I have not personally explored all the third party options, but if I vote for the office of President in November, I'm planning to go the third party route. There's no chance I'm voting for the President & for a variety of reasons. I've long stated my dissatisfaction with Mitt Romney. Took a second, serious look at him upon the request of a couple of BGPers. But I've basically come to the conclusion that I don't trust him at all. It's hard to see that changing between now & Election Day.

 

So if you're going third party, who is the third party & why are you voting for him/her?

More than likely yes.

I'm 99% confident my vote will be cast for Gov. Romney, but if not I would highly consider Gary Johnson.

Gary Johnson might be the only candidate willing to do something radical enough to begin fixing some of the problems in our country. I don't agree with him on everything, but someone needs to challenge the two major parties and their silly, trivial arguments that only perpetuate problems with real, important issues.

Only problem is a third party candidate can't win.

Only problem is a third party candidate can't win.

 

That's the main reason I will vote for them, to increase the relevancy of a 3rd party. Clearly the 2 party system hasn't produced the results that most of us want.

I voted for Perot. But was a lot younger then. A third party hurts the candidate from the major party they are most aligned with. Ron Paul would be spoiler this time around if he runs. He will hurt Romney big if he runs.

Only problem is a third party candidate can't win.

 

I think it depends on the candidate, but for the most part, I agree with you. I think if Perot doesn't jump out of the race in 1992 (& later jumps back in), he has a legitimate shot at the White House. Someone like him, in an economic climate such as this one, with the background he has could make a serious run. But if we're talking Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, etc. the third party wouldn't win.

 

The candidate's chances of winning, though, should not deter us from voting for him or her. Just my opinion.

Gary Johnson might be the only candidate willing to do something radical enough to begin fixing some of the problems in our country. I don't agree with him on everything, but someone needs to challenge the two major parties and their silly, trivial arguments that only perpetuate problems with real, important issues.

 

 

That is why I am leaning Johnson.

Here's an interview with Gary Johnson's running mate Judge Jim Gray. It's refreshing to hear someone on the national scene actually discuss an issue without all of the unoffensive political posturing, focus-group tested language, and general dodging.

 

[video=youtube_share;b6t1EM4Onao]

Only problem is a third party candidate can't win.

 

...and that attitude is what makes it so.

...and that attitude is what makes it so.

 

I wish I could find a video to it, but the idea that a third party vote doesn't matter always makes me think of a Simpson's episode where two aliens (Kang and Kodos) end up as the major party nominees by supplanting Clinton and Bush. This exchange follows:

 

Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.

[murmurs]

Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system.

Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.

Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.

[Kang and Kodos laugh out loud]

 

They elect Kang.

Because unlike other self-proclaimed libertarians on here I plan to vote for the Libertarian candidate.

The candidate's chances of winning, though, should not deter us from voting for him or her. Just my opinion.

Exactly. I can also guarantee that I vote for Johnson in KY will be a lot closer to meaning something than a vote for either Romney or Obama.

Edited May 7, 201214 yr by formerkywrestler

...and that attitude is what makes it so.

Wrong. I want a strong third party candidate, I just know it's very unlikely. Tough to raise the funds to be effective, this is a huge hurdle.