[inquest]

No national figure has emerged to campaign on immigration because the Parties prevent it, and Gilchrist's showing is somehow the harbinger of doom for the GOP. I heard this same argument when Pat Buchanan ran for President.

Buchanan captured 25% of the vote in a general election? I must have missed that.

By the way, you've neglected certain factors, among which that Gilchrist and company aren't tarnished with the same things Buchanan's been tarnished with that have left a bad taste in many people's mouths: alleged anti-Semitism and theocratic tendencies. Absent those things, a third-party candidate running on a border-security platform has a lot going for him, as third-party candidates go. This is especially true in the Southwest.

I find this argument less than convincing when both Bush and Kerry got more votes than any other living American in history.

So you can conclude from that datum either a) that Bush and Kerry are the two most popular politicians in America, or b) that the two parties really do not serve the interests of the people. Assuming the latter (which I think would be the conclusion of most rational people), then on an issue that resonates so well with the public, they clearly can't hold out forever. And the cracks are already showing.

[Once-Ler]

Buchanan captured 25% of the vote in a general election? I must have missed that.

That is because I never said it. Buchanan actually won a state wide primary...some thing Gilchrist is incappable of doing. Why you chose Gilchrist as a counter-argument is beyond me. Gilchrist was running for 1 of over 50 CA House seats, and not a statewide seat. (I'm suprised CA hasn't elected an illegal to the Congress - the Constitution seems to mean little in CA.) My question to you was "Have you ever thought to ask yourself why the leaders of the anti-immigration movement can't get elected to statewide office much less be thought of as a national leader?" You have failed to answer my question.

So you can conclude from that datum either a) that Bush and Kerry are the two most popular politicians in America, or b) that the two parties really do not serve the interests of the people. Assuming the latter (which I think would be the conclusion of most rational people)

You assume too much. Including that your views are rational. Record turnout is not an indicator of voter dissatisfaction by rational people.