Could an Independent Candidate Win a Presidential election

**old guy** · April-03-15, 12:32 AM

I've, for the most part have always been opposed to independent candidates for president because I was always afraid that one would split the party I wanted to win, and generally assumed they wouldn't have a chance.

At this point in history, I'm beginning to wonder if it couldn't be a possibility. I know it would be a long shot. But the field of people on both sides of the aisle is so weak this time around, and I think that people are so fed up with politics as usual, do you think that an independent candidate winning the election could be a possibility?

I realize that throughout the entire presidential election process, this would be something that even I would find nearly impossible to achieve, but at this point in my life would love to see, due to the current political landscape.

I'm tired of politics that don't represent the people of this country. Does anyone think we're at a juncture that could finally make this a possibility? The divide and conquer crap which is probably the most powerful strategy ever devised is destroying us as a nation. Do you think we've reached a point where a winning third party is possible? I still have my doubts but we might be reaching a point where a new reality is a possibility.

**Gpwrangler** · April-03-15, 05:22 AM

Originally Posted by old guy

I've, for the most part have always been opposed to independent candidates for president because I was always afraid that one would split the party I wanted to win, and generally assumed they wouldn't have a chance.

At this point in history, I'm beginning to wonder if it couldn't be a possibility. I know it would be a long shot. But the field of people on both sides of the aisle is so weak this time around, and I think that people are so fed up with politics as usual, do you think that an independent candidate winning the election could be a possibility?

I realize that throughout the entire presidential election process, this would be something that even I would find nearly impossible to achieve, but at this point in my life would love to see, due to the current political landscape.

I'm tired of politics that don't represent the people of this country. Does anyone think we're at a juncture that could finally make this a possibility? The divide and conquer crap which is probably the most powerful strategy ever devised is destroying us as a nation. Do you think we've reached a point where a winning third party is possible? I still have my doubts but we might be reaching a point where a new reality is a possibility.

I'd like to see candidates elected on merit, and the "party" system dismantled. We elect our officials based on narrow issues and basically screw ourselves in the process. For instance, we use their stand on the environment and greenhouse gases. Do any of them really give two shits about the spotted owl after they get in office?

To to answer your question, unless there's an elephant or jackass in their ad they don't stand a chance.

**coracle** · April-03-15, 05:43 AM

[QUOTE=Gpwrangle To answer your question, unless there's an elephant or jackass in their ad they don't stand a chance.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately there has to be a jackass in their ad to win, so that the jackasses that vote for them know they will subsidized and given free stuff taken from the elephants

**Bobl** · April-03-15, 04:52 PM

Posted a one word reply to the question. Was informed that replies must contain at least ten characters.

No.

**Jimaz** · April-03-15, 06:53 PM

An alternative, though less impartial, way to pose the question would be "How bad do things need to become before an independent candidate could win a presidential election." This calls attention to the limitations routinely imposed on voters under the current system and the harm those limitations inflict.

**old guy** · April-03-15, 11:18 PM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

An alternative, though less impartial, way to pose the question would be "How bad do things need to become before an independent candidate could win a presidential election." This calls attention to the limitations routinely imposed on voters under the current system and the harm those limitations inflict.

I think that is my question, "How bad do things need to become before an independent candidate could win a presidential election." I talk with a lot of people from both sides and I've never seen so many people concerned with the lack of good candidates. I hear a large number of people saying they might not even vote because no matter who wins, it won't help them in any way. I almost feel that way but I realize it's not a good path to take. I think we may have reached that point.

Gpwrangler

I'd like to see candidates elected on merit, and the "party" system dismantled. We elect our officials based on narrow issues and basically screw ourselves in the process. For instance, we use their stand on the environment and greenhouse gases. Do any of them really give two shits about the spotted owl after they get in office?

To to answer your question, unless there's an elephant or jackass in their ad they don't stand a chance.

I agree with this too. I really doubt that anyone outside the two party system would have a chance of being elected. But in one of Jimaz's posts of Thom Hartman, he described conservatives as actually being reactionaries. I agree with that. I'm probably considered an extreme liberal. I'd prefer being considered a progressive. On the other hand, I'm beginning to think that people in my mindset are actually the true conservatives. The old "drill baby drill." Is that actually a conservative stance that makes any sense? Short answer, no. I am pro solar, wind power, and all for conservation of the resources we have left as far as fossil fuels. Again, I realize that we still, at this point need to utilize oil. But we need to conserve it.

I honestly think that we are reaching a tipping point with the two party system. I've been wrong before, but I see people daily that are extremely tired of the system in place.

**Zacha341** · April-04-15, 07:06 AM

I'm somewhat weary of the the two-party moxie. The shuttering of good ideas and policies, simply because the wrong party endorsed them; the muddy distinction between the two, and the false equivalencies, etc.

The independent option as I've observed so far serves in some cases as a protest vote against the standard two party roll-out. Especially with the quality of candidates put forth. Ehhh.

Also, the indies, or course less partisan 'bound' often bring forth issues during the debates that can at least get people thinking beyond major candidate rhetoric.

**Danny** · April-04-15, 07:27 AM

An indepedent party candidate for president. AHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! This so-called free country is run by majority Democrats and minority Republicans. If this independent party presidential candidate can have attitude like Barack Obama, Then everyone will for this person. good luck!

**Pam** · April-05-15, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by coracle

Unfortunately there has to be a jackass in their ad to win, so that the jackasses that vote for them know they will subsidized and given free stuff taken from the elephants

I'm really sick of this right wing talking point. There are millions of Democrats in this country. Do you really think they are all on welfare?

**Pam** · April-05-15, 06:27 PM

To answer the original question- probably not now. There would first have to be limits on campaign spending to level the playing field.

Bernie Sanders thinks he has a chance: [[in the primaries anyway)

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bernie-sa...llary-clinton/

**old guy** · April-05-15, 10:45 PM

In all honesty, I guess the thought of a shill like scott walker being in the oval office would scare me away from voting for an extremely competent independent candidate. Sad scenario. I'm just tired of voting against someone rather than voting for someone.

**old guy** · April-05-15, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by coracle

Unfortunately there has to be a jackass in their ad to win, so that the jackasses that vote for them know they will subsidized and given free stuff taken from the elephants

Yeah, I'm a bit tired of this crap too. Republicans never take subsidies or relieve the poor or working class of their stuff? The working poor don't have any stuff left to take.

**oladub** · April-05-15, 11:03 PM

It is highly unlikely that an independent candidate could win a presidential election. Our R/D presidential candidates have been pre-selected for us in recent elections. The last independent candidate to pick up any electoral college votes was George Wallace 47 years ago as a regional candidate. The major news media outlets driving public opinion are owned by the same people who heavily finance their pre-selected presidential candidates in both parties. The League of Women Voters was replaced by the Commission on Presidential Debates as a private company established by the Democratic and Republican parties to keep people like Ross Perot and their unwanted issues off the stage. Major media outlets even refused to sell Perot advertising time in the home stretch of his campaign. Even the cheapest mailing rate, except for free mail for the blind, is given to only Republicans and Democrats. State laws make it difficult to for third party/independent candidates to be listed on ballots. It is not impossible but the deck is stacked against independent candidates in every way possible.

We are left with being confronted with the shameful choice of having to choose between two corrupt dynastic candidates.

**coracle** · April-06-15, 02:38 PM

Sorry to make you sick; but not to worry, if you can't afford the Doctor's bills somebody will pick them up for you even though they can't afford to pay their own. Such is the redistribution of health and wealth. Republicans getting subsidies are people getting [[some of) their own money returned to them.

**Jimaz** · April-06-15, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by coracle

... if you can't afford the Doctor's bills somebody will pick them up for you....

Not to worry, coracle. We'll stand by even you, when you're in need, with your consent. Without? Not so much.

**old guy** · April-07-15, 12:44 AM

Great video Jimaz. Thanks for that.

**coracle** · April-07-15, 06:14 AM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Not to worry, coracle. We'll stand by even you, when you're in need, with your consent. Without? Not so much.

I'm not worried in the least. I won't need "standing by"; but if the shit does hit the fan at the end I have already paid my dues many times over and expect nothing less, even for me. You got my consent.

**Crumbled_pavement** · April-07-15, 11:34 AM

No, an independent candidate would be a long shot for president in 2016. Really, what good would it do anyhow? Presidents still have to caucus with someone in Congress to get legislation passed. Due to that fact, an independent candidate would end up as a defacto Democrat or Republican anyhow.

There is hope for independent candidates however. They just have to start at the local level first. Independent candidates need to win a few mayoral elections, county executive, state legislature, and maybe a few governorships. At that point if they got a nice number of U.S. Senators and Congressmen elected then they could field a successful presidential candidate.

**old guy** · May-24-15, 05:11 AM

Okay, could an independent candidate running as a democrat win an election. Even if he's extremely intelligent and seems to have the idea of representing the needs of the average American. Tough fight indeed, but one that could possibly save the reputation of this country. Or possibly just save this country. I still think Elizabeth Warren would complete the ticket but I'm not certain that the American public realizes that we might be facing a crisis that actually requires people that are dedicated to solving our problems at hand.

**Lowell** · May-24-15, 10:02 AM

The strongest recent candidate was Ross Perrot. Unless campaign finance can be reigned in his type is the only possible model -- someone with with lots of money, someone with managerial success and, what he lacked, someone with foreign relations experience.

He also came up short that most important asset in politics -- a smooth personality. He came off too prickly, too much on the crack-pot side, charming at first but soon tiring. He had a slim chance but his VP choice wiped that out.

Somebody along the lines of Elon Musk [creator of PayPal, SpaceX, Teslas but could never run as he is South African born], rich, young, exciting might have a chance.

I don't see anyone like that around so I have to choose the Wall Street candidate who leaves the most crumbs for the little guys.

**Jimaz** · May-24-15, 03:25 PM

Attachment 26835
Bernie Sanders - The President We Need

Originally Posted by Bernie Sanders

Despair is not an option.

BernieSanders.com

**Jimaz** · May-24-15, 04:01 PM

Attachment 26836
In 180 Seconds You Will Be Voting For Bernie Sanders

BernieSanders.com

**Ray1936** · May-24-15, 04:57 PM

It would be extremely difficult for an independent candidate to acquire the needed funds for a successful campaign. That's the main problem, IMHO.

**Jimaz** · May-24-15, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Attachment 26835
Bernie Sanders - The President We Need

BernieSanders.com

At 1:45 he commits to not running negative political ads. That firmly challenges what has become the conventional practice with which we're all too familiar.

That policy could have some interesting side effects. E.g., how will that constrain Ms. Clinton's strategists? If influential, how would that policy affect campaign strategies in future political races?

Could be a game changer.

**canuck** · May-29-15, 06:56 AM

I listened to Bernie Sanders' speech on his inaugural campaign day. He had some pretty strong words for describing the inequality of modern day USA. It was nice to see a "local politician" from Burlington, Vermont right across the border breathe some new life into a Presidential campaign. Regardless of his success at becoming a new Prez, he will at least debate forcefully many issues that need to be discussed. I have always liked the guy but are people ready to hear his message and follow a more socialist path on Economic issues for instance; not so sure.