How Third Parties Did in the Election (677 hits)
Category: PoliticsRating: 0.29 on 18 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by <theanarchistparty.at.yahoo.com> (View user info) at 2004-11-05 18:13:26 EST
They didn't do good at all.
2004:
Independent/Reform - Ralph Nader = 400,706
Libertarian - Michael Badnarik = 381,270
Constitution - Michael Peroutka = 130,986
Green - David Cobb = 106,264
Peace & Freedom - Leonard Peltier = 21,616
Other = 13,011
TOTAL NON-RNC/NON-DNC = 1,053,853
Compare that with 2000:
Green - Ralph Nader = 2,882,955
Reform - Pat Buchanan = 448,895
Libertarian - Harry Browne = 384,431
Constitution - Howard Phillips = 98,020
Natural Law - John Hagelin = 83,714
Other = 51,186
TOTAL NON-RNC/NON-DNC = 3,949,201
It's a sad day in America when independent politics begin to die off.
User Reviews
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2004-11-06 13:26:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I wouldn't say they're dying off. People just felt this election was too important. Look for a resurgence in 2008.
Submitted by bob (user info) at 2004-11-06 13:15:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
No Comment
Submitted by Schwarzes_Glas (user info) at 2004-11-06 13:07:48 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by cigar.. (user info) at 2004-11-06 10:26:24 (#)
Ranking: 0
The third party is a fucking joke. No chance what so ever.
Perot was your swan song, but folks tend to ride that horse until it drops.
-----------------
True this. Have you read up on 70% of the third parties issues? Bandarik is in favor of bringing the troops out NOW, and eliminating income tax in the next 10 years. Hmmm... how to vote for fuckers, when there so far in the clouds.
Beside that, you shouldn't be worrying about mainstreaming the third party when we are at war.
Submitted by Trout (user info) at 2004-11-06 11:05:04 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I always remember something we done in school about US politics.
Rainbow Coalition?
Rev Jesse Jackson?
Or have I made a complete tit of myself?
Submitted by cigar.. (user info) at 2004-11-06 10:26:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
The third party is a fucking joke. No chance what so ever.
Perot was your swan song, but folks tend to ride that horse until it drops.
Submitted by FuckTheArmy (user info) at 2004-11-05 23:55:56 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
You need to raise the issue of preferential voting in your country. Fuck, we didn't end up any better off for it this time round - but the minor parties actually have a serious impact (even if that's not always a good thing).
May the FamilyFirst party all die horribly of the black plague!
Submitted by Razor (user info) at 2004-11-05 22:16:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
1) America has ALWAYS had a two party system. At the beginning, it was the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, the Tories and the Whigs, etc. Every time a new party has come along and won anything worth a piss (Republicans) the whole thing gets reorganized around that party and another one. The only other thing third parties have accomplished was to be the spolier (Bull Moose, Reform, Green) in a two party election.
2) Of COURSE the third parties did much poorer this time around. People are very polarized in America right now, thanks to 9/11 and the terrible or fantastic job Bush has done depending on your opinion. In the carefree 90s (in which I include the 2000 election, and also a decade I think will eventually be compared in many ways to the 1920s) we were carefree enough to indulge in alternate parties we knew wouldn't win. I'm the perfect example. I went libertarian in '96 and '00, this time I went for Kerry.
Submitted by CoachMagirk27 (user info) at 2004-11-05 20:40:25 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
worth a read... i guess.
?
Submitted by CoachMagirk27 (user info) at 2004-11-05 20:39:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
ok?
Submitted by celine (user info) at 2004-11-05 20:26:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I have trouble +2'ing a post that makes me feel bad.
But this will solve all your problems: Instant Runoff Voting!
http://www.fairvote.org/irv/faq.htm
Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-11-05 19:46:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
how about that personal choice party? With charles jay (the gambling addict) and marylin chambers (need I say more?).
Submitted by Degreeless_Capibara (user info) at 2004-11-05 19:01:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Walter Brown - 9000 something votes I believe? 404 votes from Wisconsin.
Submitted by GhostWriter (user info) at 2004-11-05 18:59:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
No, actually it's not.
Submitted by uncanny (user info) at 2004-11-05 18:43:16 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Maybe it is because people start to realize that pulling out of Iraq completely now is a bad idea.
Submitted by tinactin (user info) at 2004-11-05 18:38:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I also hate farm subsidies. But you cant expect Bush to do anything to decrease them. He instituted new subsidies a few years ago.
I think it's a greater reflection on the Democratic and Republican candidates, who polarized voters, than on the state of third parties in general. Ah, well. At least the Libertarians seemed to be the only third party that just about held its ground.
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2004-11-05 18:25:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Maybe I should have elaborated: Farm subsidies suck because in a free trade market we pay our farmers to grow shit and the 3rd world can't compete so we crush them and they get angry... Then free trade looks bad, when actually it is very good. Subsidies are unfair trade tactics.
Oh, and they don't go to the "little guy". They go to huge corporate farms...
And the democrats and republicans don't want to yank those away for nothing more than political reasons. They know they are illegal.
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2004-11-05 18:23:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I feel your pain, arcane. But we knew they never had a shot. That bites. When are we going to end farm subsidies? They piss me the fuck off.
Submitted by arcane (user info) at 2004-11-05 18:19:41 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Its sad... Its true...
Go libertarians 2008!
(sigh)