Yes, a new major party formed about 160 years ago. What does this prove?
Are you suggesting that we are close to another one right now? No, I didn’t think so.
Now you’re just trolling me…and not very well.
Nothing posted so far in this thread (and I have no doubt that some will keep trying) has suggested that a third party candidate has even a ghost of a chance this election cycle.
I wonder why we are debating this?
As I now say for the fourth time go vote your conscience. Just don’t expect the person you are voting for (unless it is one of the two major party candidates) to win.
I don’t think there needs to be any argument about that.
We aren’t. You are arguing with yourself on a point no one else is making.
1 Like
I don’t think so TB. You brought up the California example. I thought that was odd but that is how this began.
Yeah, I read that and thought it was smart for you to delete it.
Closer to what? It’s an example of how people with vision saw past the status quo and created incredible change.
1 Like
It proves that disaffected voters can retire parties that aren’t cutting the mustard, and build new coalitions that will actually be responsive to their political desires.
The current GOP needs just such a retirement, or in the alternative, serious reform driven by the threat of retirement.
The current GOP is not a political party anymore - it is a strongman cult. Rewarding this shift with blind loyalty of voting is the height of absurdity. Time to send a message and plant seeds for future elections.
2 Likes
Ha, look I don’t care where you work, nor would I ever bother you or anyone else outside of this board. We all have real lives and we occasionally get together here to disagree. I still look at it as all in fun. You and others may have a different view.
Anyway, yes the republican party won that election we were a very divided country at that time in history. And a new major party was born. And perhaps someday there will be enough desire for another strong major party, but not this election cycle and not in the foreseeable future. So…
1 Like
I certainly agree with that statement. But right now there are only two major parties and one of the candidates of those two major parties will become President.
Again, why are we arguing?
Cool. Great. Grand.
It does nothing to change fact that it never mentioned new immigrants, which was your argument. Posting non-relavent right-wing articles doesn’t exactly help your case.
That was done in 1992 and again in 1996 by the same man. The result was the same, only he achieved less votes in 1996. It’s not easy to conquer a major party, nor is it easy to dissolve one. It has happened in history but it’s not like it is very common is it?
Time to get to work you guys have fun today!
A new third party won. I’ve no idea how this election cycle will pan out, but not voting third party because they can’t win is a terrible reason not to vote third party.
1 Like
You’re ignoring that Millennial voters, the largest voting block, are not generally loyal to a particular party.
1 Like
Nope, the California example flew over your head.
Certain states are going to go blue in presidential elections. California, Massachusetts, Vermont, and so forth. The outcome is not in doubt. GOP voters in those states know that - there is no chance a GOP candidate is going to win the state and therefore contribute electoral votes to the GOP candidate. Yet they vote anyway.
Why?
It’s not on a hope that just maybe the GOP candidate might pull it off (as the states are currently constituted demographically and politically). No one believes that, just as Democratic voters in Alabama and Wyoming don’t think that’s going to happen for their candidate in those states.
So why do they vote knowing their vote will not impact the election at the electoral level, i.e., it is a wasted vote?
It’s not a wasted vote, for the reasons explained above.
And the principle is the exact same for third party voters. It’s no different.
2 Likes
Report: 90% of illegals skip immigration court appearances; 135,000 will go missing
Now this becomes interesting…and will be interesting to watch unfold.
Millennials and the “Bernie Coalition” (all of which been shown to NOT be Millennials) have not really shown that they have sway at the State and Congressional Level. (I use as anecdotal evidence the last two Mid-Terms).
While the outcome of this Presidential Election will be one for the ages…all the Mid-Terms/Senate/Congressional Races that FOLLOW…and the effect that the elected President will have on them…will (IMO) have the much greater impact.
TO ME, this has more implications than the SCOTUS status.
Thoughts?
After convention bounces its still looking rough for Trump. Maybe if he insults more gold star families his numbers will do better?
2 Likes