There are both advantages and disadvantages to considering a 3rd party.
We have heard for over a decade that the best course of action is to take over the GOP from within. How has that worked out? Dole. McCain. Romney. Possibly Bush3.
Recall how Boehner, who just barely escaped losing his speakership, turned on the conservatives and demoted several committee chairpersons.
==
For:
Several potential minor parties already exist. They, however, tend to be ‘family owned’ or limited issues parties. Few ever even win a local election.
George Wallace’s American Party and Ross Perot’s Reform Party were the only two to make much headway in the last 50 years. They were driven, however, by their founders. When those founders basically took a seat, their respective parties fell apart.
Could a ‘real’ conservative party make it? Considering that many ‘blue dog’ Reagan Democrats do not like the leftist direction their party has been going for two dozen years, and considering the conservative Republicans have a similar problem, imagine what might happen if they united.
A ‘real’ conservative party might have a change. Of course, it would have to be wary of the self-interests who would try to insert themselves in it and take over. The unofficial Tea Party groups have experienced that, as did the Reform Party.
==
But, something has to be done or we will end up with more of the same. And that has resulted in racial divide, disastrous unemployment, sluggish economy, etc.
==
The Whigs and early Republicans probably had similar discussions.
I don’t think tour hopes for a third pary would be so much with disgruntled dems,most of them left and are now with us or npsa(no party affiliations). But more with the indys, middle of the roaders who are just so pissed off with both parties they became independents. Trouble is they are usually not what you would term “activists.” The pathway to get there is ...well way over my head. I can’t think it through at this late date.