56% of voters favor a 3rd party - Pew

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

[annabanana]

1. There's always Bob Barr & Ron Paul . . I say they should do a

big fat write-in. . .

[skipos]

28. Why don't these 56% vote for Nader or any of the other 3rd party candidates?

That is what I would like to know.

[Mojorabbit]

2. Looking at how our Dems

are preforming in congress, I feel the same way lately.

[depakid]

13. Almost EVERYONE does

It takes hard work to enjoy public approval ratings in the single digits.

In the long run, I doubt that either of the two major parties will retain a majority in the coming decade(s) as the fallout from their policies hits home in the post cheap oil era.

[Drunken Irishman]

3. Except what type of 3rd party? I bet those numbers change when you ask about a lib/con 3rd party.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. They need to get off their butts and make one then.

Nah, they'd rather sit in front of the tube, watching sports and reality TV and then when you ask them how they're voting, they'll other up some lame ass bleating about how "they're all the same!"

Have I mentioned how much I loathe "undecided voters"? How the FUCK can anyone be having trouble distinguishing between the 2 major candidates?

[Deja Q]

5. $top whining!

:rofl:

[MadHound]

16. As one of those who wish for a viable third party,

I have no trouble distinguishing between the two candidates, none at all. The trouble is that once again we're down to a choice between the lesser of two evils. When both candidates and both parties are so in thrall to corporate America, there is not a candidate that I can for merely one that I have to vote against

Many many people face the same problem I do, as evidenced by this poll. However the American political system is stacked in favor of a two party system. Witness the lack of third party candidates in the presidential debates. Note the myriad of local, federal and state rules that a third party, even established third parties, have to navigate in order to get on the ballot. It is all fine and good for you to say that "they need to get off their butts" but the truth of the matter is that for the past sixty years there has been a concerted effort to exclude third parties from the political field in this country, and many, many third party candidates have indeed gotten off their butts, only to slam into the legal walls and political barriers erected to exclude them.

Frankly I'm surprised that the number is only fifty six percent, given how many disaffected, disillusioned, non-voters there are. The last presidential election saw forty percent of the electorate stay home, and that was considered a historically low number. Many people recognize this rigged political game for what it is, and they're wanting something different, not more of the same old two party/same corporate master system of government.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

17. If there are so many people like you, then why aren't there more parties?

The fact is, you represent probably less than one percent of the people who desire a 3rd choice. The rest of them are the LIVs I describe. They don't know shit, but that doesn't affect their conviction that "both parties are equally bad". That mindset is the deliberate creation of the Right, aided by the MSM, where they have persuaded the masses of the moral equivalency of both sides. They are NOT the same and it some point it's time to hold the majority of American people accountable for their ignorance and obliviousness. A 3rd party of mostly dumb uninformed people isn't going to solve anything.

[MadHound]

21. You need to read my post for comprehension

I stated exactly why there aren't more third parties, the political game has been a rigged one for a long while now.

My question for you is why you're so dead set against our Constitutional right that we can vote for who we wish? What is wrong with having third, or fourth, or a multitude of parties to choose from. Institute IRV. This system seems to work quite well in most of the rest of the world, why not here?

No, the two parties are not the same. However both parties are bought and paid for by corporations, many times by both corporations. For instance, one of the largest donors in the 2000 election was Phillip Morris. So large that Phillip Morris donated 2.3 million dollars to the 'Pugs and 2.1 million to the Dems. No matter which candidate won, Phillip Morris couldn't lose. Like I said earlier, the two party/same corporate master system of government. I would suggest that you check out Open Secrets for a real look at this system at work, and it's been at work for a long, long time.

This isn't another instance of a vast right wing conspiracy either, so you can back off from that delusion. Noted liberals and historians like Michael Moore, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Kevin Phillips and many, many others feel the same way. Are they also part of this great vast RW conspiracy:eyes:

And apparently I'm not part of a one percent minority. Instead I'm part of a fifty six percent majority, and no, we're unintelligent no nothings. In fact I would wager a large sum of money that those who desire for a third party system are quite intelligent people, quite possibly much more intelligent than those who wish to strictly adhere to a two party system:shrug:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

26. I don't think you read mine either

I'm not arguing against more political parties. You can throw out references to Chomsky, Zinn, et al., by MY point is the average American who answered that survey doesn't know who the fuck they are. If you think the majority of that 56% could tell you who Chomsky is or could define things like capitalism and socialism, I've got a bridge in London to sell you. THAT'S the problem, not the lack of parties. There are literally dozens of recognized political parties that these people could join if they bothered themselves to do an iota of research on the issues. I'm pretty sure that if people really understood what the issues were and made educated decisions on their positions on them, those fringe parties would see their memberships go up exponentially. But they're not bothered, your romanticism of them notwithstanding. You and I are a part of a tiny minority. If you don't believe me, volunteer to go door to door canvassing sometime.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. A lot of people are getting fed up with Politics as Usual.

[Wiley50]

6. I agree about the 3rd party pew. The spouse's lover should not sit with the family in church. n/t

[LiberalFighter]

7. Those 56% don't know diddly squat about politics.

There is only one way to make this happen.

And it starts with local elections from township to city to county offices. Elect viable 3rd party candidates with viable 3rd party organizations.

Then elect state senate and state representatives (assembly). Elect enough of them not necessarily a majority it will force one or both dominant parties to form coalitions to pass legislation. BUT it won't work if only one dominant party needs to be in a coalition.

[whatchamacallit]

8. I bet a lot of this is from people who

have been taught to hate the left, but are now coming to grips with how badly they've been screwed by the right. They're too brainwashed to vote democratic, and too pissed to vote republican, so they think a "magical" third party is the way.

[donco6]

9. Half the 56% would want . . .

Half the 56% would want a more conservative 3rd party, and half would want a more liberal 3rd party.

Same boat; different day.

[Junkdrawer]

10. Whats a matter? Corporate Heavy and Corporate Lite ain't good enough for 'em?

Screw 'em.

[galileoreloaded]

18. Right on!!!

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. I favor a viable third party

So what?

[AlCzervik]

12. how do you keep a 3rd party from ending up like the other 2?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. Here's (a little of) what George Washington had to say about political parties.

http://www.liberty1.org/farewell.htm

"All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction; to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community, and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans, digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things to become potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."

from his Farewell Address

[DailyGrind51]

15. America needs a viable Progressive Party AND Libertarian Party

The present Republican and Democratic Parties need to go the way of the Whigs and Bullmoose Party.

[Postman]

20. I'd be happy with a 2nd Party.

There's only 1 Party in the US.

[readmoreoften]

23. You hit on the real answer. I don't think "the Unity Party" would make much difference.

[Blue-Jay]

22. PEW!

[SoCalDem]

24. Which one?? In theory, most people DO want something else

but in reality, deciding which third party is the problem..

What we really need is proportional representation (parliamentary style)..

a winner-take-all system like we have will never support a 3rd party with enough strength for them to win..

[KharmaTrain]

25. Keep In Mind The Definition of "independent Changes...

My bets are a good number of those who say they're "Independent" are pissed off repugnicans. Back in 2000, it was disastisfaction with the Democrats that gave an extra boost to Nader. What would be interesting to see is where those who claimed to be an independent in 2000 or 2004 are today...my bets are the jump in Democratic voters this year comes from the previous independents.

[UTUSN]

27. Just count them under McNASTY's column & be done with it!1 n/t