To those who've pushed for a 3rd party in the past...

newtothegame

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Apr-15-10 08:51 AM
Original message

To those who've pushed for a 3rd party in the past...

If this is the reaction we've created to the conservatives attempts at a 3rd party (the Tea Party), and they're the ones with all the media power, does anyone really think we could even get anything off the ground if we tried the same thing? I'd say the tea leaves (no pun intended) are saying stick with the Dems and try to work and improve that party...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ShortnFiery

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Apr-15-10 08:54 AM
Response to Original message

1. Only if we can neuter the blue dogs and the new democrats give progressives more than scraps.

I'm sorry but I'm through with supporting right-wing corporate democrats. :(

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

napi21

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Apr-15-10 09:00 AM
Response to Original message

2. I agree & sdo does Chris Matthews. In his comment last night he

reviewed several elections where a 3rd party candidate ran. Nader got 96,00 votes in Fl in 2000. If he hadn't un, there never would have been a recount,, never a Shrub/Cheney admin, and never an Iraq war! He went all the way back to a contest where a 3rd pty candidate caused Jesee Helms to win & he was in the Senate for 30+ years! Although Chris didn't mention it, I remember Ross Perot creating the atmosphere for a Clinton win too!

As much as we all hate to think about it, 3rd party candidates never help your party!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

zipplewrath

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Apr-15-10 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #2

4. The math is a bit skewed

Buried in those numbers is a presumption about where those votes go without the 3rd party candidate.

The GOP tried to blame Clinton's victory on Perot. However, there were alot of "anyone but Bush" votes in '92 and Perot siphoned off some of those from Clinton.

Alot of Nader voters weren't going to vote for Gore.

In '60, there was a 3rd party, a split from the democrats, and Kennedy won anyway.

3rd parties and primary challengers don't "cause" losses, they exist because of already weak candidates. If there is a lesson in here it is that these kinds of challenges exist because a party has move too far away from those they claim to represent.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tailormyst

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Apr-15-10 09:04 AM
Response to Original message

3. The only way to improve the party is to rid the party of corporate money

Edited on Thu Apr-15-10 09:05 AM by Tailormyst

Until we have REAL election reform both parties are just mouth pieces for big business. And then of course, one needs to realize that congress will never vote to take away their perks and big donations.

Fox guarding the henhouse.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tierra_y_Libertad

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Apr-15-10 09:36 AM
Response to Original message

5. I stick with the Dems when they earn my vote.

It is my vote, and I see no reason to waste it on politicians I disagree with, whatever party they may be in. I'm a Democrat (since 1965) but I owe no allegiance to any political party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 09th 2024, 08:59 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.