[FreeReign]

How ever easy you say it would be to do a third party, it would much much easier within the party. And a lot quicker. Whatever you say about Perot and Reagan applies within the party. And if you have a ‘new’ party, you still have to continue to do it there. It’s a never-ending fight. It’s the same fight, the same thing, the same people, the same work, staff, money, goals, the same electorate, etc. etc. The only difference is you don’t have to do all the stuff you have to do with a new party. If you can’t do it within the party, you can’t do it with a third party. And there’s no good reason to. It just makes no logical sense.

Hmmmm, I used say the same thing, almost word-for-word, over-and-over, on this board.

Now?...not so much.

Sure the same problems that happened in the Republican party would happen in a third party over time.

Same electorate, same media and same back-stabbing trolls sabatoging a party.

Starting out though, for a presidential election or two, maybe not.

[D-fendr]

Glad to see someone agree with me. Sorta. :)

But:

Why wouldn’t you have the same problems and fights to begin with? Same disagreement on candidates, etc. Except you have to build a whole new apparatus in the meantime.

[EternalVigilance]

Sure the same problems that happened in the Republican party would happen in a third party over time.

Same electorate, same media and same back-stabbing trolls sabatoging a party.

Not necessarily.