Topic: Is a Third Party Politically Possible?

[charlesoakwood]

There's so much meat in this discussion I'm not sure where to dig in....

It seems to me that the essence of the discussion centers around dissatisfaction with the Republican party on the eve of the most important vote since 1860. jpatrickham alluded to the centerpiece of the dissatisfaction but I want to make it front & center - Romney. Romney is the reason why we're so pissed.

I can't shake the impression that the Republican elite (for lack of better term) is foisting Romney onto us. Why would I say that? Because I know of no popular support for him. I don't know anyone who is enthusiastic about him, wants "Romney's the one" bumper stickers for their cars, or is lining up to canvas neighborhoods on his behalf. Michael Medved has played a coy game of soft character assassination of each of Romney's Republican opponents so that he could then say, "who is left?" I expect him to endorse Romney any day now.

Likewise, just like 2008, we are going to see the reluctant acceptance by pundits claiming that "Romney is the only guy who can beat Øbozo" and all but demanding that we climb on board the Romney funeral procession.

I don't like Romney, I don't support Romney, and I likely won't pull the lever for Romney. This has caused great friction within my own family where these same discussions are taking place. I've always voted "R" and always expected to continue, but the 2008 bait~n~switch with McCain soured me and I'm no longer so willing to take one for the cause.

I know that some other countries have multi-party political ecologies. I do not believe that we will ever see that in America. While it is possible, it is unlikely because the dhimmicrats have so thoroughly sewn up the entitlement vote. This is where this:

For verification see the 1992 election results.

Election Results:
Clinton/Gore: 370 electoral votes, 44.9 million popular votes
Bush/Quayle: 168 electoral votes, 39.1 million popular votes
Perot/Stockdale: 0 electoral votes, 19.7 million popular votes

At least 90% of Perot's votes would have been Bush voters.

comes from and why there isn't a dhimmicrat reciprocal - except perhaps in "local" races. I can think of only one national exception for this in my entire voting life and that was Lieberman running as an independent after being screwed by the dhimmi party.

So what am I saying?

I don't want to say that we're screwed, but anything else would only be a euphemism. I'm saying that Charles recently posted the result of a straw poll:

Newt Gingrich        42.82%  (1,228 votes)
Herman Cain        33.26%  (954 votes)
Rick Perry                    9.76%  (280 votes)
Mitt Romney                4.5%    (129 votes)
Ron Paul                    4.46%   (128 votes)
Michele Bachmann       2.93%     (84 votes)
Rick Santorum          1.71%     (49 votes)
Jon Huntsman         0.56%     (16 votes)

and I would willingly pull the lever for any one of them except for Romney, Paul, or Huntsman.

I'm saying that somehow I need to get that message to the Republican elite - "We have good Republican candidates but Romney isn't one of them". If you continue to shill for him you will lose me as a voter.

I'm saying that I agree with the analogy of the bicycle and the Ferrari, that both sides are driving us to ruination and depending on which side you choose dictates how quickly you'll arrive.

I'm saying that it sure looks to me like our nation is bent on suicide and if that's the case I want it to happen quickly - not agonizingly slowly.

I'm saying that in 2008 the party elite McCain became our candidate not out of any sense of populism or performance but out of inter-party maneuvers and manipulations. He was foisted upon us. I'm saying that 2012 is shaping up to be a repeat performance with Romney as the default candidate this time around. I'm saying that it sucks and I don't think that I will be a party to it.

I'll still vote because there will still be other races where good people deserve support, but if they give us Romney I'll pass in favor of loading more ammo.

I have a feeling that I'll be needing it.

Not Newt Neither

If gNewt doesn't self destruct consider it a miracle.

[John Florida]

There's so much meat in this discussion I'm not sure where to dig in....

It seems to me that the essence of the discussion centers around dissatisfaction with the Republican party on the eve of the most important vote since 1860. jpatrickham alluded to the centerpiece of the dissatisfaction but I want to make it front & center - Romney. Romney is the reason why we're so pissed.

I can't shake the impression that the Republican elite (for lack of better term) is foisting Romney onto us. Why would I say that? Because I know of no popular support for him. I don't know anyone who is enthusiastic about him, wants "Romney's the one" bumper stickers for their cars, or is lining up to canvas neighborhoods on his behalf. Michael Medved has played a coy game of soft character assassination of each of Romney's Republican opponents so that he could then say, "who is left?" I expect him to endorse Romney any day now.

Likewise, just like 2008, we are going to see the reluctant acceptance by pundits claiming that "Romney is the only guy who can beat Øbozo" and all but demanding that we climb on board the Romney funeral procession.

I don't like Romney, I don't support Romney, and I likely won't pull the lever for Romney. This has caused great friction within my own family where these same discussions are taking place. I've always voted "R" and always expected to continue, but the 2008 bait~n~switch with McCain soured me and I'm no longer so willing to take one for the cause.

I know that some other countries have multi-party political ecologies. I do not believe that we will ever see that in America. While it is possible, it is unlikely because the dhimmicrats have so thoroughly sewn up the entitlement vote. This is where this:

For verification see the 1992 election results.

Election Results:
Clinton/Gore: 370 electoral votes, 44.9 million popular votes
Bush/Quayle: 168 electoral votes, 39.1 million popular votes
Perot/Stockdale: 0 electoral votes, 19.7 million popular votes

At least 90% of Perot's votes would have been Bush voters.

comes from and why there isn't a dhimmicrat reciprocal - except perhaps in "local" races. I can think of only one national exception for this in my entire voting life and that was Lieberman running as an independent after being screwed by the dhimmi party.

So what am I saying?

I don't want to say that we're screwed, but anything else would only be a euphemism. I'm saying that Charles recently posted the result of a straw poll:

Newt Gingrich        42.82%  (1,228 votes)
Herman Cain        33.26%  (954 votes)
Rick Perry                    9.76%  (280 votes)
Mitt Romney                4.5%    (129 votes)
Ron Paul                    4.46%   (128 votes)
Michele Bachmann       2.93%     (84 votes)
Rick Santorum          1.71%     (49 votes)
Jon Huntsman         0.56%     (16 votes)

and I would willingly pull the lever for any one of them except for Romney, Paul, or Huntsman.

I'm saying that somehow I need to get that message to the Republican elite - "We have good Republican candidates but Romney isn't one of them". If you continue to shill for him you will lose me as a voter.

I'm saying that I agree with the analogy of the bicycle and the Ferrari, that both sides are driving us to ruination and depending on which side you choose dictates how quickly you'll arrive.

I'm saying that it sure looks to me like our nation is bent on suicide and if that's the case I want it to happen quickly - not agonizingly slowly.

I'm saying that in 2008 the party elite McCain became our candidate not out of any sense of populism or performance but out of inter-party maneuvers and manipulations. He was foisted upon us. I'm saying that 2012 is shaping up to be a repeat performance with Romney as the default candidate this time around. I'm saying that it sucks and I don't think that I will be a party to it.

I'll still vote because there will still be other races where good people deserve support, but if they give us Romney I'll pass in favor of loading more ammo.

I have a feeling that I'll be needing it.

Not Newt Neither

If gNewt doesn't self destruct consider it a miracle.

 And if he doesn't you can consider him elected.

[AmericanPatriot]

It seems Newt is following the McCain playbook in some ways.
If he can hold on until Iowa and/or NH, he's the guy.

It comes down to Romney or Mitt.

Cain's done.
Perry's a long shot but may regain some legs.

A Paul upset in Iowa would make it interesting.

Edited to add:

And if he doesn't you can consider him elected.

Not so sure

[John Florida]

It seems Newt is following the McCain playbook in some ways.
If he can hold on until Iowa and/or NH, he's the guy.

It comes down to Romney or Mitt.

Cain's done.
Perry's a long shot but may regain some legs.

A Paul upset in Iowa would make it interesting.

Edited to add:

And if he doesn't you can consider him elected.

Not so sure

 Me either but I'm voting for him with bells on. It's anybody but Obama.

[charlesoakwood]

I think all of us are on the ABBR page,
it's that we are working on who that person
will/should be.

That top 4 list, in order of preference, can
change from day to day or by one sound
bite.

[John Florida]

I think all of us are on the ABBR page,
it's that we are working on who that person
will/should be.

That top 4 list, in order of preference, can
change from day to day or by one sound
bite.

 True but all we can do is wait for the culls to get weeded out and that's fast approaching.

[AmericanPatriot]

Just got off the phone for a political call from Newt.
I explained that I would vote for Newt or Romney the day after Hell froze over