2016 "Independent Third Party" Presidential Nominees

[Texsox]

http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States..._election,_2016

 

Anyone interested in taking a third party and writing a summary of their platform and the candidates?

[greg775]

Trump says Bernie should run independent because of his treatment by the Democratic party movers and shakers. I'd be for that. I wonder if that would guarantee Trump the 'W'

Edited May 7, 2016 by greg775

[pettie4sox]

Trump says Bernie should run independent because of his treatment by the Democratic party movers and shakers. I'd be for that. I wonder if that would guarantee Trump the 'W'

 

Most certainly it would. I don't know know the percentage numbers but some BS supporters are super rigid to the point they have started a Bernie or Bust movement.

[StrangeSox]

In '08 there were a decent number of Clinton "Party Unity My Ass (PUMA)" people, too, but they almost all came around to vote for Obama in the end. Polling shows that, by and large, Sanders supporters are not thrilled but would still vote for Clinton (like me!). Sanders himself will likely endorse Clinton, and another favorite of Berners, Elizabeth Warren, has been on the attack against Trump lately and will definitely back Hillary in the GE.

 

There is a rump of Sanders supporters who rarely/never vote Democrat anyway, and those people won't be swayed by "lesser evil" arguments and will instead not vote or vote for some protest candidate. Overall, though, Trump's facing a much larger problem in that regard than Clinton is.

 

A Sanders 3rd party run would possibly lead to a 2000 scenario. You'd have to go state-by-state and estimate/guess which states Sanders would pull enough supporters from Clinton from in order to throw it to Trump. It could definitely happen (e.g. how LePage got elected in Maine, two liberals split their votes and he got the plurality), but just like trying to guess the ultimate primary results back in January, it'd be really hard to game out that hypothetical.

[StrangeSox]

Today's the filing deadline to be on the ballot in Texas, so any 3rd party "Never Trump" campaigns are probably DOA today.

[southsider2k5]

In '08 there were a decent number of Clinton "Party Unity My Ass (PUMA)" people, too, but they almost all came around to vote for Obama in the end. Polling shows that, by and large, Sanders supporters are not thrilled but would still vote for Clinton (like me!). Sanders himself will likely endorse Clinton, and another favorite of Berners, Elizabeth Warren, has been on the attack against Trump lately and will definitely back Hillary in the GE.

 

There is a rump of Sanders supporters who rarely/never vote Democrat anyway, and those people won't be swayed by "lesser evil" arguments and will instead not vote or vote for some protest candidate. Overall, though, Trump's facing a much larger problem in that regard than Clinton is.

 

A Sanders 3rd party run would possibly lead to a 2000 scenario. You'd have to go state-by-state and estimate/guess which states Sanders would pull enough supporters from Clinton from in order to throw it to Trump. It could definitely happen (e.g. how LePage got elected in Maine, two liberals split their votes and he got the plurality), but just like trying to guess the ultimate primary results back in January, it'd be really hard to game out that hypothetical.

 

They spent the entire last two election cycles convincing themselves that Mitt Romney and John McCain were right wing lunatics. They will have no problem keeping the party in line with Trump on the other side. The party is amazing at keeping its people in line.

[lostfan]

It's really not any mystery who Obama's talking about here (although this could be addressed to multiple groups of people).

 

[lostfan]

I agree with probably 85% of the same things Jill Stein believes, but especially in 2016 I find her petty and insufferable. She is simply not someone who's suited to any elected office. I legit can't remember the last time I heard her actually talking about addressing any of the problems she talks about in a realistic way, or otherwise doing more than blasting the shortcomings of others.

 

Seriously any dumbass can point out what's wrong with American politics because it's obvious. I'm not interested in that. And the shine of purity fades whenever you're in a position of responsibility and have to make actual decisions, unless you're a dictator.

[GoSox05]

If Sanders doesn't win the nomination, I will have to figure out who to vote for.

 

It will probably be Jill Stein. Although I do agree with lostfan, I feel like she can be petty sometimes.

[Quin]

I agree with probably 85% of the same things Jill Stein believes, but especially in 2016 I find her petty and insufferable. She is simply not someone who's suited to any elected office. I legit can't remember the last time I heard her actually talking about addressing any of the problems she talks about in a realistic way, or otherwise doing more than blasting the shortcomings of others.

 

Seriously any dumbass can point out what's wrong with American politics because it's obvious. I'm not interested in that. And the shine of purity fades whenever you're in a position of responsibility and have to make actual decisions, unless you're a dictator.

 

Jill Stein is the new flavor or the month. And yeah, I agree with her on most issues. Like I do Bernie.

 

But let's remember, she didn't win a primary. She was just appointed. Collusion!

[Buehrle>Wood]

No he's running

[Bananarchy]

Is Gary Johnson out?

He's in as per usual. He seems like the most sensible candidate in a Trump/Clinton election. I feel like I can't waste a vote on him this time around as I can't accept President Trump.

 

That being said, I live in Texas and my vote doesn't matter.

[southsider2k5]

He's in as per usual. He seems like the most sensible candidate in a Trump/Clinton election. I feel like I can't waste a vote on him this time around as I can't accept President Trump.

 

That being said, I live in Texas and my vote doesn't matter.

 

If you live in a state where your "vote doesn't matter" a 3rd party vote is actually more valuable than a vote for the 2nd place candidate, as it can help push their total towards the minimum totals to get them to the table in places like debates.

[pettie4sox]

If you live in a state where your "vote doesn't matter" a 3rd party vote is actually more valuable than a vote for the 2nd place candidate, as it can help push their total towards the minimum totals to get them to the table in places like debates.

 

I just learned about this too. It's a great idea for people that live in Illinois.

[StrangeSox]

A reminder that the Libertarian Party's official stance is against essentially all regulations including environmental, safety and health and that they oppose the public accommodations requirements of the Civil Rights Act. They oppose the government issuing debt aka US Treasury Bonds; want to abolish the income tax; want to abolish all social safety net programs such as social security, medicare and medicaid; and they oppose a standard legal tender issued by a central bank, instead favoring competing currencies offered by different banks (this has been tried to disastrous results in the past). They would abolish public education. This is all straight from their official party platform. I would not agree that they are a reasonable party and instead argue that they have a very radical ideology, with the ultimate goal to essentially reset the government to what is was in the late 19th century.

 

edit: of course, a vote for a party doesn't mean you embrace their entire platform, but they're not the "cut taxes a bit and legalize pot, who cares about conservative social issues" party.

Edited May 13, 2016 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

On the other end of the spectrum, the Green party kinda-sorta accepts anti-vaxxer nonsense and other medical woo like homeopathy.

[farmteam]

On the other end of the spectrum, the Green party kinda-sorta accepts anti-vaxxer nonsense and other medical woo like homeopathy.

That's unfortunate. I had only looked at the surface so far but liked Jill Stein.

[Brian]

He's in as per usual. He seems like the most sensible candidate in a Trump/Clinton election. I feel like I can't waste a vote on him this time around as I can't accept President Trump.

 

I have the same mindset and I hate it. I'd feel like I was wasting my vote on him and will probably unenthusiastically vote for HC. We'll see what I do when I actually step into the booth.

[Bananarchy]

On the other end of the spectrum, the Green party kinda-sorta accepts anti-vaxxer nonsense and other medical woo like homeopathy.

The irony that a party that calls itself "Green" is anti-science.

 

Anyone who is anti-vaxxer should be disqualified from voting.

[Quin]

On the other end of the spectrum, the Green party kinda-sorta accepts anti-vaxxer nonsense and other medical woo like homeopathy.

 

link?

[StrangeSox]

link?

http://www.gp.org/social_justice/#sjHealthCare

 

Greens support a wide range of health care services, not just traditional medicine, which too often emphasizes "a medical arms race" that relies upon high-tech intervention, surgical techniques and costly pharmaceuticals. Chronic conditions are often best cured by alternative medicine. We support the teaching, funding and practice of holistic health approaches and, as appropriate, the use of complementary and alternative therapies such as herbal medicines, homeopathy, naturopathy, traditional Chinese medicine and other healing approaches.

[CrimsonWeltall]

http://www.gp.org/social_justice/#sjHealthCare

 

Barf.

[Quin]

http://www.gp.org/social_justice/#sjHealthCare

 

Dear lord.

 

Don't see anything about the anti-vaxxers, but jesus christ.

 

[StrangeSox]

Dear lord.

 

Don't see anything about the anti-vaxxers, but jesus christ.

That came from a Jill Stein interview or something, I'll see if I can dig that up. It was very much hedging about "oh well we need more research!" without taking a firm stance one way or the other. I think that's an example of playing to their base more than something Stein earnestly believes herself.

 

They're also very strongly anti-nuclear power.

 

The two major parties definitely do everything they can to entrench themselves, but 3rd parties are generally niche for a reason.

Edited May 17, 2016 by StrangeSox

[lostfan]

That came from a Jill Stein interview or something, I'll see if I can dig that up. It was very much hedging about "oh well we need more research!" without taking a firm stance one way or the other. I think that's an example of playing to their base more than something Stein earnestly believes herself.

They're also very strongly anti-nuclear power.

 

The two major parties definitely do everything they can to entrench themselves, but 3rd parties are generally niche for a reason.

Stein's an actual medical doctor so when I hear her talk about those kinds of topics it sounds like she's careful what she does and doesn't say. She's not gonna say something she knows to be outright false, like you'd see in a bulls*** link on Facebook.