Amazon.com Widgets

Would you vote for a third-party presidential candidate or a candidate who did not have a national campaign?

  • Reflect the public interest, not the media's.

    In fact, in terms of the 2016 elections, I may end up voting for Gary Johnson; that or a write-in for Rand Paul (Paul for sure in primaries). The American constitution never as much as mentioned political parties; however, it has still managed to evolve itself into one, massive horse race. Voting should be an honest representation of the desires of the people, not a method of "picking the lesser evil".

  • If I Liked Them

    If you ask me, American's two party system should be done away with anyway. It has lead to nothing but fighting in the government, and that fighting hurts America. Maybe a third party candidate could actually work with Congress instead of against them, like Obama consistently has.

    Of course, I would never vote for somebody JUST because they're a third party candidate, but I would be WILLING to vote third party, or independent.

  • I would vote for a third-party candidate without a campaign

    In my opinion, most presidential candidates now base their campaigns on the values and opinions of the companies that donate to their national campaign. So if there were a third-party candidate who did not run a national campaign, I would vote for them, if my views aligned with theirs. It is hard to completely understand what presidential candidates actually believe when during debates, they avoid questioning and instead attempt to attack their opponent. I think that a third-party candidate who doesn't have any big business companies directing his or her opinions, would be something that many Americans would be open to.

  • Why Independent Votes Matter in a Two-Party System

    In the United States, where we have a two-party system, the majority of voters decide not to vote for a third-party presidential candidate out of the fear that they will essentially be "throwing away their vote." While their may be some validation to this fear -- most voters are, in the end, going to vote for one of the two main parties' candidates -- this in no way makes a vote towards an independent candidate a waste. Ultimately, voters should always vote for the candidate that they think would make the best president for their country. Even though our two-party system severely denies the chances of a third-party candidate being elected, voting for a candidate that you do not actually prefer to be in the White House undermines the democratic process and perpetuates a system that divides our country into two opposing sides.

  • No Campaign No Problem

    Even if a candidate doesn't have a national campaign, that doesn't make them any worse than a candidate with a huge campaign. Donald Trump has a huge campaign and people behind him but I would never consider voting for him, I much rather prefer a smaller candidate with views I agree with. Even if they are third party, their views can still be valuable and better than a candidate with money and a crew behind them.

  • Party vetting is a must

    A candidate who was not vetted or chosen by a party in a primary contest is likely untested and unprepared for a general campaign or a presidency. Furthermore, presidents require internal support from at least their own party to pass or author any legislation. They even need it to make judicial appointments. A third-party candidate has no chance of effective governance in our current political climate, so a vote for him or her would be a vote wasted.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.