I think if you get a real 3d party candidate who has a pro-constitution free enterprise program, GOP candidates will endorse him and if anything, you will get a positive impact on the legislative races.
The good news is that the only kind of third party candidate who is likely to have an impact would be a serious well funded person with a strong national agenda that has broad appeal.
I don't think that is very difficult to do--the borders are clearly an opportunity issue; so is the budget. The American people clearly recognize that it was not white little old ladies that ran airplanes into the WTC towers on September 11--a clear understandable definition of the enemy and a policy to defend America is another opportunity issue.
The two parties do not want to address any of these issues directly. We have reached the point where there are a number of issues the mainstream parties won't talk about because the parties are in agreement and the American people are on the other side. So there is a real opportunity for a third party candidate.
I don't see a Republican candidate who is able to take any of these issues to the people.
On the other hand, most of the posters here have their heads in the sand--Mrs. Clinton is ahead because she is taking positions on national issues that more than 50% of the voters agree with. So when you line her up against wets like Ms. Rice or the lady about whom this topic got started, Sen. Hutchinson, Mrs. Clinton is going to win going away.
I'm 62. I voted 3d party every time except 2 GOP guys for Pres. I worked hard for most 3d party candidates. Last time out, the LP purposely chose the weakest of its 3 options. The Constitution Party chose a weak option. If they wanted to win, those 2 parties would merge. But both are controlled by masochists. (If the Constitution Party is pro-life, why do its members commit suicide? If Alan Keyes is pro-life, why did he commit suicide in Illinois?)
We have reached the point where there are a number of issues the mainstream parties won't talk about because the parties are in agreement and the American people are on the other side.
The major parties avoid many issues, not because they agree... but because they are afraid of those third rails. Seniors who have been Republican all their lives and won't be affected by SS change turn on Bush because he touches the 3d rail of Social Security.
Immigration is such a 3d rail. Many of us far right Republicans including libertarians like me, and social conservatives, and evangelilcal abolitionist Republicans are pro-immigration. Others on the right are anti (illegal) immigration. The Dem party is also divided on the issue.
In neither party are the divisions liberal-conservative. They have a unique dynamic. Lies and irrational logic are prevalent among the high profile spokespeople on both sides of immigration. Most politicians see no way to win on that issue. To take one side or the other associates them with the lies and irrationality that will destroy them.