Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wastoute

I’m curious if Clinton would have been elected under this scenario, since Perot split the vote.

On the other hand, the primaries service this purpose.


6 posted on 10/27/2016 11:05:07 AM PDT by aimhigh (1 John 3:23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: aimhigh

It would sure “get the money out of politics”.


7 posted on 10/27/2016 11:08:15 AM PDT by wastoute (Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

And then there’s Buckley’s “first 400 names in the phone book.”


9 posted on 10/27/2016 11:09:16 AM PDT by wastoute (Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh
I’m curious if Clinton would have been elected under this scenario, since Perot split the vote.

Depends on how Perot split it. See my post #8.

On the other hand, the primaries service this purpose.

No, primaries choose the party's candidate. It doesn't give someone the opportunity to rank their choice of parties in the general election.

The Constitution Party candidate is on the ballot in only 27 states this year. If you support their platform, it would give you the opportunity to vote for them, and then for Trump. You can express your true political preference without feeling like you wasted your vote.

When third party candidates get any significant support, the major parties take notice. The most recent example is the Contract For America in the 1994 off-year election: it was largely derived from the Reform Party platform.

10 posted on 10/27/2016 11:14:59 AM PDT by justlurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson