Oh, good. Ralph Nader will cease to have any affect on elections, forcing him to find another outlet for his attention whoring.

If you continue to reward the two major parties, you get what you deserve.

/meet the new boss

Saborlas: Oh, good. Ralph Nader will cease to have any affect on elections, forcing him to find another outlet for his attention whoring.

There were more people in Florida that had their ballots tossed for overvoting than voted for Nader.

Though it is a lot easier to blame a third party candidate than a flawed system like Plurality voting.

Snarfangel: Though it is a lot easier to blame a third party candidate than a flawed system like Plurality voting.

Shh, don't bother him with those big scary thoughts.

Eh. At least keep them alive. Every so often one of their ideas finds its way to the mainstream. We can extract the ideas from the parties without necessarily electing the people.

Nader is the ultimate electoral scapegoat. Al Gore blew the election all by himself in 2000, and the Supreme Court put the nail in his coffin. Blaming Ralph Nader is ridiculous.

I thought that Paul was on the ballot in Montana or some such, splitting the Republican vote by ~ 10%.

RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

"This election is too important," said Goode, a 43-year-old accountant from Charlotte. "That would just be like throwing my vote away. I'm not going to do that."



And that is exactly why this country is in trouble.

eddyatwork: RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

He'd be dead before he could take the oath. Same for Barr.

I'm voting independent this election (Nader), even though I know he doesn't have a chance. I do hope Obama wins, but I think we need to build support for third parties so they will become a significant political force in the future.

/the corporations, man

For as liberal as this site seems a lot of the time, I've noticed there's been a growing amount of complacency with the Obama campaign. Look: he's a centrist Republicrat. If you want progressive causes pushed, either vote 3rd party or get active to get this guy to swing back left. Mocking the third parties for their supposed inability to be viable is counterproductive, given that you really don't have much difference between the two mainstream parties.

I threw my vote away for Barr, not that it matters here in Obamatown, U.S.A (i.e. Chicago).

Weaver95: eddyatwork: RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

He'd be dead before he could take the oath. Same for Barr.

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what the rule is if the pres elect dies before taking the oath? Does the veep automatically take it? Or do we get a last minute do over?

I sort of liked Libertarians until they made a Republican their candidate.

This is the first time I WON'T be voting third party for President.

Theological Farker: Weaver95: eddyatwork: RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

He'd be dead before he could take the oath. Same for Barr.

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what the rule is if the pres elect dies before taking the oath? Does the veep automatically take it? Or do we get a last minute do over?

steel cage death match to see who rules bartertown.

carmody: Nader is the ultimate electoral scapegoat. Al Gore blew the election all by himself in 2000, and the Supreme Court put the nail in his coffin. Blaming Ralph Nader is ridiculous.

Not to mention that Gore actually did win the popular vote...

Weaver95: steel cage death match to see who rules bartertown.

And since it's politicians, can we get it on public TV instaed of Pay Per View?

*Spoiler inert!*

ITT: People That Don't Understand Math

Dang...that was much better than the headline I submitted. Kudos, subby.

Oh yeah, I guess this is obligatory in the 3rd party thread....

Assbutter: carmody: Nader is the ultimate electoral scapegoat. Al Gore blew the election all by himself in 2000, and the Supreme Court put the nail in his coffin. Blaming Ralph Nader is ridiculous.

Not to mention that Gore actually did win the popular vote...

which doesn't really matter - the electoral college calls the shots, not the great unwashed masses.

That said, i'm not sure the country really needs yet another presidential election constitutional crisis. I hope this race is above board and that whomever loses recognizes that they've lost and concedes gracefully.

New rule for elections. If you are on the Ballot in 45+ states you get to take part. Imagine Obama ans McCain dealing with McKinney crazy.

orrinbloquy

Clinton was impeached for perjury. Same reason Scooter Libby was convicted.

Don't rule out Serious Cat yet.

globalwarmingpraiser: New rule for elections. If you are on the Ballot in 45+ states you get to take part. Imagine Obama ans McCain dealing with McKinney crazy.

How about 30+?

I might be announcing my candidatecy for the Libertarian Party nomination for the 2012 Presidential election soon. Still feeling it out and getting necessary people onboard. Stay tuned.

/Lawson '12

Theological Farker: Weaver95: eddyatwork: RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

He'd be dead before he could take the oath. Same for Barr.

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what the rule is if the pres elect dies before taking the oath? Does the veep automatically take it? Or do we get a last minute do over?

If I remember correctly, if it's between the election and inauguration, the 25th amendment takes charge, so the VP elect takes over, nominates a new VP, who the Senate then confirms. If it were before the election, it would be the party's job to come up with a new nominee, whether it's the VP nominee taking the reins or not.

Anyone find it a tad ridiculous that a country of over 300,000,000 people can only seem to field TWO viable points of view for what direction their country can go in?

I realize that the Democrats and Republicans are fairly large tents under which one sees many diverging points of view, but I think it's a bit silly that we don't have two or three more parties.

Heck, Canada has four or five national parties, and they have like 1/10th of our population!

too many people in this country just coast on a party affiliation. If people REALLY understood that both Republican and Democratic parties are lying to them, then they'd vote third party. But voters don't really think about the issues. They just know that they're 'Democrat' or 'Republican' and believe everything that their party leaders tell them.

Oddly enough, this works for brand name marketing as well.

So until/unless one party (it really won't matter which one) implodes, we won't see a change in this country. The electorate needs to be shocked. They NEED to wake up and really look around them. Otherwise nothing will change. The collapse of either one of the major parties would accomplish that shift in consciousness.

Theological Farker: Weaver95: eddyatwork: RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

He'd be dead before he could take the oath. Same for Barr.

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what the rule is if the pres elect dies before taking the oath? Does the veep automatically take it? Or do we get a last minute do over?

I am 99% sure that the VP-elect would take over. Relatively uncomplicated.

This, however, was complicated. (new window, amazing history)

UNC_Samurai: If you continue to reward the two major parties, you get what you deserve.

/meet the new boss

If you think that it is possible to have mroe than two parties in a plurality political system, you get what you deserve in wasting your vote.

If you want third parties, work to change the system to a majoritarian one.

Theological Farker: Weaver95: eddyatwork: RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

He'd be dead before he could take the oath. Same for Barr.

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what the rule is if the pres elect dies before taking the oath? Does the veep automatically take it? Or do we get a last minute do over?

The veep-elect takes over. Interestingly enough, the amendment that clarifies this predates the amendment that talks about what happens if the president dies in office.

Gortex: Anyone find it a tad ridiculous that a country of over 300,000,000 people can only seem to field TWO viable points of view for what direction their country can go in?

I realize that the Democrats and Republicans are fairly large tents under which one sees many diverging points of view, but I think it's a bit silly that we don't have two or three more parties.

Heck, Canada has four or five national parties, and they have like 1/10th of our population!

Actually, we really have only ONE party here in the US. There is no functional difference between Republican and Democrat anymore. They are almost identical in terms of ideology (practical application, not stated), not that anyone really bothers to pay attention to that sort of thing anymore.

The only real difference between Republican and Democrat is a few relatively minor theological differences. Oh, and who gets to sit in the big chair of course.

Pope George Ringo:

You know who else washed their hands of a crucial political decision involving a messianic figure?



Ponch's pilot, that's who.

Gortex: Anyone find it a tad ridiculous that a country of over 300,000,000 people can only seem to field TWO viable points of view for what direction their country can go in?

In all honesty, we really only have one point of view for what general direction we go in; the petty squabbles over the specifics don't really amount to much in the bigger picture.

Gortex: Anyone find it a tad ridiculous that a country of over 300,000,000 people can only seem to field TWO viable points of view for what direction their country can go in?

Not when the choices are up or down.

Alan Keyes and Bob Barr will siphon an equal number of votes from would-be McCain supporters to what Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney will siphon from would-be Obama supporters. Even if there was a sizeable protest vote, it'd be a wash.

Courtney Cox-Zucker: Alan Keyes and Bob Barr will siphon an equal number of votes from would-be McCain supporters to what Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney will siphon from would-be Obama supporters. Even if there was a sizeable protest vote, it'd be a wash.

except that in this case, the Republicans really can't afford to lose even 3% of the vote. A lot of people are PISSED OFF about the direction the party went the past couple of years and it's gonna (hopefully) cost most of those fraggers their jobs.

Shaggy_C: Gortex: Anyone find it a tad ridiculous that a country of over 300,000,000 people can only seem to field TWO viable points of view for what direction their country can go in?

In all honesty, we really only have one point of view for what general direction we go in; the petty squabbles over the specifics don't really amount to much in the bigger picture.

Again, this has to do with the system.

We have a plurality system. This ALWAYS leads to two parties. If we changed it to a majoritarian system like most european countries, we would instantly have more viable third parties.

I can see Barr siphoning enough votes from disenchanted Repubs to cost McCain Georgia.

CerealCode: I threw my vote away for Barr, not that it matters here in Obamatown, U.S.A (i.e. Chicago).

It's not throwing your vote away. I'm in Idaho (McCainistan) and voting for Barr. I'm doing it not because he has a chance but because the Libertarian Party needs to reach several percentage of voter thresholds to get matching funds and access to the debates. Only in states where it really doesn't matter can these thresholds be reached.

Third parties do virtually nothing but ensure no candidate gets more than 50% of the popular vote. It is a useless tool for "protest" voters, who if they had any concept of American Presidential elections now usually do nothing but punish the candidate that more closely follows their own views.

Translation : If your fav TV shows are Dancing with the Stars and Real Housewives of Orange county, ever invested in a pet rock, and believe the government blew up the Twin Towers, a third party may be for you.

Tsunami Ditka: Theological Farker: Weaver95: eddyatwork: RON PAUL may still yet pull a miracle and win this one.

He'd be dead before he could take the oath. Same for Barr.

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what the rule is if the pres elect dies before taking the oath? Does the veep automatically take it? Or do we get a last minute do over?

If I remember correctly, if it's between the election and inauguration, the 25th amendment takes charge, so the VP elect takes over, nominates a new VP, who the Senate then confirms. If it were before the election, it would be the party's job to come up with a new nominee, whether it's the VP nominee taking the reins or not.


Does it make any difference if the President elect dies before or after the Electoral College formally meets to vote?

Bill Frist: Again, this has to do with the system.

A system that benefits the two major parties at the expense of everyone else is not going to go away. Why would these people want to vote themselves a smaller part of the pie?