but it never works that way. People talk a good game about voting a third party, and every time, that support melts away at the last minute when the specter of one of the main party guys getting in rears its ugly head.

Nobody wants to be the next Ralph Nader.

Not shooting for the next Ralph Nader.. We have 2 vetted and proven governors. Pretty hard to overlook that ticket if you're an Independent or a disenfranchised Rep or Dem. .

We are the Blue Dog Democrats that your party chased out of the South. And we are the Tea Party without the social baggage. We ARE unique and fit the American 30% Independent demographic completely.

If THAT 30% ever gets fired up to go the polls --- like you party animals do -- there will be a different result than "ralph nader"..

 

[Pogo]

They're not going to dump Donald

They may or may not have the political will but don't be too sure. They did it in 1912 when the primaries were swept through, rather easily in fact, by another bombastic orator from New York who his critics called an egomaniac. The convention ended up denying the guy with all the primary votes and nominating the Establishment guy from Ohio, who had won a total of one primary state. Stop me when this starts to sound familiar.

Bottom line is the Republican Party, or any party, is its own entity and can do whatever it wants. Primaries and delegates are its own system within its own rules, and if it sees fit to bend those rules to what works best, it can and will, and there's already precedents.

This isn't the topic here, though it's worth mentioning that when all that went down in 1912, the snubbed New York candidate took his delegates down the street, formed his own third party on the spot, and ended up siphoning off so much vote from the official Republican nominee that the 3P guy came in second, drove the Republican down to 3rd place, and put the Democrat into office with less than 42% of the popular vote --- but a huge majority in the Electoral College.

The Democratic Party did something similar, or elements of it did, in 1948 and earlier as far back as 1860, when disgruntled elements ran their own 3P campaigns and also siphoned off votes. It almost cost Truman in '48 and ensured Lincoln in 1860. So none of this is carved in nomination stone until the convention fat lady sings.

he dems are stuck with the worst candidate since McGovern.

There is no place outside the internetic Echobubble where that's even remotely close to reality. Checked any polls?

If your vote doesn't count, there's no reason to stick with either of these loathsome people.

Fine, then that's what this thread is for. Bring in your alternative and tell us about them.

 

[bendog]

They're not going to dump Donald

They may or may not have the political will but don't be too sure. They did it in 1912 when the primaries were swept through, rather easily in fact, by another bombastic orator from New York who his critics called an egomaniac. The convention ended up denying the guy with all the primary votes and nominating the Establishment guy from Ohio, who had won a total of one primary state. Stop me when this starts to sound familiar.

Bottom line is the Republican Party, or any party, is its own entity and can do whatever it wants. Primaries and delegates are its own system within its own rules, and if it sees fit to bend those rules to what works best, it can and will, and there's already precedents.

This isn't the topic here, though it's worth mentioning that when all that went down in 1912, the snubbed New York candidate took his delegates down the street, formed his own third party on the spot, and ended up siphoning off so much vote from the official Republican nominee that the 3P guy came in second, drove the Republican down to 3rd place, and put the Democrat into office with less than 42% of the popular vote --- but a huge majority in the Electoral College.

he dems are stuck with the worst candidate since McGovern.

There is no place outside the internetic Echobubble where that's even remotely close to reality. Checked any polls?

If your vote doesn't count, there's no reason to stick with either of these loathsome people.

Fine, then that's what this thread is for. Bring in your alternative and tell us about them.

What do polls have to do with anything when the two major candidates have the highest negative ratings of anyone other than satan? LOL

The alternatives? Are you DEAF? the gop ran a bunch of old farts with supply side tax cuts, and Rubio who was still using training wheels. Hillary's fund raising scared off everyone but a silly old socialist whom everyone though was a joke, and who would have won except he'd ignored blacks since 1968. LOL