F-you independant candidates

The BBQ Pit
1

Yeah you H. Ross Perot. Nader, too.

Screw you guys.

And now to your company I add Glenda Parker, whoever you are.

Your little no 'count campaign racked up over 25,000 votes in a race decided by fewer than 3,000 (as of 11:30 Tuesday night).

And you credentials? allow me to quote from your homepage:

(your bolding, not mine)

Now I know you are very proud of the g-kids. No doubt. But with crises facing the world like a nuclear Iran, a nuclear N. Korea, AIDS rampant in Africa, a genocide in Darfur, a war and a half of our own, etc. ad nauseum, can I ask you to kindly have a tall glass of STFU?

You earned your nick name, Gail “the Rail” because your number one issue is bringing high speed rail to Virginia. Thanks.

Your unwinnable campaign has allowed a racist, smug, warmongering, chickenhaw, redneck to stay in office. Your pet campaign from your loser party means one less fang has been pried from the toothy snarl of the NeoCon wardog. Virginia remains the purview of Senator Allen, who we can take at his word, that we will remain in Iraq until the “job” is done. Whatever that job may be.

Per your website, here is your “plan”:

Thanks. I mean it. Your candidacy virtually guarantees none of your wishlist will receive a supportive vote from Virginia Senator.

Did you have the right to run? Sure. Should you have? Hell no.

(As I wrote this, the margin has narrowed. The pitting still stands even if Webb ends up the victor)

2

Yeah…it’s totally her fault.

Because all those people who voted for Allen couldn’t possibly be racist, smug, warmongering, chickenhaw, rednecks too.

Smug warmongering chickenhawk rednecks, maybe, but as we all know on the Dope, racism isn’t really a problem in America anymore.

3

I never said it was all her fault, nor did I say racism was not a problem. It is. And if whatsherface hadn’t run we may not have a Senator who represents that consituency so well.

4

As of eight minutes ago Webb is ahead by a little over 3,000 votes with 99% of precincts reporting, according to CNN.

Recount’s a-comin’, either way.

Speaking of independent candidates, why is Lieberman being counted as a “party change”? I know he didn’t get the Democratic nomination but is he truly supposed to be an “independent”?

5

In the Virginia Senate race, I believe that both Webb and Allen are pro life (as am I). I also believe that there are plenty of pro-choice voters in Virginia. This being a democracy and all, those voters ought to have the opportunity to vote for people who agree with them. This means fringe candidates, so suck it up. And I know that the linked candidate is probably not pro-choice, but the OP was aimed at all minor candidates.

And I eagerly await proof that the linked candidate took more votes from Webb than Allen (which I doubt) and, if so, that the margin was enough to affect the outcome.

An Ross Perot? You do know, I’m sure, that Perot helped Clinton, right?

In conclusion, fuck you.

6

How is “if she hadn’t run, our guy would have won” not saying it’s her fault? Which is fucking absurd. It would be absurd even if Webb hadn’t written explicit pedophiliac erotica.

I have trouble enough grasping the football-fan mentality behind two-party-politics in this country; this kind of thing really twists my brain. I guess Douglas Adams put it best in Mostly Harmless, about the planet where the people are led by lizards in a democracy: the people hate the lizards, but they keep voting because if they didn’t, the wrong lizard might win.

The wrong lizard won. You think it’s some other lizard’s fault, or possibly her swarm of grandkids. I think this whole fucking process is broken beyond repair.

And there’ll be a recount if the margin is 11,000 votes or fewer anyway. Which, on preview, it seems to be.

7

While it’s my candidates that have lost the most elections due to third party candidates in recent years, I still don’t share your disdain for such candidates. If we’re ever going to have more than a two party system in this country, then we need to stop blaming the third party for “swaying” the election to the other side. The persons truly responsible for the other side winning, are the folks who voted for the other side, not the person trying to run on a platform that isn’t in alignment with either party.

If I want to blame someone for putting Allen in office, I’ll blame the folks who overlooked his racist remarks when they voted (or voted for him specifically because of his racist remarks), not some nice little lady who wants to build high-speed rails across Virginia.

8

I’m not sure you understand how our government works if you think any system other than a two-party one is possible.

Actually, a one-party one is possible under our current government structure, just unlikely.

A three party, or more, sustainable system would require significant constitutional changes.

9

Given that there is not a single mention of political parties anywhere in the Constitution, can you exactly what in the document would need to be changed?

10

Yep, that’s got me scratching my head too.

11

Unless you’re referring to some strange interpretation of Storer v Brown or some other similar ruling, I have no idea what constitutional changes you’re talking about. Please elaborate, as I’m guessing it’s not quite as clear cut to the rest of us as you think it’s going to be.

The only other thing I can even imagine is that you think that the manner in which we hold elections would tend to force the parties to meet in the middle and fill any niche that some third party might find. While that’s certainly a debatable position, I don’t think constitutional changes are required.

12

This Wikipedia entry may be of some interest.

The law – which is not absolute by any means – says that simple majority voting, as we have in the United States, tends to lead to a two-party system. We would need to switch to proportional representation to have a better chance at having more parties.

13

If that’s what he’s referring to, then my second guess was correct. In that case, it’s still perfectly possible for other parties to emerge. Sure, eventually something would give, but that could just mean the possible death of an existing party. Such transitions could take years or even decades, as parties would likely have trouble doing about faces with their platforms in a single election cycle, and the process could repeat itself over and over again. I certainly don’t ever expect us to have exactly three fixed parties, or anything like that, but I do see potential for third parties to gain significant power, or even overtake one or both of the existing parties, and I don’t see a problem (nor a constitutional hurdle) with that.

14

Yeah, he’s saying it’s mathematically unlikely for a multi-party system to exist in our current situation.

That said, this would be an ideal time for a third party to appear- historically, third parties have only flourished in times of crisis in the US and tend to be tied to a single issue.

Foreign policy, in this case, perhaps, or maybe even gay rights or abortion…

15

Because the Republican party supported his campaign instead of their own candidate. Because he votes with the Republicans as often as not, and happily received a kiss from Bush after one of his State of the Union charades.

Lieberman is widely expected to jump to the Republican party if necessary to retain control of the Senate, by both Democrats and Republicans. He’s a typical politician, interested in the power, rather than the people.

16

Sometimes, people vote for the candidate whom they choose as the best person to represent the constituency.

Regardless of party affiliation.

And those people will continute to vote for 3rd party candidates, no matter how much it inconvienences you.

Welcome to America.

17

This would be - what - about the eleventy-trillionth time I’ve heard this gripe on the Dope.

You guys soooo need preferential voting

18

The Republican candidate for governor in Illinois, Judy Baar Topinka, was actually criticizing those who were going to “throw away” their vote on voting for the Green Party candidate - because she said that wasn’t going to unseat the Democratic incumbent and so protest voting against her over any perceived/real shortcomings of the Republicans was going to backfire. Yes, you heard that right; she thought that sufficient potential Republican votes would be going to the Green Party instead. What planet is she from that she thinks this would be palatable to most Republican-leaning voters in Illinois, especially since the Green andidate had been a member of the Socialist Party just over a decade ago?

19

Excude me Mr. Australia, but in the USA, that is not even a number!

20

The Dems could have had a real shot in Texas if the Governor’s race hadn’t been a 4 way contest. The stupid novelty campaign of Kinky Friedman and the useless Strayhorn helped Governor Goodhair, Rick Perry win.