Who will the 3rd candidate be and will it matter?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SMM, Dec 24, 2007.

  1. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #1
    I seems that most of the recent Presidential elections has featured a third candidate, which has drawn votes from the Democratic candidate. I am basing this from Richard Nixon to the last election.

    The first one of significance I recall was Paul Simon. Even though he did not win the Democratic nomination, he was able to monkey-wrench the election of Michael Dukakis.

    Ross Perot was expected to draw-off moderate votes from Bill Clinton. Unfortunately for the republicans, he did not just appeal to moderate Democrats, but he also attracted a great deal of interest from Goldwater republicans. It was pretty much a wash.

    The past two elections have seen one individual hand the election to GWB; Ralph Nader. I cannot argue his right to run as a 3rd party candidate. The truth be known, I would support a strong 3rd party, with an equally formidable Presidential candidate. But, Nader did not have one in 2000, 2004, and he does not have it now. I have tried to figure Nader out, at least the act of putting GW on the throne twice. "Green Party" - what a joke. The outcome was as predictable as the Sun rising (especially the second election).

    Ralph was not going to win. Even his ego is not so big to believe that. The votes he was diverting from Democratic party was going to be enough to tip the favor for Bush. And once GW sat down, he was going to begin his rape of the planet. Like I said, totally predictable. Only a complete buffoon could not see this coming. For awhile I suspected either someone had the goods on him, or they were slipping him some serious cash. However, I decided to give the man the benefit of the doubt. Maybe the man just cannot handle the thought of passing into obscurity without an occasional '15 minutes of fame' blast? If he pulls this **** next year, someone should attach him to a weather balloon.

    The republicans have also been bitten by the '3rd candidate'. But, not to the same level as the Democrats. So, is their another candidate out there, ready to throw a vote diverting hat into the ring? Of the current republican candidates, Ron Paul would seem to be a good choice, if he does not win in the primaries.
     
  2. djejrejk macrumors 6502a

    djejrejk

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Location:
    Uhh...
    #2
    Nader was actually polling as high an 10% in some places, so yes he played a key role in 2000... but Gore lost Arkansas and his home state... and he actually won Florida. Don't blame Nader for Bush, to blame anyone other than the Democrats for Bush is folly. You should check out "An Unreasonable Man".

    I have actually met Ralph Nader and I highly doubt that ego had anything to do with him running for office. Nader actually has a good point,.. how different are the republicans from the dems? After observing them for 1 year in congress, the only difference is that they are not actively trying to put forth constitutional amendments to ban same sex marriage. They didn't clean up Washington and they couldn't even get us out of Iraq.

    Out system is failing us.. wake up.
     
  3. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #3
    He has said he won't be running as an independent if he loses the Republican primary.
     
  4. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #4
    of course that is what he says. he wants to win the republican primaries not sabotage himself lol
     
  5. SMM thread starter macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #5
    It is not polite to make comments like that.
     
  6. lord patton macrumors 65816

    lord patton

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    #6
    Paul Simon was a 3rd party candidate? Ross Perot's candidacy was a wash for the Democrats and Republicans? Dukakis had a chance? Nader made a difference in '04?

    You have some odd assumptions.
     
  7. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #7
    Yea, to blame the Repubicans would be stupid :rolleyes::rolleyes:
     
  8. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #8
    I don't remember Paul Simon running as a third party candidate and a quick google about him doesn't turn up anything mentioning him as a 3rd party candidate against Dukakis.

    Are you sure of your facts on this one?
     
  9. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #9
    That's interesting because every independent recount showed that Bush won Florida when all was done and said.
     
  10. djejrejk macrumors 6502a

    djejrejk

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Location:
    Uhh...
    #10
    The republicans got what they wanted, but all Gore had to do was carry his own state. I guess that was asking too much. Imagine what the last 7 years could have been like. I'm not saying that Gore would have been a great president, but almost anyone could have done a better job than W.


    Sry to offend =P


    All of the vote were not counted and the supreme court decided the 2000 race... look it up.
     
  11. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #11
    All the valid ballots were counted except for those not counted that were cast by overseas servicemen. Thanks for clarifying that. I'll bet the ratio of votes cast by the servicemen were higher for Bush than for Gore.
     
  12. djejrejk macrumors 6502a

    djejrejk

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Location:
    Uhh...
    #12
    You do some more research about the 2000 election,.. its a real "eye opener".
     
  13. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #13
    The only way Gore could have won is if all the overvotes were counted, which by election rules they aren't. Bush won by over 500 votes. That's the certified amount and by law that's the correct amount.
     
  14. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #14
    Ron Paul would be a great candidate, lets face it he is saying things that have to bother the party bosses like getting back to the Constitution and eliminating the Income Tax. Bringing back all our troops from overseas , places like Korea 50 years later. 50 years! thats insane. Ron Paul would get my vote as either a republican or a 3rd party.
     
  15. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #15
    Exactly......Bush is what they wanted


    Well, had Nader not run, where would his votes have gone?

    Don't blame Gore....atleast not over Bush and Nader.

    Nader knows he can't win, but he's hurting the people who have similar ideas as he goes...in that race, that was Gore.
     
  16. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #16
    Ron Paul is good...for international issues...for issues at home, he ignores them by allowing the states do what ever they please.

    Certain things need to be taken care over by the federal governments(healthcare, legalize drugs, etc)
     
  17. djejrejk macrumors 6502a

    djejrejk

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Location:
    Uhh...
    #17
    I agree with some of what Ron Paul has to say,.. my problem with his position is that he assumes that everyone has the same abilities and opportunities. I think that the federal government has some responsibility to make sure that people don't die.

    Unfortunately, many states simply don't care about the poor. I live in Texas and I can tell you that our state lawmakers assume that everyone has a doctor. I heard my state rep. say that caring for poor people who are sick is not in the interest of her taxpayers. The problem is that these people are dying. In Houston for example, individuals without insurance who don't receive care at on of the 2 big public hospitals have a 75% greater chance of dying. Clearly, at least in Texas, state and private entities are not taking care of this need.

    I think more people would have insurance if a.) they could afford it and b.) if they were better educated about the consequences of not having insurance.
     
  18. Anonymous Freak macrumors 601

    Anonymous Freak

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Location:
    Cascadia
    #18
    A group of news organizations did their own recount.

    It found that if the course of recounting that had been stopped by the Supreme Court had been allowed to continue, Bush would have had an approximately 1600 vote win.

    So even if the court process had finished, Bush still would have won.

    However, the court process was only asking for a "less strict" counting of the disputed counties results. It was not even going to ask about overvotes.

    Had the "less strict" counting ben applied to all counties, Gore would have won by a little over 300 votes. (Essentially, the counties where Gore won by a large margin were not contested; when Gore should have contested them as well, because if the same standards he was asking for in some counties were applied to all counties, he would have won.)

    Even the 300 for Gore number does *NOT* take "overvotes" into account. The press never went through with trying to resolve overvote ballots.

    source. An irony is that the method of recounting that Gore wanted had Bush as the winner, while the method of recounting Bush has advocated (before deciding he wanted to cancel the recount altogether,) would have had Gore winning.
     
  19. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #19
    No...the parties are not the same, the people in the parties are NOT the same and I'm tired of hearing this. Yes they are both beholding to certain factions that I really wish we could eliminate but they are not the same. If Bush had lost the election would he have spearheaded a program to educate people about global warming??

    That's the man Nader took the election from, would Gore have been perfect obviously no but he would'nt have done what Bush has done.
     
  20. djejrejk macrumors 6502a

    djejrejk

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Location:
    Uhh...
    #20
    I know plenty of people that wouldnt have voted if Nader would have not been a candidate,.. much like Ron Paul.


    The question you should be asking yourself is,... if Gore would have won, would he have done anything on global warming? He certainly didnt when he was VP. This illustrates the point, politicians are unable to do serious work they might be passionate about, even Democrats, because of corporate $$. They (the politicians and the process) are all corrupted.
     
  21. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town

Share This Page