Go ahead, throw your vote away!

Apologies if something like this has been bandied about before (it probably has), but I don't tend to read much of the political threads.

However, the ones I do read, and particularly the Libby one, have sparked a thought: Just what would it take, and are we close, to a third-party candidate having a legitimate shot at the presidency? Even among the more ardent supporters of one side or the other, I sense a deepening notion that the main reason for supporting that side is "well, they're better than THOSE guys." I get the notion that liberals don't much care for the Democratic Party, and conservatives don't much care for the Republican Party.

So what would it take? Is it feasible? Would it require someone to the left or to the right of the current crop? Would it require someone to go for the gooey, creamy center? Of course, Bloomberg may try his luck, but I'm not sure that he's the right answer, whatever that answer may be.

Thoughts?

 

it would take a few billion dollars. or not. ask ross perot.

 

The problem is most of what pisses off a conservative is okay with a liberal. What pisses off a liberal is fine by the conservative. The only common ground they share is that they're both pissed off.

 

There has to be one massive hot-button issue that both parties are fucking up, combined with a candidate that has both Hill and street cred, mixed with a shitload of money and set into motion by a significant event that brings said issue into focus.

You'd also have to get past the "voting third-party is throwing your vote away" believers, to say nothing of the "voting for the liberal/conservative independent candidiate is treason against the Democrats/Republicans" bloc.

 

Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos.

 

Dammit, you beat me to it.

 

I can think of a few such issues, but does anyone have any legitimate solutions to any of them? I'm not sure.

I think the voters might actually be OK with a third-party candidate. I wonder if the media, though, isn't so set in the two-party system that it instinctively treats third-party candidates with a smirk and a snort. Perot got some favorable attention, especially in '92, but there was often a thinly veiled layer of "who does this guy think he is?" about the coverage. But if he hadn't bailed in July, I do wonder whether he'd have taken a few states.

But the comment about the billions of dollars is prescient. How many could really afford it? More importantly, how many outside the mainstream political scene could afford it? The problem there, then, becomes that any candidate is going to be bankrolled by someone, and I think that would be someone like a George Soros -- and that ain't gonna lure many conservatives, for example.

 

You jumping in, then? Maybe you can convince the mods to put some of that subscription money toward your campaign.

 

Campaign slogan: I don't need a F*CKING ($400) haircut!

 

Bubbler could be your running mate and deskslave your slogan writer.