Christie

[Timothy]

Which is the main crux of the argument! 

At present, the hold our nose and yank the big R handle at the polls may be our only hope in the near term...

Down the road we can dream of the Reagan reincarnation but probably not in the next election!

[Big Frank]

Does anyone remember the last time a third party candidate was elected President? What makes you think a third party candidate has a chance now? I would vote for the Bull Moose party if I thought they could beat the Democrats.

[Ulmus]

Wasn't the Republican party a "third" party or "replacement" party after the Whig party ended?

[billt]

Remember the mathematics as well. With three parties you wind up with a candidate who can win with 34% of the vote. Which means 64% of the voters don't want him.

[Timothy]

66%

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

Wasn't the Republican party a "third" party or "replacement" party after the Whig party ended?

The way the Republicans won was that no one supported the Whigs .
and the Democrats wound up split on slavery and running 2 separate slates of candidates .
That's the ONLY way a 3rd Party will gain the white house.

[Ulmus]

So you're saying that the public has to become disenfranchised from a given party enough that they leave it and create a third party.  I can see that happening.

[Solus]

So you're saying that the public has to become disenfranchised from a given party enough that they leave it and create a third party.  I can see that happening.

That might get a 3rd party win, but in Tom's example, the strong party was bickering and fielded 2 slates, allowing the 3rd party an easier victory.

I fell pretty confident that most Dems won't leave the party no matter how disenchanted they become...they already believe the government is causing the problems, but don't associate it with how they vote...or if they do, they vote the same any way.  

I'm discouraged by this thread along with the one Tom started with a long post about whey the Reps don't win.  

I'm not discouraged by this thread because of those how see things differently than me, but because enough facts from both sides just don't paint a very bright picture.

[gunman42782]

I had no intention of starting WW3 when I started this post.  Basically, I just wanted to vent about the fact that the liberal news media is picking our candidates.  They have the last two elections, and are already working on the next.  Chris Christie is not someone I can vote for, period.  I am a card carrying Republican, and have been since before I could vote!  I was too young to vote for Reagan, but I sure as hell would have if I could have.  Have voted Republican in every election since, except when the first Bush stabbed us in the back and by executive order signed the very first assault weapon ban, and renounced his NRA membership (remember that?) I voted for Peroit in that election, and am not ashamed to say it.  (I did vote for him the first time he ran.)  All that being said, I stand by my original post.  I have never voted for a Democrat, and never will, but I honestly fail to see the difference between a Democrat and Chris Christie.  After all, Bloomberg ran as a Republican, and he is the most anti-gun SOB in the country!

[billt]

As long as the bulk of the voters believe the crap the liberal Democrats dispense, along with handouts, that is what you're going to get. You still have plenty of Dems that still believe Obama Care is good. How scary is that?