Candidates like Bob Barr and Ralph Nader obviously don’t stand a chance. However, they will surely pick up a few percent of the national popular vote. It seem to me they aren’t factored into the polling in most cases. This could certainly make a difference in an election this tight.
Which major candidate do you think these candidates are mostly likely to ":steal": votes from and who do you think they might help?
ii am voting for Jack of the Wild Baby Party http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWjOyYdbR…
I believe it is possible that you could see a turnout similar to the 92 election when Perot received 19% of the popular vote. There are a lot of people who are not only unhappy with both parties, but are also sick of voting for the lesser of two evils. While it is true that the third parties and independents will not win, they do have the power to send a message. Some people have a more long term goal in mind than just who gets to run the country for the next four years. McCain stands to lose more votes than Obama in this area, because the most disenchanted appear to be conservatives.
Nader is an after thought at this point. I do not think he will reduce Obama’s popular numbers at all.
Bob Barr lost any chance of significant numbers when he failed to win Ron Paul’s backing. He may get some of McCain’s popular but not enough to cause a loss of any electorals to Obama.
I looked more into it. Ron Paul is on the Ballot in Louisiana and Montana and is an official ‘write in’ in california. He may hurt McCain yet.
Nader believes it’s time to quit going soft on the Democrats and the way they cater to big business and never work hard enough for the poor or for peace just because the Republicans are slightly worse. He makes good pints. There must come a time the American left refuses to take the BS of the Democratic party any longer. They talk the talk but never walk the walk when it comes to standing up against the far right and big business. Nader is right and has more integrity than any Democrat or Republican but he also has no chance to win. Nader didn’t spoil the 2000 election, the Supreme court gave it to Bush. I wouldn’t vote for Nader because the system at this point is far too corrupt for him to have a realistic chance but I have respect for those who stand up for what they believe in. I myself however believe in pragmatism over idealism but that doesn’t change the fact Nader is right.
All the times thrd-party got electoral votes:
1968- 46 electoral votes
1960- 15 electoral votes
1956- 1 electoral vote
1948- 39 electoral votes
1924- 13 electoral votes
1912- 88 electoral votes
1892- 22 electoral votes
1860- 39 electoral votes
1856- 8 electoral votes
(1852 Whigs and Democrats major parties)
1832- (The Democrats and National Republicans were frontrunners, w/ Nullifer and Anti-Masonic being third parties)- Nullifer 11 electoral votes, Anti-Masonic 7 electoral votes
1820- 1 electoral vote
1808- 6 electoral votes
Also, political parties in America didn’t begin until 1796. Third parties can win if they get the necessary votes
Bob Barr will steal votes from McCain
Some states have Ron Paul on the ticket..that will steal votes from McCain.
No one is talking about Nader this year…I don’t believe he will take any votes away from Obama.
I think Barr is more likely to get more votes than Nader, which would take away a small percentage from Republicans.
Third party candidates don’t factor much in Presidental elections.
The main reason is the the main candidates have enough trouble keeping the voters they should have, and swaying swing voters.
Persuading voters of third party candidates is the least of their worries.
Who cares? They’re still the best choices, and we’re screwed no matter whether McCain or Obama wins.
The third parties WOULD ":stand a chance": if people would simply start voting for them.
Ron Paul is on the ballot in Montana. He might spoil it for McCain.