Time yet for a third party?

[Tarfang_Trubasher]

I keep seeing Gary Johnson popping up in random articles. Today, the Washington Times even linked to a community writer that had positive words to say. GQ re-posted an updated article after following him as a slighted Republican candidate for President during the primaries. It feels to me the "middle" is getting bigger...and the current two-parties are becoming more and more hive-minded out at the respective extremes.

Is it still a wasted vote?

-TF

[Partha]

It feels to me the "middle" is getting bigger...and the current two-parties are becoming more and more hive-minded out at the respective extremes.

Well, if you don't pay attention to anything, that certainly could be a valid feeling.

[Lurker]

It feels to me the "middle" is getting bigger...and the current two-parties are becoming more and more hive-minded out at the respective extremes.

Well, if you don't pay attention to anything, that certainly could be a valid feeling.

Yeah, that was odd. The Democratic Party has not become more extreme. While the Republican Party has been moving further and further to the right, the Democratic Party has been moving closer to the center.

And there's nothing "middle" about Libertarianism in general or Gary Johnson's platform in specific. They are as far to the fringe and outside the mainstream as the most rabid Tea Party Republican.

And lastly, unless we drastically alter our voting system, a third party is guaranteed to not only lose, but to ruin the chances of any similar party.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

It feels to me the "middle" is getting bigger...and the current two-parties are becoming more and more hive-minded out at the respective extremes.

Well, if you don't pay attention to anything, that certainly could be a valid feeling.

Yeah, that was odd. The Democratic Party has not become more extreme. While the Republican Party has been moving further and further to the right, the Democratic Party has been moving closer to the center.

And there's nothing "middle" about Libertarianism in general or Gary Johnson's platform in specific. They are as far to the fringe and outside the mainstream as the most rabid Tea Party Republican.

And lastly, unless we drastically alter our voting system, a third party is guaranteed to not only lose, but to ruin the chances of any similar party.

...



Thank guys, I really needed that.

[Harlowe]

Guess you guys bad-touched him.

[Lurker]

Well, we are talking about the useful idiot who thinks the only thing wrong with the Republican Party is that they are too awesome.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

I've definitely never said that, but to claim that there is nothing extreme about current democrats and that they're "coming to the center" is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.

[Arathena]

False. The Democratic party has been stable since about 1980. Most of the liberalization that did occur from '50 to '80 was the result of the Civil Rights Act purging the party from the deep south. The Republican party has gone insane and is trending ever crazier.





And unless you care to end the practice of winner-take-all elections, there won't be a significant third party, unless it replaces the Republicans if they manage to finally offend the general electorate enough to obliterate themselves.

[Kulaf]

Everyone comes to the center......seems to happen every 4 years or so.

[Kulaf]

False. The Democratic party has been stable since about 1980. Most of the liberalization that did occur from '50 to '80 was the result of the Civil Rights Act purging the party from the deep south. The Republican party has gone insane and is trending ever crazier.





And unless you care to end the practice of winner-take-all elections, there won't be a significant third party, unless it replaces the Republicans if they manage to finally offend the general electorate enough to obliterate themselves.

Why are there three datasets for Democrats? Correct me if I am wrong but there is only 1 Democrat party. Is the line listed as Democrat simply a composite of the other two? I can't believe it is because certain people on this board had said that the "Dixiecrats" left the party and joined the Repulicans during the 60's, so why are there data points for them after that.

[Arathena]

False. The Democratic party has been stable since about 1980. Most of the liberalization that did occur from '50 to '80 was the result of the Civil Rights Act purging the party from the deep south. The Republican party has gone insane and is trending ever crazier.





And unless you care to end the practice of winner-take-all elections, there won't be a significant third party, unless it replaces the Republicans if they manage to finally offend the general electorate enough to obliterate themselves.

Why are there three datasets for Democrats? Correct me if I am wrong but there is only 1 Democrat party. Is the line listed as Democrat simply a composite of the other two? I can't believe it is because certain people on this board had said that the "Dixiecrats" left the party and joined the Repulicans during the 60's, so why are there data points for them after that.

The center democrat line is, I believe, a composite. And the datapoints exist because of that precise effect, so you can track the loss of the regressive elements of the Democratic party.

[Ddrak]

There is no possibility of a third party existing with the US electoral system the way it is.

Dd

[Kulaf]

The center democrat line is, I believe, a composite. And the datapoints exist because of that precise effect, so you can track the loss of the regressive elements of the Democratic party.

I don't believe that to be the case. For one, if they joined the Republicans then they can no longer be tracked as "lost Democrats" because unless you are tracking the same individuals, they would no longer have the same ideology. And if they are Republicans who lean more to the center but are not being tracked as such then the tempering effect on the Republican party is not being expressed even though those individuals have input into the Republican platform.

So I think the authors of this graph for whatever reason are trying to show some split in the Democratic party based on geographical location.

[Lurker]

So I think the authors of this graph for whatever reason are trying to show some split in the Democratic party based on geographical location.

Correct. The center line includes all Democrats. The other lines simply provide additional information and show that "northern Democrats" are slightly more liberal and "southern Democrats" are more conservative than the average. I'm not sure why they didn't include the same additional information for Republicans.

[Partha]

Because there are almost no 'liberal Republicans' left in the party at any meaningful level. Name a single Republican who supports abortion rights without exception, for example.

[Embar Angylwrath]

That's an unfair bar, as many Democrats have differing levels of support for abortion.

Republicans that support abortion rights (in a manner consistant with many Democrats) are Olympia Snowe (granted, she's retiring). Rob McKenna, Washington gubernatorial candidate, is another. Plus, you forget that over half of the people in the House and almost half of the people in the Senate were voted in because their consituents either are ambivalent about their stance on abortion, or fully support their stance on abortion. So its the electorate that has these views, and they elect people to office that share them. Its not the "Party". It's the "People".

Part of the issue is the perspective people take. Republicans (conservatives) see this as protection of the unborn. Liberals see it as feedom of the individual personage (which I find ironic considering the Dem position on gun control). There is no middle ground here, beacuase the issue isn't defined in the same terms.

[Partha]

That's an unfair bar, as many Democrats have differing levels of support for abortion.

That's the entire point. You can't talk about 'liberal Republicans' being some kind of force in the party when people who share their values have been systematically frozen out of posts in the party. For all Republicans bitch about Democrats being haters of free speech, notice that several prominent members of the party disagree on abortion, gay marriage, taxation, and a host of other basic issues, whereas Republicans vote and quote in lockstep.

And I'll believe Rob McKenna if he's voted in and has the bill sitting in front of him and we see which way he votes.

[Garrdor]

I think we need prayer sessions in school (not for mahammad koran obama, but for our first president JESUS CHRIST). Everyone should have guns + flash them every time a black person walks past property/mcmansion. Also planned parenthood is like super evil as are all social programs (and you know what that means! POOR GROSS PEOPLE who are probably unemployed!) Oh and gays aren't human beings.

WOOHOOO SANE PARTY 2012!!!! DRINK PEPSI!!!!!