Memo to third party voters

Published on September 4, 2004 By Gideon MacLeish In Politics

We are writing to you, who have entered our database as third party voters, to recognize the futility of your efforts. The system of voting in the United States is set up as a two party system, and it will remain so despite your fervent efforts to have it otherwise.

A vote for a third party is a wasted vote; you would do as well staying home on election day. The candidates of the two leading parties have proven themselves to be the best qualified, most intelligent candidates to lead this nation and your vote as a voter should reflect that. The platform of your candidate is far too radical to elicit mainstream appeal.

In keeping with these thoughts, I implore you to discard your vote for your "third party" Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln, and vote instead for the Democratic or Whig tickets.

September 1860

(note: this was not an actual memo, just written to prove a point)

Gideon MacLeish

Comments

historyishere

on Sep 04, 2004

I think its time for the Free Soil party to make a comeback.

ShoZan

on Sep 04, 2004

Yes, and it proves that third party votes DO COUNT.

Gideon MacLeish

on Sep 04, 2004

I think its time for the Free Soil party to make a comeback.

Prior to my joining the Libertarian Party, I was tempted to register as a member of the "Bull Moose" party.

SSG Geezer

on Sep 04, 2004

YEAH, mooses!

Gideon MacLeish

on Sep 04, 2004

Mooses rule

lol

M-Post

on Sep 06, 2004

Bullwinkle for president??

"Hey Rocky.. Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!!"

messybuu

on Sep 06, 2004

Point taken. I should vote for the lesser of two evils and not the candidate I had originally had in mind.

Bull Moose though? That sounds a bit Canadian for the United States.

ShoZan

on Sep 06, 2004

Bull Moose, wasn't that Teddy Roosevelt's Party's Name at one point.

Gideon MacLeish

on Sep 06, 2004

Yes, Shozan, and personally I consider T. Roosevelt to be one of the best presidents we've ever had.

matt07

on Sep 06, 2004

He was a Republican president though. He created the Bull Moose Party for a later election, which he didn't win. That election, 1912, interestingly enough was the only election where we had three people who were at one time president all running, Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson.

Gideon MacLeish

on Sep 06, 2004

Matt,

I had to double check that one, and actually, way back in 1792, George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson all ran in the same election. Incidentally, that election is interesting in that the other two candidates, George Clinton (no, not THAT one...lol), and Aaron Burr were at one time vice president (Burr under Jefferson in 1800, and Clinton under Jefferson in 1804).

dahveed323

on Sep 06, 2004

There is nothing in the constitution which establishes a two-party republic in the United States. The notion of a wasted vote is a falsity - the reasons behind a vote are many and depend on the goals of the voter. Furthermore, anyone who votes Republican in California or New York is "wasting" their votes because with a winner-take-all electoral process nor Republican delegates from those states are elected. The same is true for Deomcratic voters in Texas or other decidedly "red" states. So if you live in one of those "safe" states and your vote is intended to help a third party attain permenant ballot access and federal matching funds (like what occurred after the 1996 election for the Reform party) then your votes can go very far toward achieving this goal - the threshold is national, not state-by-state - they only need to receieve 5% of the votes nationally. There are many Republican and Democratic voters in each of the "safe" states to create a viable third party in our country. It happened 8 years ago, unfortunately the Reform party imploded and the debates were closed to Buchanan after he did get the nomination. This brings me to the point of the Commission on Presidential Debates. The CPD is the corporate-sponsored duopoly's response to the fact that Ross Perot's popularity went from approximately 7% before the 1992 debates to his eventual 13-14% in November. Now third party candidates cannot be seen by the majority of Americans.

I know this has rambled a bit and jumped around, but the importance was not to give a history lesson, but rather to show why the country does not HAVE to be a two-party state and how close we actually are to breaking the duopoly.

so, if you live in a swing state, please vote Kerry, if you live in a safe state, give Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian PArty and David Cobb of the Green Party (and maybe even Ralph Nader, though he has abandoned his values by accepting money and help from Republicans in a cynical attempt to affect the outcome of the election and no longer supports alternative parties in his megamaniacal presidential bid.

dahveed323

on Sep 06, 2004

The libertarians are esentially the heirs to Roosevelt's Bull Moose ideals

dahveed323

on Sep 06, 2004

there is an excellent book about the election of 1912, I think it is actually called "1912". I read it last year, it just came out and it is superb! IT follows the 4, that's right FOUR!, candidates who receieved significant support that year: wilson, Taft, Roosevelt and Debs. The story divides into four sections about each candidate and in the case of the first three, their relationships with one another. I highly recommend it to anyone who is on this post.

ShoZan

on Sep 06, 2004

George Washington did state in his last speech before he left office that the United States should avoid "excessive party spirit" and I think that is what America is suffering from since they have been introduced.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!