From the Clarus Research Group via Third Party and Independent Daily:
Twenty-five percent of the nation’s electorate said they would “definitely” consider voting for “an independent candidate with moderate views on most issues” in the 2012 presidential race, and an additional 42 percent said they would “probably” consider doing so. Twenty-eight percent said they would “definitely” or “probably” not consider voting for an independent candidate.
“This poll shows that a serious independent candidate would have a shot at 25 percent of the vote, maybe more,” said Faucheux. “This is 6 points higher than the 19 percent independent Ross Perot received in 1992. Of course, it ultimately depends upon the qualifications and appeal of the actual, flesh-and-blood candidate and whether he or she has the resources to mount a full-fledged nationwide campaign.”
“As the Independent Green Party of Virginia proved in 2008 – by putting Michael Bloomberg on the ballot, and in the process collecting some 70,000 signatures.”
The Independent Green Party of Virginia (which has no affiliation with either the national Green Party or the Green Party of Virginia) did place Michael Bloomberg’s name on a petition as a Presidential candidate and they did gather enough signatures to obtain ballot access in the Presidential election. However, since Bloomberg did not end up running he ended up being a stand in candidate, and then in a very bizarre twist, the Independent Green Party of Virginia actually sold their ballot status to the Constitution Party and so Chuck Baldwin ended up being listed on the ballot in Virginia as the candidate for the Independent Green Party.
Bloomberg was not the candidate the IGP had on the ballot.
very few billionaires – if any – are likely to be doctrinaire Gs or Ls ……….. T. Boone Pickens ??????
Clearly, Bloomberg is neither a Green nor a Libertarian, for all the reasons stated above. And very few billionaires – if any – are likely to be doctrinaire Gs or Ls. There may be an exception somewhere, but by and large, people who have made lots of money tend to support things as they are; the system has worked for them, after all! Sure, they may want to tinker with aspects of present policies and/or make things “more efficient” – but they are unlikely to challenge the basic premises and assumptions of the status quo.
The democrats have gone so far to the right that in many cases I have no least preferred candidate between the democrats and the republicans. I have nothing to lose anymore, by voting green. It is either vote for greens or vote for nothin!
The centrist focus of this poll was silly, and I wouldn’t vote for antiunion bloomberg to lead the green party, but if it takes moderate third party enthusiasm to make irv a reality that is cool.
Okay, if that’s the case, then why didn’t they in 2008? Or is it because things are so bad now? Well, one of the two candidates in 2012 will just tell them they will fix the problems, and everyone will vote for them. Always happens.
And Mike Bloomberg would never run as a Green. He doesn’t fit their platform at all, and running as a Green would probably actually hinder his campaign; he would do much better as an independent.
I think you’re all making too much of this headline. It’s nothing new.
“67% Say They Would Consider Supporting an Independent Candidate for President.”
Well, golly as sure heck! I’m CONSIDERING pulling the lever for a Democrat of all things this November, does that mean I’m going to do it? No. Does that make that statement any less true? No.
The problem with being an independent is obvious: credibility. As much as it sounds cynical to say, money buys that. And that’s why only billionaires like Perot or Bloomberg can ever make a dent as a third party candidate when the threshold to even get into debates are so high.
that the academic power house from Maine
was widely quoted as ‘Don’t Vote For Me’
Green Party fan // Mar 26, 2010 at 6:53 pm
“That’s the Beautiful Pat LaMarche …….…”
Nor would Libertarians back Michael Bloomberg for President.
Bloomberg is a good businessman, and Bloomberg Financial is a useful resource for business information. But as Mayor, he pushes nanny state regulations, and maintains New York’s bloated welfare city-state.
Most importantly, Mayor Bloomberg has backed the criminal use of eminent domain in the Brooklyn Yards project, forcing people out of their homes to benefit a well connected developer with tax money behind him.
Then again, Bloomberg’s attacks on private property might get him support from the Green Party, which has opposed limits on eminent domain in several California elections.
Bloomberg was not the candidate the IGP had on the ballot.
There is no way the Green Party would run Bloomberg.
That’s the Beautiful Pat LaMarche…
Speaking of Independent/Green Party candidates for President…or Vice President…
The Green Party’s Pat LaMarche’s column for this week is in the Bangor Daily News.
pat la marche
Beating the odds in basketball, cancer
By Pat LaMarche
You’ve got to love March Madness. The front page of Ohio State’s Web site yesterday proclaimed, “Evan Turner rebounded from a poor opening round performance to lead Ohio State into the Sweet 16. The Buckeyes bounced Georgia Tech 75-66 in a game where many thought the Yellow Jacket post players would dominate them.”
http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/139624.html
Green Party Watch and IPR came into existance because the mainstream fatcat media blackout Indys, Greens…
Thanks for the story.
Several previous Posters are corrrect.
There is grassroots Independent and Green Party support for Bloomberg.
As the Independent Green Party of Virginia proved in 2008 – by putting Michael Bloomberg on the ballot, and in the process collecting some 70,000 signatures.
Indy Greens were the only state in the nation to put Bloomberg on the ballot for President.
As veterans of the Green Party, and Libertarian Party know – getting a candidate on the ballot means creating 50 state parties. That means any “Independent” running for president must immediately create a nationwide party consisting of 50 state parties, and in fact, and in truth ceases to be totally “Independent”.
As Green Party veterans well know, as Green Party Watch, and IPR prove, America has a major media pay to play system.
If as a candidate you do not buy the major media advertising you are largely blacked out of coverage.
There are endless examples – hundreds of Green Party candidates – who experience this every year.
Look at how much more coverage Perot, because Ross, bless spent $52 million of his on money on advertising, and gotmore coverage than the Green Party’s Ralph Nader.
The point: the Green Party needs Michael Bloomberg to run as their candidate in 2012 and truly build America’s third party with force, power, and the resulting elected office holders at all levels, local, state, and federal, who would run with Bloomberg as Green Party candidates.
Thanks again for post.
You read my mind d…t.
Sure, 67% say that today, but by election day, all but 2% will have miraculously changed their minds.
Until voting for a third party unequivocally cannot result in the inadvertent election of your least-preferred candidate, voters will balk when they step into the booth. Their grand claims to the contrary are about as meaningful as politician’s campaign promises…
think Don Lake is shedding tears on his keyboard for the lack luster 2008 ………
If the indy candidates for governor this year do well, win even, (Chafee, Cahill, etc), that could be a big boost for independents in general heading into 2012.
The only person who comes to mind with the resources is Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He would not be my first choice by any stretch of the imagination.
Well they should do it then.
Sure, Look at John B. Anderson [1980] and Perot, Perot, Nader, Nader, Nader ……. Lake