# Will the Current Political Upheaval Result in a Third (viable) Party? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 17, 2017, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-current-political-upheaval-result-in-a-third-viable-party/799165 "2017-10-17T22:55:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2017, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-current-political-upheaval-result-in-a-third-viable-party/799165/61 "2017-10-30T14:56:01Z")
Historically, new parties arise after one of the old major parties implodes (as in the case of the the Federalists and the Whigs). ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2017, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-current-political-upheaval-result-in-a-third-viable-party/799165/62 "2017-10-31T09:53:34Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > John Oliver, to name just one satirist, often provides excellent in-depth coverage of important stories. Can you name a “mainstream” news show of comparable informational value? John Oliver is either dishonest or incorrect on a regular basis. Do yourself a favor and read just this one article: [Errata Security: John Oliver is wrong about Net Neutrality](http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/05/john-oliver-is-wrong-about-net.html#.WfhGmWhSyUk) ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2017, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-current-political-upheaval-result-in-a-third-viable-party/799165/63 "2017-10-31T17:08:20Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > John Oliver is either dishonest or incorrect on a regular basis. Do yourself a favor and read just this one article: [Errata Security: John Oliver is wrong about Net Neutrality](http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/05/john-oliver-is-wrong-about-net.html#.WfhGmWhSyUk) I clicked … and see much that is disingenuous: > [@](#): > > Another example in Oliver’s show is whether search engines like Google or the (hypothetical) Bing can pay to get faster access to customers. They already do that. … the biggest companies (Google, Facebook, Netflix, etc.) pay to put servers in your city close to you… The smallest companies, however, get poor performance, being a thousand miles away. What on earth does the ability of companies to buy computers have to do with performance neutrality of the backbone connections? > [@](#): > > Sure, Internet companies will occasionally go down misguided paths. If it’s truly bad, customers will rebel. Another hyperlibertarian who never actually read Adam Smith and thinks individual vs monopoly is a fair fight. :smack: **AND** , even if you disagree with some of John Oliver’s arguments, the fact remains that he is presenting his viewers with _ **arguments on an actual policy issue** _. What were CNN viewers watching then? The continuing hunt for MA370. What were FoxNews viewers watching? More lies about Hillary? Which channels should be labeled entertainment, which real policy analysis? ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2017, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-current-political-upheaval-result-in-a-third-viable-party/799165/64 "2017-10-31T17:39:09Z")
And, talk of a third party tends to trivialize the \*\*\*severe immediate threats to American democracy. * * * [Here’s a video from a few months ago](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w44lApffH30) by one of my heroines, **Naomi Klein**. She outlines how Americans need to prepare, and is interviewed by Amy Goodman. Watch it! (And read Klein’s books.) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2017, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-current-political-upheaval-result-in-a-third-viable-party/799165/65 "2017-10-31T18:01:31Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > The two established parties have enacted restrictive ballot access laws that ensure they stay on the ballot and make it difficult for others to get on the ballot. I’m not sure about that. It’s almost too easy in most states for candidates representing minor parties to get their names on the ballot. > [@Chronos](#): > > The ballot access laws are almost irrelevant. Even without those, winner-takes-all would still ensure we’d have exactly two relevant parties. There is one ballot access law that I believe has some relevance. In almost all states, candidates can show up on the ballot under one and only one party. This means that if the Zorg Party wanted to build up from the grassroots level without endangering the major-party Presidential and Congressional candidates it favored, it couldn’t have a ticket consisting of, say, the Dem candidates for President and Congress, and its own candidates for state legislature, county council, and so forth. It’s got to be Zorgs only. This cuts off an avenue that would enable minor parties to get started and gain credibility. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-current-political-upheaval-result-in-a-third-viable-party/799165.md?page=3)