Reply With QuoteYes, as the government falters we need to turn to a strong industrialist to fix things. Where is that John Galt fellow anyway?Originally Posted by JeffL
"I'm not one of them."
Yes, as the government falters we need to turn to a strong industrialist to fix things. Where is that John Galt fellow anyway?
Ross Perot would like a word with you.
Someday, my prince will come ....
I don't think the public feeling towards Washington was as negative as it is today. Plus the members of each party were pretty supportive of their respective Presidential candidates. A lot of Obama's base has become fairly disenchanted with him, and the Republicans clearly aren't very enamored with their current crop of candidates.
Not saying he/she would win, but I think a 3rd party candidate would pick up a lot more votes than normal.
LOL!...
Perot's 1992 run was by far the most successful third party run in modern history. He already did pick up a lot, lot more votes than normal, and it only served to split the Republican vote. The only third party candidate to ever top that twenty-five percent figure you mentioned was Teddy Roosevelt in 1912, already a popular former two-term President.
There is zero chance of this happening again next year, full stop.
I agree that there is a very low chance of anyone running 3rd party next year (anyone reasonable) but I still believe that if the right person did, they would top Perot's 92 vote. I think the political climate is more conducive to that than it was in 92.
Anyone who wants to compete as a true third-party candidate next year is going to need garbage trucks of money to dump all over the place. Anyone who can do that is going to be a seriously established rich guy. The only way they'd win is if their campaign slogan was "Raise my taxes! I'm referring to me, the rich guy, not you! When you chant that it might sound a little weird."
The only guy who I can think of who might fit that bill and has enough name recognition is Warren Buffett, and he's not running.
Bloomberg, arguably, would be the other one.
Just because it's fun, I'll state yet again that the available exit polls show Perot voters roughly evenly split between the other two candidates as their second choice.
We really ought to put together some P&R FAQ to debunk these commonly reported claims.
Wow, I'm sorry for not subscribing the the Jason McCullough Digest of Ross Perot-Related Posts, geez. In that case, it only served to do basically nothing.
I wasn't being snarky, I just couldn't remember if you had been in the arguments on it before.
Operating totally from memory, but didn't Perot hit around 19% on that vote? I also seem to recall that Nader was on the ballot, and polled somewhere between 1-3% depending on where you counted.
I think Bloomberg could win if he were to run but he won't.
Are liberals allowed to criticize convservative pastor's this time around? 'Cause what some of these guys will tell you don't hold a patch on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Last edited by mrmolecule88; 10-14-2011 at 11:38 AM.
Yeah, 19%. He actually came in 2nd in Maine, beating Bush by 0.05%.
In other news, apparently RON PAUL RON PAUL is wearing fake eyebrows to the debates.
No one trusts a man with thin eyebrows.
No, no one trusts a man whose eyebrows are trying to crawl right off his own face. Maybe they finally got fed up with the covert plutocracism and want to go protest on Wall Street.
That is... awesome.
Ooh, snark.
Nice summary, though.
The funniest thing about that article is the RONPAULRONPAUL fans in the comments weeping bitter tears that their candidate doesn't even merit his own comment.
McFadden is no Tom Tomorrow, but I did love the first panel.
It is interesting to see how the candidate who is the least Tea Party-ish is the one leading the polls right now. And the ones who are absolutely lined up with the Tea Party, Bachmann (easily the "most Tea Party") and Perry, are fading away. I'm not sure how to interpret that. The Tea Party has been all about no compromise, pragmatism is the enemy.
This is because they are insane.
They've all led in the polls at some point though, which should tell you something about the polling to begin with. I don't see Cain lasting any longer in the polls than the rest of them did.
I'd say the last panel is the best. Except that it isn't funny, it is just true.
I am a few days late to this party, but I just read this post on Andrew Sullivan's blog on why it's legit to question Cain on his experiences in the civil rights movement. It's worth a read.
Posting Permissions