One of the most interesting dynamics in this election is the impact of third party candidates from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to Cornel West to a yet-to-be-named candidate with the No Labels ticket. Both Democratic and Republican operatives have been actively dismissing the ability of any third party candidate to win, including claims that the No Labels group has waited too long to get on ballots. I do not believe that is true. There is a path for a third party alternative to both Joe Biden and Donald Trump. However, that path is rather narrow and rocky.
Sources with No Labels have pushed back on the media narratives by noting that Ross Perot did not enter the race until February of 1992. The group insists that it can make the ballot in all 50 states, but would likely seek a ballot spot in 32 states. The group noted that signature requirements are lower for candidates if they seek to run as individuals as opposed to seeking the addition of a party.
That is correct, though the signature requirements can still be daunting. Yet, No Labels did meet the requirement in Maryland recently for party recognition. What is clear is that the path is narrowing with the passage of time. No Labels currently has no candidate.
The requirements for states vary significantly. In California, they will need 219,000 signatures while, in Maine, they only need roughly 5,000 signatures. Joining an existing party like the Libertarian Party or Green Party allows a candidate to use an existing platform and infrastructure. Kennedy is rumored to be considering a run with the libertarians.
Even with third party candidates on the ballot, it is notoriously difficult for such a candidate to break through our duopoly of power given the hold of the two main parties on the process.
However, it is also important to note that an outright electoral victory is not necessarily the only option for these candidates. Polls show that sixty-seven percent of voters want someone other than Biden or Trump.
Yet, in the primaries, neither Democrats nor Republicans are opting to make a change. Both Biden and Trump appear to be on an easy glide path to their respective nominations.
Much can change this year from convictions of Trump to a withdrawal by Biden. There could be a seismic event that leaves a “dark horse” candidate as the front runner.
The more intriguing path would be through the Congress. With the country bitterly divided between these candidates, there is a chance that neither candidate might receive the needed 270 electoral votes in the Electoral College. If there is a “contingent election,” the Twelfth Amendment kicks in with the House of Representatives selecting a president and the Senate selecting a vice president. In the House, the members vote as state delegations.
The divided Congress could make all of this . . . well . . . challenging. It is also not clear how the political dynamics will look for these politicians. In the mix, a third party candidate could emerge as a compromise candidate if the division leaves neither Biden or Trump with enough support.
We have only used the Twelfth Amendment a couple of times. However elections like 1825 and 1837 show that such conflicts can present unexpected alliances.
For example, Andrew Jackson secured a plurality of both popular and electoral votes. However, he needed 131 electoral votes out of the 261 votes of the college. He only had 99 votes after the election. John Quincy Adams had 84. The third candidate, William Crawford had 41. While Henry Clay had 37 votes, the first three went to the first round balloting. Clay eventually threw his support behind Adams who later made him Secretary of State.
If a third party candidate were to secure electoral votes, he or she could make that first balloting. If the Congress were to deadlock, a third party compromise candidate could become more attractive given the rejection of the majority for the two leading candidates.
Is that likely? No. However, to quote Maya Angelou, “ain’t nothing to it, but to do it.”
Letitia James-Fani Willis-Ray Epps in 2024! Only they can save America. In your heart, you know I’m right.
Off topic
Israeli IDF has the monster Hamas leader Yehiya Sinwar, the alleged architect of the Oct. 7 attacks, cornered. But he is surrounded by a human shield of hostages intended to deter an operation to capture or kill him.
What would you do?
Surround, contain, and administer sleeping gas.
I’d kill him collateral damage be damn. Bc it will save more pplin the long run.
There has always been a ‘path’ for any candidate to run and potentially win.
However its an uphill battle.
The proverbial deck of cards are stacked against any outside candidate.
No third candidate can beat Trump. He embodies too much of our American spirit. They can use die bold systems et al to install a new puppet- but that doesn’t change us as people – we are still americans and now we got mike jonhnson finally wielding the power of our purse!
I meant old dominion- not necessarily die bold – but the Italian Corp we who used to provide the systems for election before the one who sued the kraken. The whole history of corrupt it systems … un-American systems … and b4 Zuckerberg influences.
The system some states rejected bc it wasn’t secure – but other states accepted – and supreme turned down Texas original standing for what is basically a derivative issue in Anderson v Trump – Sotomayor asks why does Colorado get to decide? Weird 6 unharmed voters had third party standing but Texas didn’t have original standing to ask the same type question? Why does GA or pn get to decide? Worse Texas had already decided no decline the software the ceating states used bc it wasn’t secure. The supreme will look fools if the don’t kick colrados derivative suit our for lack of standing – having said that to Texas already.
“Crazy Abe” Lincoln won and shredded the Constitution and Bill of Rights with the “yuge” mandate of 39.8% of the vote.
J H Kunstler had another relevant article today:
excerpt from, Comes Thermidor
During their year in power, the Jacobins turned the life of the nation upside down in their zealous quest to create a perfectly equitable society. They abolished the church (and replaced it with their own “cult of the supreme being”). They changed the week from seven days to ten days, they changed the names of all the months of the calendar. (1792 was denoted “the Year One.”) They put in price and wage controls while churning out money (paper assignats) which triggered (voila) monetary inflation! They confiscated grain from farmers all over the country. They condemned thousands (estimate: 20,000 to 40,000) of political enemies to the guillotine in their “Reign of Terror.” In short, the Jacobins made a bloody mess of things and pissed-off a lot of their countrymen.
By the summer of 1794 (in their renamed month of Thermidor), everybody else finally had enough of the Jacobin nightmare. On July 27, Robespierre was at the rostrum once again denouncing his enemies and crying for blood when the out-group members present started throwing food at him and shouting him down. That was the magic moment when everything flipped — the shock of recognition that the Jacobins had lost power. Just like that! The chamber fell into a melee, a lot of shoving and shouting. . . Robespierre and his cronies were chased across town to the city hall (Hôtel de Ville) and barricaded themselves inside. The mob broke through and arrested them. Somewhere in the confusion a policeman shot Robespierre in the face, shattering his jaw (no more speeches for you!). . . and the very next day, Robespierre, Saint-Just, and twenty of their associates had their appointment with “the national razor.”
This event became known as the Thermidorian Reaction. The insane Jacobin program of terror and social derangement was swiftly abolished. Nothing like it was seen again until the Bolsheviks, the Maoists and the Khmer Rouge came along in the 20th century, and now, in our time, The Party of Chaos as led by “Joe Biden” (or whoever and whatever is behind him), with their open border, their lust for another world war, their drive for censorship, their sadistic lawfare, their race and sex hustles, their compulsive lying, and their sick destruction of every norm and boundary in daily life.
America is headed for its own Thermidorian Reaction. It’ll end up being called something else, of course, because it is a different time, place, and set of circumstances. But it feels close, doesn’t it? Everybody I know or correspond with mentions this feeling that something is going to blow in our country, and pretty soon. The air is alive with it, just as the air is alive with portents of spring. Are you waiting for it?
“The Party of Chaos as led by “Joe Biden” (or whoever and whatever is behind him),…”
– Pretty Boy Floyd
_____________________
That unidentified party behind Joe “The Corrupt” Biden is none other than Communist Party General Secretary and “Dear Leader,” Barack Hussein “Barry ‘I-Have-A-Statue-In-Jakarta’ Soetoro” Obama, the one and only absurd, wholly ineligible non-president in American history.
Barack “The Ineligible” Obama is “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” into full communism while perpetuating the Obama Coup D’etat in America against Real President Donald J. Trump.
What the —- is the American government comprised of, and what the —- is the American government doing?
Oh, yeah, Joe, Barry, Nikita et al. are burying America.
___________________________________________________________
“We will bury you!”
– Nikita Khrushchev, General Secretary of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
An electable third party might be Haley and Joe (Manchin). I’m guessing that if those two came together they would wipe the floors with both Trump and Biden
Yep. I think Joe Manchin theoretically could save the Democrat Party BUT – there would need to be a fight between the factions of the Democrats, like unto The Night of the Long Knives, where sensible Democrats rid their party of the insane, Leftist trash. Or a few years later, the Democrats are back to where they are now, The Maniac Party. This would require a significant purge, and because such a large number of Democrats are indeed, batsh!t crazy, the New Democrats would have to go after Maga Republicans to cross over, to maintain numbers. Which ain’t likely. Particularly if Nikki was his VP. He would have to have a serious MAGA running mate. But then again, many Democrats pull the D lever, because they pull the D lever.
The more likely fight that I see coming, is between the Joe Biden Democrat faction and the “We’re Gonna Get Our Butts Kicked!” Democrat faction. I have plenty of popcorn.
While it is mathemetically possible for a candidate outside of the Repugnican or Demoncraptic parties to win 270 electoral votes, it just flat isn’t going to happen. Regarding the possibility of selection by Congress if all fall short, see my comments elsewhere.
Guess what came out of the skeleton closet?
Green Party candidate Jill Stein is running for 2024 president again.
Here’s Jill in action during the DAPL protest in North Dakota.
Re: Jill Stein. Another ‘doctor’ the White House does not need. A typical Harvard brat for whom the ’60’s counter-culture mindset is still in play. She’s about as far from addressing what truly ails the nation today as the planet is from the center of our galaxy. About as useful to a blacksmith as a rubber mallet on a steel anvil.
Or as Barney Fife would say, “I think she’s a nut!”
Stein does oppose the Gaza genocide, and for that reason I’m going to vote for her.
It would be interesting to see.
The real problem would be explaining how it all works to the American people.
At some point, our public education system ditched civics.
Exactly. While selection of a President and VP by Congress in the event existing candidates fall short of 270 Electoral College votes is perfectly legal and Constitutionally sound, it would be viewed by many or most as a clear usurption of the will of the people, and the resulting public outrage (likely from many divergent parts of the political spectrum) would be tremendous. I’m not even certain that Congress itself, as currently composed and disposed, is at all capable of successfully pursuing that process. The results would make the dissent and chaos following the 2020 election look like kindergarten play.
More likely outlook would be a scenario, if Biden continues to deteriorate, of Trump winning more states and electoral votes with pluralities in several states rather than majorities. Most of the 3rd party people tend to the left side of the aisle and are likely there because the Democratic Party closed their primaries to all but good Ole Joe. I think the Republicans made the smarter move by keeping the primaries open and actually having a contest. Certainly Trump’s voters are severely committed to him whereas I think the democrats will bleed votes to a plethora of left of center but moderate 3rd parties. Time will tell.
Of course the blatant legal war that the Democratic party is waging against Trump seems to only solidify his supporters and make him look like a victim. Even Democrats around the country are somewhat aghast at the NY legal onslaught. Sometimes they seem to go beyond what is reasonable in an attempt to overwhelm Trump and that only weakens their case. Did the people in NY not take into consideration what might happen if Trump wins. I suspect federal dollars in NY, Atlanta and DC may well disappear. I know if I assumed the presidency in that case, I would attempt to lay waste to the Democratic Party and power structure in those cities. Keep it focused with the idea that this too can happen to you (other democratic bastions) if you continue down this path. But then I am somewhat bloody minded.
GEB said: “Trump’s voters are severely committed to him…”
Not this voter, and I very much doubt that I am alone, or even nearly so. I frankly do not like him. I think that he has very few real principles, and can potentially be too easily swayed by some advisor or other tugging on his ego strings; albeit he is not nearly so manipulable as Biden. But I will vote for him to stop, or at least throw a road block in the way of, the insantity that is currently going on.
Number 6,
I would prefer to see candidates other than Trump OR Biden.
But looks like this is what we have, not what we may want.
It is not about voting for Trump but voting against woke leftism that has gripped the Democrat party.
There are times that I would love to bounce a coconut off Trump’s head, but it is going to take somebody like him to challenge the system. Plus, from 4 years as president, we already know that he is not going to destroy the country, or lock up errant homosexuals, or get us into stupid wars.
It isn’t just about die hard Trump supporters. The political prosecution and two tier justice system has concerned people, like me, who were on the fence about him. It comes to policy issues, economy and concern for the political overtaking of our court system. Trump is just a side factor.
If there ever was a time for a third party it’s now.
A Kennedy Gabbard ticket would be interesting.
Gabbard-Kennedy would be more interesting.
Edward mahl,
That is a ticket I would vote for.
Upstate, it might sound like an attractive mix if one was in favor of bigger government. I like both of them, but to lead the nation? No. Today, both will expand government and neither has the track record of Trump. I so happen to have my reply to John Say about Gabbard. Look at the points I made to him and tell me whether you agree with the policies or not. Do you agree with her positions? The following are only some of them.
“I do not care if she wants to nationalize healthcare should she become president, ”
John, that is a strong indicator of where Gabbard stands when it comes to individual rights, large or small government, constitutional government, spending, and a host of other things.
—
Don’t get me wrong, I like Gabbard, but her stance on many things needs to be better understood.
Just a couple of years ago, she advocated ending cash bail, eliminating private prisons, free tuition for higher education, universal tuition-free community college, ban on fracking, remaining in the Paris Climate Accord, ending fossil fuels by 2050, closing down existing nuclear reactors, eliminate electoral college, no photo ID to vote, etc.
Those views and many more tell me that though she is a thinking person, her most recent ideas are too far to the left. If she matured outside of Washington and in the workplace, some of her views might radically change, and then she would be more fit for the job.
Wait, so you support Trump because you like a smaller government?
The man who added $8.4 trillion to the national debt?
The man who allowed the gross national debt to grow from $19.95 trillion to $27.75 trillion.
The man who believes in government intervention in the form of anti-capitalist tariffs due to his outdated, mercantilist understanding of global trade?
The man who openly desires to consolidate executive power such that he will be legally above the law?
Both parties want to expand the size of government. Trump adds to that the desire to run America like a Latin American strong arm authoritarian regime. That’s the guy you support as a fan of small government?
For a more detailed look at Trump the autocrat:
https://www.justsecurity.org/92714/american-autocracy-threat-tracker/
Another anonymous person who refuses to have an alias but is able to link. Does he add content? No, which is consistent with most anonymous cowards. They can link but are afraid to present data and defend it. In other words, another simpleton.
From the first sentence in the introduction, one can see this will not be a serious link that is worthwhile to read. Anonymous figures frequently don’t read their own links and generally know little about the subject matter.
Perhaps reading more than the first sentence of things is the keep to acquiring knowledge.
Just Security has linked to Trump’s actual words to back up everything in that document.
If you are unable to provide content with the link, don’t blame anyone for not going further when the first sentence is nonsense. It is your stupidity not to provide the content under discussion and the link. You don’t do that because you lack the ability, just like you cannot use an alias.
“The man who added $8.4 trillion to the national debt?”
Are you embarrassed to post with a name? Is your limited imagination making you sound simple? Did I say I liked everything Trump did? No. I liked his policies, but Trump was not permitted free reign by Democrats and Never-Trumpers, so even he had to compromise more than should have been necessary. You should know that, but you don’t.
Trump’s foreign policy was excellent. However, a strong foreign policy for a superpower means their military has to be up to strength. A powerful military tells people to stay away or be destroyed. With that foreign policy came costs to support the military, and in order to get that money, compromises had to be made. Overall, though I wouldn’t say I liked the cost, the results were excellent, so yes, I approve. In actuality, blame the Democrats and some Republicans for higher than necessary costs.
“anti-capitalist tariffs”
Those tariffs, like the military, were needed to regain our national stature. You sound like you like globalism, but I don’t. I will keep capitalism alive at home and with friendly nations, but I don’t have to sap the strength of America to push capitalism where there isn’t a level playing field. Yes, overall, the tariffs were positive, though I would not want to use them as a permanent way of doing business.
“The man who openly desires to consolidate executive power such that he will be legally above the law?”
Biden has gone beyond the law, but Trump, compared to the average President, didn’t. Go ahead and make your case. I don’t expect a detailed discussion with an anonymous person who doesn’t have the inner strength to use even an alias.
“Both parties want to expand the size of government.”
That is true and your first sign of intelligence. I would get rid of all the Democrats and most of the Republicans. I am neither. I vote for specific policies pragmatically.
“Trump adds to that the desire to run America like a Latin American strong arm authoritarian regime. ”
Once again, we have stupidity ruling your words. When you make a statement like that, you need to provide facts. You have none but can probably make up obscure facts that are meaningless. Our Constitution was created to have friction between the branches. Unfortunately, Congress hasn’t appropriately functioned for many years. It is up to them to reign in the President. They have the power of the budget.
Yes, I am a fan of small government and push in that direction, recognizing that if it is ever done, it will take decades. You don’t seem able to think long-term, and from what I am seeing, you barely think at all.
You dislike “globalism” but like “capitalism.” That makes zero sense. Capitalism in domestic markets only is not capitalism. It is import substitution industrialization, which was a key feature of Latin American economies of the ’80s. No one would consider those economies to be beacons of capitalism.
“You dislike “globalism” but like “capitalism.” That makes zero sense. ”
I can’t help it if you can’t read. I will quote what I said.
“I will keep capitalism alive at home and with friendly nations, but I don’t have to sap the strength of America to push capitalism where there isn’t a level playing field. ”
I also can only help it if you lack understanding of the different interpretations of globalism, but I expect little from you, who is unable even to create an alias.
Based on what you wrote above, you don’t fully understand what capitalism is, but we already know that.
“The man who . . .”
Among those policies (some of which are accurate), why did you ignore his free market policies?
Here are just three: massive deregulation of the economy, tax cuts, the creation of Opportunity Zones (to help low-income and black communities)
S. Meyer wrote: “I like both of them, but to lead the nation?”
I don’t like *any* politician, but generally agree about Gabbard. There is also significant evidence that Kennedy is pretty strongly anti-2A, although it appears as if his advisors may have persuaded him to soft pedal that for the moment. However, just as I am willing to hold my nose and vote for Trump. rather than passively allow the current progressive/woke BS to continue unabated, I would be willing to do the same for a Kennedy/Gabbard or Gabbard/Kenndy ticket, *if* I was convinced it would seriously contribute to putting an end to that insanity. Right now the Trump vote looks to have much better odds to accomplish that. There is also a consideration that no one has yet mentioned (AFAIK). Vote for Kennedy or Gabbard for President and find you have grievously erred, you may be stuck with that choice for 8 years (younger Presidents who don’t have some outright major crisis materialize on their watch generally have quite good odds for reelection, even if they really otherwise really suck at the job). Trump comes with a built-in 4 year expiry date.
Number 6, though I don’t approve of all of Trump’s behavior, for the most part, they do not negatively impact his actions. It’s hard to become President without some baggage. However, I prefer his behavior, which mostly deals with consenting adults, to Bidens’, which deals with underage children. JFK, who was much beloved by many, had many peculiarities.
Outside of that, we agree, but I don’t have to hold my nose unless I do so for all Presidential candidates I vote for. I find some of the others far more objectionable.
Gabbard has to mature before we can see who she is, but what I see from the past is very liberal.
Thanks for your comment.
I was a big Trump fan in 2016, and voted for him again in 2020. This time around I was kind of hoping he would not run, but voted for him in last week’s SC primary. Don’t trust Haley. Although I do not subscribe to a lot of RFK’s environmental agenda, I believe he is an old Democrat that still believes in personal freedoms, etc. I have listened to him and the man is extremely intelligent, very well versed on crony capitalism, and world affairs. I could sleep at night were he the next President. However, with that being said, I recently spent some time with my Dalai Lama leftist sister, with whom I never talk politics. I did ask her about her thoughts on RFK- “Oh, he’s a whackadoodle!” So there you have it- the left will not give him the time of day, and has labelled him to be a crazy conspiracy theorist. But then, would I expect anything more from a leftie? Just a side note- my sister is a well educated person with a Masters Degree- but it is in Behavioral Science, so need I say more?
Sounds like you and your sister might be related. “I don’t trust Haley”. Why?
Considering that political parties are not mentioned in our governing blueprint, both majors have amassed enormous extra-Constitutional power. What would make for an epic lawsuit to attempt to reassert the non-partisan definitions of federal elective offices?
Now that the Koch group has pulled their money support maybe Margret Hamilton will return to Oz but I doubt it. Margret believes the support she’s getting from Democrats is real. As one Dem supporter revealed I’m voting for her in the primary to stop President Trump but voting for Biden in the general.
The system mistakenly trapped the above comment as spam. Restored
Well, if RFK wins, look for Kennedy Derangement Syndrome to kick in, if he actually works to end the war, and clean out the swamp. But I don’t think he can win.
RFK can help Biden lose to the point that even their cheating won’t save him. The Mannequin shouldn’t have another term with DEI hires running and ruining the country.