1 posted on
10/09/2008 12:16:03 PM PDT by
mnehring
To: mnehrling
one of the big surprises of the presidential election of 2008: the disastrous decline of fringe party candidates in a year that once seemed ripe for their efforts.Thank you, Sarah!
To: mnehrling
Big money gets support from the two partys. They will not donate to a third party. Without that money, a third party can’t make it.
3 posted on
10/09/2008 12:18:13 PM PDT by
RC2
To: mnehrling
Third party decline?
No third party has ever won a national election in the history of the Republic.
5 posted on
10/09/2008 12:21:03 PM PDT by
wideawake
(Why is it that those who like to be called Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
To: mnehrling
1. No money.
2. Media refuses to cover or include the candidates.
3. Libertarians are the biggest third party, and most of them that I know are demoralized about Barr as the pick, since he was a big time statist in congress.
6 posted on
10/09/2008 12:21:42 PM PDT by
mysterio
To: mnehrling
Perot taught the GOP it’s 3rd party lesson in 1992 and Nader taught the Dems their lesson in 2000 and 2004. Dems are a little slower.
8 posted on
10/09/2008 12:23:10 PM PDT by
Always Right
(Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
To: mnehrling
Third parties used to win seats in the house. What changed was mass media. If the media won’t take you seriously you don’t stand a chance.
11 posted on
10/09/2008 12:25:06 PM PDT by
SeeSharp
To: mnehrling
I’d be happy with a second party at this point.
16 posted on
10/09/2008 12:29:15 PM PDT by
cripplecreek
(Paying taxes for bank bailouts is apparently the patriotic thing to do. [/sarc])
To: mnehrling
This is easy... a little less than half of America wants to live under communism and sharia law... the other less than half wants to live under Freedom and Liberty... Patriots will not waste a vote that will elect the worst radical POS the dims have ever run for POTUS.
LLS
22 posted on
10/09/2008 12:36:04 PM PDT by
LibLieSlayer
(GOD, Country, Family... except when it comes to dims!)
To: mnehrling
As much as I like Lou Dobbs, around the 21st of June, he stated the Chinese run the Panama Canal.
I all about fell out of my chair.
At that point, I decided I needed to verfy whatever he states.
Since I live in Panama, I had not realized he was so off his game. If he was totally wrong here, in what other areas is he wrong?
This in no way is a “I hate Lou” thread.
I will not be replying to anyone who tries to make it one.
To: mnehrling
The laws passed by Dems and Repubs are designed to stop a third party.
It will take a conservative billionaire to get a conservative third party started.
25 posted on
10/09/2008 12:39:20 PM PDT by
airborne
(Don't pray that God is on your side. Instead, pray that you are on God's side!)
To: mnehrling
I think a lot of people who usually vote third party (this libertarian included) see this election as very important and very close to call.
Third parties often focus on the big ticket elections, which is the wrong approach. Support needs to come from the ground up. Libertarians need to elect people on the local levels first before making a run at the White House.
You read it hear first Freepers, Portnoy is running for a local office two years from now.
28 posted on
10/09/2008 12:42:21 PM PDT by
Portnoy
(Fahrenheit 451...Today's Temperature is hotter than you think...)
To: mnehrling
All the kook fringe party members have moved to the democrat party — and they openly coddle them!
30 posted on
10/09/2008 12:43:38 PM PDT by
mlocher
(USA is a sovereign nation)
To: mnehrling
So no 3rd party has won in modern history. We're stuck with 2. McCain or Obama. It's not a hard choice. And pray for a President Palin.
33 posted on
10/09/2008 12:47:29 PM PDT by
McGruff
(Sarah. We crave red meat. Red meat!)
To: mnehrling
1. Running for president is now BIG business.
2. It takes BIG bucks (regretably).
3. The Media will only focus on 3rd Parties in furtherence of their own Agenda... they have no time for them this year. They are fully in the tank for Obama.
38 posted on
10/09/2008 12:52:00 PM PDT by
Tallguy
("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
To: mnehrling
If a single issue party had come out against amnesty and illegal immigration and proposed revisions to our legal immigration policies, IMO it would have garnered at least 5% of the vote.
47 posted on
10/09/2008 1:01:36 PM PDT by
kabar
(.)
To: mnehrling
It will never matter what a third party offers.
Until a runoff system is created it won’t happen.
To: mnehrling
58 posted on
10/09/2008 1:37:18 PM PDT by
Antoninus
(Ignore the polls. They're meant to shape public opinion, not measure it.)
To: mnehrling
The third parties picked guys that actually have less appeal than the mains. It was a ripe opportunity given how lame the picks of the mains were, but they blew it.
The big question history books will ask about 2008 is why nobody worth a damn ran for president.
60 posted on
10/09/2008 1:38:52 PM PDT by
dilvish
To: mnehrling
Seeing that BO was a card-carrying member of the New Party, it may be revealed that our 2008 Presidential election was actually won by a stealth third party.
63 posted on
10/09/2008 1:46:41 PM PDT by
Mygirlsmom
(How to make a Dem crazy: Speak softly and carry a big LIPSTICK!!!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson