Posted on 09/30/2004 7:19:03 AM PDT by Warden
Sorry, I meant to reply to the original poster of the question. It's late at nite and in the middle of a heated campaign.
This is true, but not necessarily a Catch-22.
It seems all the 3rd Parties want to start at the top (the Presidency). To gain acceptance, you do indeed need to win - but they need to start at the local level. I (like most people) will vote for the best candidate for City Council, Mayor, County Board of Supervisors, and perhaps in the state legislature. However, on the National level, I will vote for the best candidate with a chance to win .
The Libertarians, Constitutions, Greens, and SecondAmendmenters have to win a few elections at the lower levels before they will gain acceptance at the national level.
Especially when you use "principal" instead of "principle".
CP
2000: Popular Vote: 98,016 (0.09%)
1996: Popular Vote: 184,656 (0.19%)
Sure sounds like a lot better idea than to have both major parties Pres. candidates bought and paid for by big oil, agriculture, textiles, foreign corps & govts, etc.
Have you ever heard of paragraphs?
>I just know that if the constitution party really had a
>chance to win they would definitely get my vote
That's the catch. RINOs hate them and preach doom and gloom whenever the name comes up because they knew if true conservatives ever switched en masse, the GOP would no longer be anything resembling grand, but instead would be scrabbling around in the dirt with Nader.
The only reason I'm not voting for them this go around is that I see this election as a referendum on gay marriage - nothing more, nothing less. There's too little difference between the candidates for most other issues to be affected in a major way by the election of either man.
But, this is my last republican vote should the '08 nominee be a tax-and-spend liberal like Bush.
Yeah, that's just what we need. A Fundamentalist Christian Superpower.
Don't let the door hit your arse on the way out, eh?
I'm voting for the Elmer Gantry Party this election.
You're still upset that JohnGalt and Burkeman1 got the Zot, aren't you.
Since you claim to be concerned about the judiciary I am sure your vote for Bush need not be doubted.
Paragraphs are our friend.
Yes, I've heard of the Constitution Party and I met Howard Phillips at Jarbidge, NV in '00.
The Constitution Party does for the Republican Party what the Ralph Nader Party does for the democrat party.
Have you heard of John Kerry?
HE is the one, who is going to win, if conservatives will vote for anyone other than Bush.
... a vote against President Bush is a vote against the US.
Ah, yes! Label all who vote against big government as traitors. Why am I not surprised?
Come over from DU for a little fun?
We like bigger and more expensive ~ it's the American way. :)
In retrospect if I had imagined the final outcome and the four year mantra of the democrats boasting of winning the "popular vote" I might have reconsidered.
The primary process is despicable,leaving most of nation with the dictates of a few state votes.
That being said, when I look at the pencil-knecked geek from Utah, with his colorful neckwear and consider his close friendship with his fellow-judiciary committee buddy Teddy Kennedy I get the shivers.
Shhhhh, what's important is that they FEEL GOOD about themselves. ;D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.