Will there be a "third party" candidate? (Ron Paul, Huckabee, voters)

[tallrick]

Considering the low quality of all Democratic and all but one Republican, will there be a third party candate for 2008? I realize that most voters are not very well educated, but could a third party candidate have a chance, and who should run?

[burdell]

Originally Posted by tallrick

Considering the low quality of all Democratic and all but one Republican, will there be a third party candate for 2008? I realize that most voters are not very well educated, but could a third party candidate have a chance, and who should run?

First I'd have to ask just where are they hiding this alleged 'quaity' Republican?

As for a 3rd party candidate I think Bloomberg's probably even money to run, I don't believe he'll make a decison until the Dem and Rep choices are known. I think he'd have a realistic chance, financing a campaign is no problem and he's not a typical mainstream politico.

[BVH]

Originally Posted by burdell

First I'd have to ask just where are they hiding this alleged 'quaity' Republican?

As for a 3rd party candidate I think Bloomberg's probably even money to run, I don't believe he'll make a decison until the Dem and Rep choices are known. I think he'd have a realistic chance, financing a campaign is no problem and he's not a typical mainstream politico.

Yes, I believe there will. My guess is Nader (who's already formed an exploratory committee), Ron Paul, or perhaps a more long-shot chance Edwards or Gore...

[LancasterNative]

I would seriously consider voting 3rd party if that smarmy fink McCain captures the GOP nomination.

Heck, if that happens...it's not like we'd need a third party. We'd need a second one!

[Hasdrubal]

a 3rd party is stupid with the current electoral college system. it will never get any of those votes, but it can do serious harm to the other parties.

[GuyPinestra]

Originally Posted by LancasterNative

I would seriously consider voting 3rd party if that smarmy fink McCain captures the GOP nomination.

Heck, if that happens...it's not like we'd need a third party. We'd need a second one!

Ain't THAT the truth!!!

[LancasterNative]

Originally Posted by Hasdrubal

...but it can do serious harm to the other parties.

Is that necessarily a bad thing?

In all seriousness though, we have had 3rd parties coalesce into new national parties before.

As Jefferson's original Democratic-Republican party unraveled after 1824, each of the factions within it became "3rd parties" as they vied for supremacy. The party that emerged victorious from that struggle became today's Democrats.

Today's Republicans began as a 3rd party in 1854.

[Frank the Tank]

Let me be the voice of reason here - there will be plenty of third party candidates (as always), but none that will gain any traction at all. Bloomberg would only run in a situation where Hillary Clinton was going up against someone like Mike Huckabee where there would be a large segment of voters in the middle of the political spectrum that would be up for grabs. However, Bloomberg essentially draws a hybrid of McCain, Obama and Clinton voters, so the way the race is shaping up, he's going to save his billions of dollars for a more opportune time.

The fact is that independents are generally satisfied with how the presidential nomination is turning out with candidates such as Obama and McCain being extremely appealing, which makes it very unlikely that a strong third party candidate will emerge. The loud and vocal right wing of the Republican Party seems to have it out for McCain with a lot of bark, but at the end of the day (assuming that he gets the party nomination), there will be little bite as the vast majority of the GOP will end up consolidating support around him (especially if Hillary is the opponent in the general election). At the same time, most Democrats are generally happy with their candidates since either Obama and Clinton looks like a winner (which is what they are desperate for after 8 years of Bush).

So, independents and Democrats are generally satisfied, while Republicans have a vested interest in keeping another Clinton out of the White House. Honestly, this is the worst environment to be a third party candidate in many years.

(Note that I'm speaking in the GENERAL sense - I know there are plenty of partisans on both sides of the aisle on this board that don't think that their personal interests are being represented and would wish for some third party candidate would emerge, but by and large, this is the highest level of interest that the American public has had in the major party primary process in many decades. This is not the type of environment that would produce a Ross Perot-type figure or even Ralph Nader in 2000.)

[Preaching2thechoir]

As someone who has voted democrat my entire life, I am seriously hoping Ron Paul will consider a 3rd party candidacy.

The so called "front runners" in both parties **** me off for various reasons and with the exception of Mitt Romney the rest are OBL amnesty advocates.

I like Ron Paul because of what he stands for. He would revitalize the Constitution and bring respectability back to America. Start troop withdrawal from all over the world (a big plus in my book); work towards making America a respected nation again; more importantly he would secure our ports and borders; end the pork barrel spending and put America back on track.

[SALteacher]

I intend to vote third party regardless who gets the nomination for the GOP (unless it's Paul, which isn't likely). I'm a conservative and very unhappy with the GOP choices. I don't think I'm alone among conservatives in this thinking, so ultimately, if McAmnesty gets the nod, many conservatives will either vote third party or sit out. I don't see many voting for McAmnesty. So Hillbilly will win the election. Romney might stand a chance if he gets the nod since more conservatives like him. However, I still will not vote for Romney.