They are running for President Too

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Nov 10, 2006
2,124
2
0
48
#1

Robert Laurence 'Bob' Barr
Party: Libertarian
Status: Announced



Cynthia Ann McKinney
Party: Green Party, Peace and Freedom
Status: Announced


Charles O. 'Chuck' Baldwin
Party: Constitution
Status: Announced


Ralph Nader
Party: Independent
Status: Announced

Someday we may get our fellow Americans educated enough to elect and vote who we want in office based upon what type of land we want, not simply because of what we are used to: Spoon Fed Politics. Think about voting for someone outside the major 2 if you are undecided so we can bring up the numbers every year, to the point we may one day have quite a few options. Rome wasn't built in a day
 
Apr 8, 2004
1,362
10
0
#2
Unfortunately for third parties we operate under the Electoral College (which I personally don't like). The last third party or candidate to make a strong stance was Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 (Progressive Party), and he finished in second with 88 of the 266 electoral college votes needed to win. If third party candidate won the popular vote, they would have a good chance at winning the Electoral College but there are still no guarantees. The Electoral College was designed for political stability and to repress challenges to the two-party system.
 
Jun 27, 2003
2,457
10
0
38
#12
I agree supporting third party candidates is important (not just by voting either). Obviously they aren't going to win, but that's not the point. The idea is support to try and build for the future.
and what happens if on the off chance in this future that one of them does get elected, and does find himself or herself in office. Then what? What substantial change could ever really come from that?
 
Nov 10, 2006
2,124
2
0
48
#14
and what happens if on the off chance in this future that one of them does get elected, and does find himself or herself in office. Then what? What substantial change could ever really come from that?
A Bush or a Clinton has had a position of President or Vice President since 1980. Do you really believe the most qualified in all this land just happened to be one or the other.

On a day to day basis, the Republicans and Democrats are more alike than hardcore devotees to their political party will ever admit. Others are well intended, just ill informed. Some just spout off clever sayings they have heard thought up by others. .

There are many involved in both parties who are great Americans, don't mistake that... You would see prominent candidates in both parties switch parties if there were more options to have a strong enough platform to operate from.



Unfortunately for third parties we operate under the Electoral College (which I personally don't like). The last third party or candidate to make a strong stance was Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 (Progressive Party), and he finished in second with 88 of the 266 electoral college votes needed to win. If third party candidate won the popular vote, they would have a good chance at winning the Electoral College but there are still no guarantees. The Electoral College was designed for political stability and to repress challenges to the two-party system.
Each state could break up the electoral votes, like 2 states do now, instead of a winner take all count. That would be more representative of a populous vote count, and is something each state could enact on their own without requiring an amendment. Over a 99% rate has resulted in electorates voting as voters intended is currently on record. The pros of the electorate college is avoiding sectionalism faced by nations such as China, India, Roman Empire etc... On that note, States Rights should triumph on just about every issue; that way, if you don't like it in one state, you have 49 others to choose to live. A happier citizen makes a more productive and civic minded citizen.
 
Nov 21, 2005
5,793
5
0
42
www.revver.com
#15
Yeah we need to vote for someone other than
New World Order puppets...

But change doesn't come through politics.. it comes from spiritual... power
and thinking ... and not limited thinking.. like they give us in Church..
or in religion.. i mean.. REAL. free thinking. and emotion.....

Once people wake up. then they can manifest a much better..
and free world
 
Apr 8, 2004
1,362
10
0
#17
Each state could break up the electoral votes, like 2 states do now, instead of a winner take all count. That would be more representative of a populous vote count, and is something each state could enact on their own without requiring an amendment. Over a 99% rate has resulted in electorates voting as voters intended is currently on record. The pros of the electorate college is avoiding sectionalism faced by nations such as China, India, Roman Empire etc... On that note, States Rights should triumph on just about every issue; that way, if you don't like it in one state, you have 49 others to choose to live. A happier citizen makes a more productive and civic minded citizen.
More states could follow the example of Maine & Nebraska, they are at liberty to do so, but why haven't they? In the eyes of most Americans the two party system offers stability, not because they disagree with third parties, but they fear them out of ignorance. Alot of people hate/fear something they don't understand. It's not an issue of the popular vote, if you want the popular vote to be effective you have to change the attitudes of voters.