In new article, ABC’s The Note is bullish on 2012 third party prospects

letter of credit resume sample masters dissertation research funding go viagra plus 400 mg http://mce.csail.mit.edu/institute/creative-writing-zadie-smith/21/ http://mechajournal.com/alumni/purchase-an-essay/12/ help me write my essay for free follow link research paper on school uniforms online paper writing service cialis versus viagra http://go.culinaryinstitute.edu/how-to-write-a-cover-letter-for-government-job-canada/ homework help grade 4 go to site http://teacherswithoutborders.org/teach/buy-custom-essay-papers/21/ viagra erectile dysfunction paraphrasing in english https://vaccinateindiana.org/alternative-buy-viagra-154/ buying viagra online in b https://www.go-gba.org/6100-short-essay-morning-walk/ u.s. history and government ghostwriters website https://www.guidelines.org/blog/thesis-binding-ucl/93/ can you buy viagra in cancun get homework help get link define family case study projects thesis eku graduate school thesis guidelines source url sample essay introduction click go site Amy Bingham of ABC’s The Note writes that third parties may well do better in 2012 than they have in the past. The article contains quotes from LP Executive Director Wes Benedict, GP spokesman Mark Dunlea, GP presidential candidate Jill Stein (apparently misidentified as the only GP candidate in the field), and Americans Elect CEO Elliot Ackerman. The tenor of the article is summed up by this quote from Dunlea:

“People are definitely fed up,” he said. “Am I predicting a victory for the Green Party this year? It’s certainly still a long shot, but less this year than in past years.”

5 thoughts on “In new article, ABC’s The Note is bullish on 2012 third party prospects

  1. Jeremy C. Young Post author

    I happen to agree with this article. It’s quite possible we’ll see four serious third party candidates on the ballot in enough states to win the election: Gary Johnson, Virgil Goode, Jill Stein, and the Americans Elect candidate. All of these candidates in my view would be upgrades over their party’s previous nominee. Meanwhile, if Stewart Alexander secures the PFP nomination as I predict he will, he’ll likely do better than the previous SPUSA candidate, too. That would mean all third parties who run constitutionally-eligible candidates in multiple states would do better this cycle than they did last cycle — a real feat if it happens.

    I also think that articles such as this one really should interview Constitution Party spokespeople as well, particularly since Chuck Baldwin outpolled Cynthia McKinney nationally in 2008.

  2. Kleptocracy And You

    @2 Google and research and report back. THX

    “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.” – Georgetown Prof. Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton’s mentor, speaking on the supposed U.S. “two” Party system since the early 20th Century.

    {Why do} “300 million Americans have {only} 2 choices for president? Can you imagine having 2 colors to pick for your car? Red or Blue. No silver, or black w/ chrome rims. No racing yellow or hunter green. Nope – 2 colors, red or blue. The 2 party system has failed us. Our corrupt corporate propaganda media has failed us. You cannot give 300 million people 2 choices & expect change. They feign fighting on TV while they sleep together at night. We need a 3rd, 4th, 5th choice to fairly represent us” -shwantz2 on youtube

    I think I am, therefore, I am. I think.- George Carlin

    Explaining the left-right paradigm to a co worker!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Kw7j4lbDB4

  3. Sam

    @3 shwantz2 simply does not understand the mechanics of plurality voting, single winner districts and the effect these voting systems have on elections.

    The problem with everyone’s thinking is that they’re always zeroing in on one person from several parties, when they should be thinking of 100 to 1000 people as a team, from 100 to 1000 potential party/categories (and independents) possible.

    When you limit your thinking to 4, 5, or 6 names from 4, 5, or 6 parties/categories, you’re really putting a limit on the American people and all those who are trying to participate in the process.

    Take down the road blocks and start thinking 1250 names vying for 1000 “seats”, and it’s happening on 1/1/2012.

    Can you function as one of 1000 voting members of a team working as representatives for the all? Or do you insist on a team of 3 to 6 people?

    I like 1000. It’s not in concrete, but it is a nice round and rather big number.

  4. Pingback: In new article, ABC’s The Note is bullish on 2012 third party prospects | ThirdPartyPolitics.us

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *