52% of Republicans Want a Third Party

Fifty-two percent of Republicans want a major third party to compete with Democrats and the GOP, according to a Gallup poll released Monday. An even larger percentage of Tea Partiers, 60 percent, want a new party. The portion of Americans who want a third party has been at or above 50 percent since mid-2006, but this is the first time a majority of Republicans have felt that way since Gallup began asking the question in 2003. This is news Donald Trump can seize on--he's flirted with running as an independent once he's done flirting with running as a Republican in 2012.

Given that number and the number of Americans who think the country is on the wrong track, Gallup's Jeffrey Jones writes that "it would not be surprising if a third-party candidate emerged." But that candidate would surely fail, since American elections are decided by plurality rule. Nevertheless, that hypothetical candidate could still be a major factor in the race, as is happening in the special election to replace former New York Rep. Chris Lee. A Tea Party candidate--and voters' disapproval of Republicans' plans to tinker with Medicare--has turned the election into a toss-up, The Hill's Michael O'Brien notes. In 1992, Ross Perot's candidacy helped Bill Clinton defeat incumbent George H.W. Bush. Obama must be hoping for a Trump candidacy more than ever.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/05/most-republicans-want-third-party/37509/

Christian Conservatives
Liberal Democrats
Conservative Democrats
Labor
Confederate Xenophobe

that this large a chunk of the American population don't feel the GOP is batshit crazy right-wing enough?

Despite the short-term tactical gains that might be made, ultimately good things can't emerge from an electorate where such a large number of people have beliefs that aren't tethered to reality.

:scared:

I wonder if some (many?) are hoping that a split would return the Republican party to sanity.

in place to actually make that work.

its weaknesses, and one of them is that it can still lead to the same strategic voting problem we have now under the plurality system. :(

different stages of party building.

The party would eventually be the result of who succeeds at the poles, not the other way around, the way it is now which is also what would shape a 3rd party in our current voting systems, more of the same processes with different labels on them.

Paper ballots, marked by hand and counted in public on a national voting holiday that begins on a Friday and ends on the following Tuesday -> Instant Runoff Voting -> Public Campaign Finance -> 3rd/4th Parties.

about everything. With 2 parties it's always win/lose. This would seem to give a lot more give and take to policy and discussions.

really represent your own interests and screw everyone else. That is the way of the dark side, I mean the right wing.:rofl:

The lunatic right and the just-left of center, then Obama would rightly be worried. Instead, it's likely to come from the spectrum to the right of right-of-center off into the nutty darkness. That would definitely complicate things but also hand the election to Obama. What it would do to Congress is uncertain, but on the whole should see more adults at the table than is currently the case.

The conditions to get onto the ballot are quite daunting.

candidates will be immune from prosecution?

and people are counted by political ideology alone, the 52% number stays the same.

further right than they already are..

They think the republicans aren't conservative enough. They're so full of shit. They already have more than enough representation within the two party duopoly. It's us who have no representation and keep getting screwed by having to vote for the lesser of two evils.

I mean, that party agrees with far right repubs on the size and function of government, for the most part. And it is an already established party. I actually hope Ron Paul runs on the Libertarian ticket next year. The repub party would be in disarray as a result, imho.

What prevents repubs from jumping to the Libertarian party? Is it the Libertarians' views on social issues?

socially liberal. It's not that they're really liberal on social issues, it's just that they care more about economic oppression than anything else.

:rofl:

It will just take votes away from our two major party votes. Usually the Democratic party suffers the most of votes going to a third party candidate. We are members of Democratic Underground. In time this might not be a bad idea, but not yet, and not now. That is my opinion.

of, double and triple, cross-overs trying to make a power statement/name for themselves by spoiling relatively decent candidates/issues.

If a 3rd Party could just spring full-formed/differentiated from the forehead of "Zeus" that'd be one thing, but that's not how it will happen. It'll be extremely tricky and messy for a very long time, resulting in more harm than 2 parties and even once a 3rd Party got on its feet, there'd be no guarantee that its issue platform would really resemble anything Liberals would want. The developmental process could push it either to the right or to the left. Liberals, though still a minority, would have to deliver to succeed and Conservatives need only to hold onto their money and put jazzy "new" window dressing on the same old stuff while their real deal goes down in the back room still.

I hate to think that the Tea Party is a prelude to our future, Because they are a joke, but not funny at all. But they are history in the making. Thanks for you reply patrice.

That should get rid of some of the vermin.

You might just get that new party.

OH BRING IT ON!!!

These people will believe anything they are told.

they even suspect they are crazy since their source of information is tainted. They need help, therapy.