# Judge Moore: A third-party challenge from the right? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 14, 2004, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220 "2004-02-14T16:02:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![John\_Carter\_of\_Mars](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/2bfe46/32.png) [@John\_Carter\_of\_Mars](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Carter_of_Mars)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2004, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/21 "2004-02-15T19:18:10Z")
By **Governor Quinn** : “The only question that this leaves is, how large a following in the South does Moore have?” Very little. He’s pretty much recognized as a crackpot. His outrageous positions get him more ink from the press than his minimal popularity deserves. His “Big Rally” to garner support for his Ten Commandments monument in Montgomery drew about 500 people. It was a brag point that over half of these supporters came from as far away as Indiana, Illinois, and North Carolina. So less than 250 people from Alabama showed up. This in a state where over 80,000 routinely attend football games in Auburn and Tuscaloosa. The Good Judge ain’t exactly ridin’ a mandate from the people. The deal as I see it: In the states where Moore might pull a few thousand votes, Bush will have a large plurality over Kerry anyway. Those electoral votes will still go to the Pubbies. Moore’s popularity, and thus his effect, would be much less in states where a third party candidate pulling some votes from Bush might actually make a difference. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2004, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/22 "2004-02-15T23:46:29Z")
It’s a mistake to believe that the extreme right exists exclusively in the deep South. There are pockets all over the country, and certainly a few thousand people in swing states like Missouri and West Virginia might be tempted by Moore’s screeching. The number is small, yes, but remember that several states were decided by just a few thousand votes in 2000. I suspect that after Kerry’s primary bubble bursts, the two candidates will be almost exactly even. In an election that goes down to the wire, every little bit will count. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2004, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/23 "2004-02-16T02:14:35Z")
> [@John Carter of Mars](#): > > The deal as I see it: In the states where Moore might pull a few thousand votes, Bush will have a large plurality over Kerry anyway. Those electoral votes will still go to the Pubbies. Moore’s popularity, and thus his effect, would be much less in states where a third party candidate pulling some votes from Bush might actually make a difference. YMMV. I’m thinking of the great state of Florida and it’s 27 electoral votes (and the demographics of the northern part of the state). More locally, I’m thinking of OR and WA (where the 2000 elections were were closer than most people realize, and threaten to be again) and have their share of people who would proudly vote for Mr. Moore. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2004, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/24 "2004-02-16T03:41:48Z")
> [@amarinth](#): > > I’m thinking of the great state of Florida and it’s 27 electoral votes (and the demographics of the northern part of the state). > > More locally, I’m thinking of OR and WA (where the 2000 elections were were closer than most people realize, and threaten to be again) and have their share of people who would proudly vote for Mr. Moore. Though North Florida is culturally Southern, my impression is that those folks tend more toward the hell-raising, hard-drinking variety of Southerner, and less toward the Bible-thumping variety. I could be mistaken, but I can’t imagine a lot of support for Moore in Florida. Any Floridians wanna chime in? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2004, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/25 "2004-02-16T03:49:47Z")
I hate to rain on this parade, but it looks like [a challenge from the left is more likely.](http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/7950330.htm) And this would be **in addition to** the candidate whom the Greens field. ---
**Author:** ![hansel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6bbea6/32.png) [@hansel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hansel)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2004, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/26 "2004-02-16T04:15:23Z")
There’s another side to this that Conservatives might be happy about: If the religious right throws in behind an unelectable third party candidate, doesn’t it free the Republican party from catering to a base that’s as much a liability as a benefit? They can grab the center on social issues and the right on economics/foreign policy. In 2004, that would be an unbeatable combination. Doesn’t anyone ever wonder what would happen if the right half of the Democratic party and the left half of the Republican party met in the middle, decried extremist politics, and locked up the presidency and both houses of Congress? Why, you’d have… the Liberal Party in Canada, which is perpetually in power (not by policy, so much as position). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2004, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/27 "2004-02-16T04:20:42Z")
> [@hansel](#): > > Doesn’t anyone ever wonder what would happen if the right half of the Democratic party and the left half of the Republican party met in the middle, decried extremist politics, and locked up the presidency and both houses of Congress? Why, you’d have… the Liberal Party in Canada, which is **perpetually in power** (not by policy, so much as position). My bolding. That sounds very dangerous. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen. ---
**Author:** ![hansel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6bbea6/32.png) [@hansel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hansel)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2004, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/28 "2004-02-16T04:35:51Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > My bolding. That sounds very dangerous. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen. That’s a debate all in itself, and were I better versed in Canadian politics, I would start a thread. But I will observe that Canadian governments have far less trouble passing sweeping legislation that doesn’t suffer from the horse-swapping that omnibus bills in the U.S. do. It’s an interesting tradeoff: fewer checks and balances seem to mean purer legislation, for good or ill. To the extent that the Liberal Party is responsive to public opinion, it seems good. ---
**Author:** ![sibyl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b9e5f3/32.png) [@sibyl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sibyl)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2004, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/29 "2004-03-06T20:25:26Z")
If everyone voted the same way as they did in 2000, the electoral count would be (D) 260, ® 278. I’d say the following are locked up as (D) states: Washington California Minnesota Wisconsin Illinois Pennsylvania Marlyand Delaware Washington DC New Jersey New York Massachusetts Connecticut Rhode Island Vermont Maine And the following are locked up as ® states: Nevada Arizona Idaho Utah Colorado Wyoming Montana North Dakota South Dakota Nebraska Kansas Oklahoma Texas Louisiana Arkansas Mississippi Alabama Georgia Kentucky Indiana North Carolina South Carolina Virginia That puts the following in some form of contention, with how the fell in 2000 in parenthesis: Oregon (D) New Mexico (D) Iowa (D) Michigan (D) Ohio ® West Virginia ® Florida ® New Hampshire ® Oregon, NM and Florida were within half a percent of going the other way, so lets say they do. The others stay the same, including New Hampshire as Republican despite it being a 1% difference. That puts the electoral vote at: D: 273 R: 263 Now, lets say Florida remains on the Republican side, but New Hampshire and West Virginia, both states who generally vote Democrat, go (D): D: 269 R: 269 Interesting, huh! If Bush manages to keep all the states I’ve listed as solidly ®, lose all the states listed as solidly (D) and keep Florida and Ohio, giving the rest of the “swing states” to the democrats, we get a tie. If he keeps Florida, Ohio and either WV or NH he wins. If the Democrats win Florida, they can afford to lose even Michigan at 17 electoral votes. If they get both Florida and Michigan, they can afford to lose both NM and Oregon. I think this will be another Florida-centric campaign, and I’d have to give a very, very slight edge to GWB on this. I doubt many retired folks sympathize with gay rights, and they are certainly more prone to being molded by the fear of terrorism. The hispanics are also more likely to support Bush because of his amnesty program. The economy is a toss-up here though. The Democrats are going to be hard-pressed to win without Florida. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2004, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/30 "2004-03-06T21:18:18Z")
> [@Governor Quinn](#): > > If it please the court, the Constitutional Party candidate for President in 2000 got 96,919 votes. > > Therefore, one can logically assume that Moore would get over 100,000 votes. > > Moreover, let the records show that Pat Buchanan received 446,743 votes in 2000. > > If the Buchananities were to vote for Moore, that would be over 500,000 votes. > > The only question that this leaves is, how large a following in the South does Moore have? And the only answer is, none. John Kerry will win or lose on his own merits. Roy Moore and Pat Buchanan will make absolutely no difference i nthe coming election at all. But if you lefties wanna fantasize, be my guest. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2004, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/31 "2004-03-06T22:26:59Z")
Why, thank you, **Astorian** , how very thoughtful. But, really, there is no need to fantacize. Fantasy would be a total sweep of all elective offices. Fantasy is Tom Delay (R, Undead) departing to sit at the feet of the Dalai Lama to learn humility. Don’t need fantasy. A simple win will suffice quite nicely. But thanks anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2004, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/32 "2004-03-07T16:17:35Z")
> [@Jomo Mojo](#): > > The America Firsters. They’re ba-a-a-ck. > > Ver-r-ry interesting. > > Does anyone remember who the original America Firsters were? Yes, they were simply copycats of the Know-Nothings. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2004, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/33 "2004-03-08T16:56:19Z")
> [@Dogface](#): > > Yes, they were simply copycats of the Know-Nothings. Not really. The Know-Nothings were pretty exclusively an anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic party. The Firsters were more pretty strictly isolationist, and, in fact, were endorsed by Fr. Coughlin in _Social Justice_ ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2004, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220/34 "2004-03-08T17:51:00Z")
> [@sibyl](#): > > If everyone voted the same way as they did in 2000, the electoral count would be (D) 260, (R) 278. > > I’d say the following are locked up as (D) states: > > Washington > California > Minnesota > Wisconsin > Illinois > Pennsylvania > Marlyand > Delaware > Washington DC > New Jersey > New York > Massachusetts > Connecticut > Rhode Island > Vermont > Maine > > And the following are locked up as (R) states: > > Nevada > Arizona > Idaho > Utah > Colorado > Wyoming > Montana > North Dakota > South Dakota > Nebraska > Kansas > Oklahoma > Texas > Louisiana > Arkansas > Mississippi > Alabama > Georgia > Kentucky > Indiana > North Carolina > South Carolina > Virginia > > That puts the following in some form of contention, with how the fell in 2000 in parenthesis: > > Oregon (D) > New Mexico (D) > Iowa (D) > Michigan (D) > Ohio (R) > West Virginia (R) > Florida (R) > New Hampshire (R) Your list of ‘safe’ states is much larger than I’d consider reasonable. For instance, Wisconsin went Democratic by 0.22% of the vote last time. If I’m working for Karl Rove, I’m not gonna suggest giving up on Wisconsin anytime soon. Ditto Pennsylvania. Here’s an [FEC list](http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/appa.htm) of how the two major-party candidates did in each state in the past four Presidential elections. It makes for a pretty good starting point for the discussion on what’s safe and what’s vulnerable. States that Clinton won twice at least have the possibility of going Democratic in 2004: besides Arkansas and Tennessee, states he carried twice that you’ve listed as GOP locks include Nevada, Kentucky and Louisiana. Clinton took Arizona in 1996, and a lot of politicos think it might well be a Dem pickup this year. I’m assuming you meant to list Missouri as a swing state, since it’s a swing state _par excellence_. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-moore-a-third-party-challenge-from-the-right/229220.md?page=1)