THIRD PARTY CANDIDATES

[SnakeTom]

There is talk of Michael Bloomberg running as a Independent for President. What affect would this have on the election. No third party candidate has ever won or even came close to being elected but some have altered the final outcome. Since the start of the 20th century several come to mind. In 1912 former president Teddy Roosevelt probably paved the way for Woodrow Wilson defeating incumbent President Taft. In 1948 and 1968 segregationist candidates Strom Thurmond and George Wallace did not have much effect on the final outcome as their votes would probably have gone to the ultimate winners (Truman & Nixon). On the other hand Ross Perot (1992) and Ralph Nadir (2000) had a direct effect in deciding the outcome in defeating one Bush and electing the other.

So what effect would Bloomberg have. He's been both a Republican, a Democrat and an Independent at differing times. A fiscal conservative and a social liberal most of the time. The sad thing is that he would have no chance to win while he may well make a better President than any of the candidates in the race from either party. My guess is that he would hurt Hillary the most but in this year who knows?

Tom K

 

[HALL85]

You can make either case that he would hurt Hillary or Trump (if he's the ultimate Rep nominee).

Hypothetically, what would happen if Hillary had to drop out due to the FBI investigation or if for some reason Sanders started to emerge as the nominee because of her baggage (and the Democratic leadership became concerned that he would be the nominee)? Could they draft Bloomberg as a candidate this late in the primary process?

 

[SnakeTom]

If Hillary's campaign fell apart the Dems would never choose Bloomberg as a replacement. Remember he was elected mayor as a Republican. In that unlikely hypothetical Elizabeth Warren is more likely to emerge. But in today's primary system it's hard to imagine a late entrant getting the nod. The only way I could see Hilary leaving the race would be if there were health issues that developed.

Tom K

 

[shu09]

Joe Biden is always waiting in the wings if Hillary falls apart. I think Hillary falling apart due to legal matters is a long shot. Falling apart due to Sanders is also not likely.

 

[Seton75]

I understand the history, but I wonder of a third part candidate being in the thick of the race is any more unrealistic than Trump's chances to succeed based on perceptions of 3-4 months ago.

 

[SnakeTom]

I understand the history, but I wonder of a third part candidate being in the thick of the race is any more unrealistic than Trump's chances to succeed based on perceptions of 3-4 months ago.

It is unrealistic because the third party candidate does not have the built in organization to do the groundwork necessary such as poll workers & get out the vote phone crews and van operators. The independent must build it from scratch where as the political parties has scores of party regulars ready to spring into action..

Tom K

 

[HALL85]

It is unrealistic because the third party candidate does not have the built in organization to do the groundwork necessary such as poll workers & get out the vote phone crews and van operators. The independent must build it from scratch where as the political parties has scores of party regulars ready to spring into action..

Tom K

Maybe so, but did Trump really have all that in place three or four months ago? And how much of that does he have in place now? It seems that he is primarily using the mainstream media to get out his vote.

 

[SnakeTom]

Maybe so, but did Trump really have all that in place three or four months ago? And how much of that does he have in place now? It seems that he is primarily using the mainstream media to get out his vote.

There is a big difference between primary elections and general elections. In the general election you have the full effect of the organization in action. The primaries are more fragmented and deals with a different type of voter (the ideologue) and a much smaller group that actually comes out to vote. This is one of the reasons that it is much harder for a true moderate to make it to the general election. The ideologues & extremes in both parties have much exaggerated power in determining who will be the nominee.

Tom K

 

[cernjSHU]

Yes, all we need is another billionaire coandidate for president. No thanks. I am not sure why he gets so much praise as mayor of NYC in the first place.

Bloomberg would hurt Hillary for sure against any Republican candidate. By contrast, he would really help Sanders if the the field is Trump, Sanders and Bloomberg. That would be a dream for Sanders to go against two billionaires.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

Cernj is speakin' my language!

Bernie was pretty impressive last night. Really inspiring at times. The questions lobbed his way were tough but fair, and then Hillary got softballed for a half hour. The first question for her was basically "Why does Obama love you so much?!?" Sad how clear CNN's bias towards the status quo is on the Dem side. Kinda wish I was able to go volunteer more than I have in a state like South Carolina & convince people to vote for the real fundamental change they thought they were getting with Obama, instead of the piecemeal, incremental change we actually got.

 

[Section112]

Why not add to the current circus that is our election with an outside independant candidate! Maybe Ross Perot or Romney or Al Franken or Jesse Ventura or one of the dead Kennedy's can join the circus too.

I would have respect for Bloomberg if he ran as an independant right from the start. But at this point it would be pretty crazy but crazy seems to be working in this election.

 

[shu09]

the real fundamental change they thought they were getting with Obama, instead of the piecemeal, incremental change we actually got.

Please elaborate. Obama has changed a lot of things and has been a net positive in my view.

 

[Seton75]

Why not add to the current circus that is our election with an outside independant candidate! Maybe Ross Perot or Romney or Al Franken or Jesse Ventura or one of the dead Kennedy's can join the circus too.

I would have respect for Bloomberg if he ran as an independant right from the start. But at this point it would be pretty crazy but crazy seems to be working in this election.

Why would he do that? He knows the deck is stacked against the third party. He looked into it years ago, and there was an article where he said that the way things are structured makes a third party run too hard to pull off, which is the logic Snake was discussing. And that has certainly been true in the past, and maybe it still is now. Or maybe it isn't due to the candidates on the dem and rep side. So till he knows who his opponents will be, he isn't sure he has a chance. So he waits and now puts his toe in the water. And if two candidates are selected who he thinks he has a shot at, he goes for it.

 

[Section112]

Why would he do that? He knows the deck is stacked against the third party. He looked into it years ago, and there was an article where he said that the way things are structured makes a third party run too hard to pull off, which is the logic Snake was discussing. And that has certainly been true in the past, and maybe it still is now. Or maybe it isn't due to the candidates on the dem and rep side. So till he knows who his opponents will be, he isn't sure he has a chance. So he waits and now puts his toe in the water. And if two candidates are selected who he thinks he has a shot at, he goes for it.

But how will another billionaire be looked at by the electorate and at this late date? He can certainly fund it so money is not his problem. If he wants to do it more power to him but if a true third party candidate wanted to run from the start and not have any party affiliation that is something I could respect and consider.

 

[Seton75]

Maybe a self made millionaire who started a company, revolutionized info availability in the financial industry will be looked at with admiration. Trump supporters see his money as an asset cause he is influence free.

Mb is the guy who gets my vote if he runs. If not, i will write in SPK again.

 

[SPK145]

Bloomberg is the worst of a bad lot of candidates. Nanny-stater.

 

[Section112]

We will never see a Big Gulp again if Mike gets elected! lol

 

[SnakeTom]

Only once have I voted for a third party presidential candidate & that was in 1980 for John Anderson. it was because Ronald Reagan was much too conservative from my viewpoint but Jimmy Carter was a disaster as President. So I voted for Anderson the moderate Republican Congressman from Illinois who of course had no chance to win. If Bloomberg does in fact run he may be the second Independent that I would vote for depending on who the Dem & GOP nominees are.

Tom K.

 

[HALL85]

I really haven't heard any of Bloomberg's positions on a national level outside of his gun control thoughts. I just don't see how a third party candidate gets much traction since Trump has already defined himself as the anti-establishment guy.

Speaking of Trump and his decision to pull out of the last debate....From a purely observational view, we have seen two major shifts in media perception in this campaign. First, is that there seems to be no doubt or push back that the MSM has a liberal slant...they don't even try to defend that position any more. The CNBC debate seemed like the turning point when Cruz and Rubio called them out and the parent company - NBC - had a weak response. But Trump is proving that the public really doesn't have nearly the same respect for the news media anymore. He says something outrageous and they over-report it...and his support increases. They think they can sway the electorate and it's blown up in their faces. AND he's not using any of his own money...how incredible is that?

This latest pull-out of the FOX debate only builds that persona that he is beholden to no one....liberal MSM or conservative FOX. He may be a crappy President, but he is brilliant in his manipulation of the media. He has positioned himself as a third party candidate in the Republican primary; and he's MSM neutral. It's all about his message resonating with working America (wages/jobs and safety/security) using immigration as the flashpoint for both.

However this plays out, the MSM News credibility has taken a huge hit in this election....maybe that's a good thing, and Trump should get a lot of the credit at least for that.

 

[Seton75]

Fox responded to his threat like an idiot and help make trump look better. And nfw should a person with negative history with a candidate be on the panel. Fox shows they are a conservative media entertainment network.

Imo, many trump supporters are fed up but prefer a guy less out there than dt if he existed. Right now he is the only option. And many dems could slide to mb. They can trust his judgement for the supreme court, and know is is not like the red meat guys trump is stirring up.

Maybe a country with citizens unable and unwilling to take care of themselves, with obesity and diabetic epidemics , needs someone to say you don't need a 50 Oz big gulp. That doesn't bother me at all.

 

[SnakeTom]

Maybe a country with citizens unable and unwilling to take care of themselves, with obesity and diabetic epidemics , needs someone to say you don't need a 50 Oz big gulp. That doesn't bother me at all.

It doesn't bother me a bit either.

Tom K

 

[Seton75]

I really haven't heard any of Bloomberg's positions on a national level outside of his gun control thoughts. I just don't see how a third party candidate gets much traction since Trump has already defined himself as the anti-establishment guy.

Speaking of Trump and his decision to pull out of the last debate....From a purely observational view, we have seen two major shifts in media perception in this campaign. First, is that there seems to be no doubt or push back that the MSM has a liberal slant...they don't even try to defend that position any more. The CNBC debate seemed like the turning point when Cruz and Rubio called them out and the parent company - NBC - had a weak response. But Trump is proving that the public really doesn't have nearly the same respect for the news media anymore. He says something outrageous and they over-report it...and his support increases. They think they can sway the electorate and it's blown up in their faces. AND he's not using any of his own money...how incredible is that?

This latest pull-out of the FOX debate only builds that persona that he is beholden to no one....liberal MSM or conservative FOX. He may be a crappy President, but he is brilliant in his manipulation of the media. He has positioned himself as a third party candidate in the Republican primary; and he's MSM neutral. It's all about his message resonating with working America (wages/jobs and safety/security) using immigration as the flashpoint for both.

However this plays out, the MSM News credibility has taken a huge hit in this election....maybe that's a good thing, and Trump should get a lot of the credit at least for that.

Trump's success is because of the coverage he gets from the MSM. Or as I like to call it, the media. As bad as the media can be, it would never release such a sophomoric note that was so bad for their argument as FOX did yesterday. Idiots in every way, dopey tactic and worse strategy.