Never Trump 3rd Party Poll

[vcczar]

Over 100 Republicans have threatened to form a new party over Liz Cheney's removal. This poll is inspired by this event. 

[MrPotatoTed]

0% chance an anti-Trumper forms a viable third-party run.

100% chance that Trump himself forms a viable third-party run, assuming he is alive and not the Republican nominee.

[MrPotatoTed]

9 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Over 100 Republicans have threatened to form a new party over Liz Cheney's removal. This poll is inspired by this event. 

(This criticism isn't aimed at you, it's aimed at the 100 Republicans.)

You can't threaten to do something as a response to something that has already happened.

Either actually DO the response, or don't pretend like you're going to.

Empty threats might work as a deterrent, if used sparingly -- but it's stupid to make an empty threat after the triggering condition has already been met.

[ConservativeElector2]

I don't think they'd have a realistic chance. Like Evan McMullin who had good intentions but faded quickly, respectively was never a noticeable force. Another problem would be the congress during an anti-Trump Republican presidency. They would have virtually no supporters in congress.

Lastly I believe this move would hurt the Democratic ticket as well, as Biden's support relied also heavily on those not comfortable with Trump. 

[Rezi]

I think there’s a small but real chance that a party could be formed to separate from the cult like party that the republicans are becoming. I don’t think they’d have a real shot at winning anything, maybe 5% on a presidential level and a few winning congressional seats if incumbents join the party. But I, unfortunately, think that a combination of an electoral system that makes voting for third parties a bad choice (less so in Maine and Alaska because RCV. On a similar note, does anyone know if Alaska’s RCV applies to the presidential race?), as well as just a lack of real moderate republicans remaining.l makes success unlikely.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Rezi

[MrPotatoTed]

10 minutes ago, Rezi said:

I think there’s a small but real chance that a party could be formed to separate from the cult like party that the republicans are becoming. I don’t think they’d have a real shot at winning anything, maybe 5% on a presidential level and a few winning congressional seats if incumbents join the party. But I, unfortunately, think that a combination of an electoral system that makes voting for third parties a bad choice (less so in Maine and Alaska because RCV. On a similar note, does anyone know if Alaska’s RCV applies to the presidential race?), as well as just a lack of real moderate republicans remaining.l makes success unlikely.

There's no doubt that the Anti-Trump Republicans have to land somewhere.  As a former proud Republican myself, the 2008 introduction of VP Candidate Sarah Palin knocked me loose from "proud Republican" to "Independent moderate" who backed Obama twice.  But it wasn't until Trump came along and his lasting impact on the party became apparent that I made the full jump to "proud Democrat." 

As everyone already knows third parties tend to have no shot at all, it's much more likely in my mind that former/current Republicans who are anti-Trump swarm instead to the Democrat party -- both just as somewhere to land in opposition to Trump, but also in an effort to reel the party back in from extremes they're not willing to pursue.  The more former Republicans join the Democrat party, the more moderate the party becomes over time, thanks to the growing influence they'd have in primaries at every level.  

[MrPotatoTed]

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

 

 

 

I'd rather just a not a looming threat of a rematch of the dotards, or their direct ideological cronies, and have fresh candidates with new ideas to move FORWARD and address many ignored and languishing issues plaguing the country. But such a simple hope (far less wishful than my earlier gripes today), also seems to be a pipe dream, unfortunately. Beating the dead horse seems the plan, instead...

Sure, but we're dealing with reality.  Biden has already said he plans to run again, as is his right as the sitting President, assuming he's still capable of the job.  Assuming he does indeed run, I'd expect he easily gets nominated to a second term.

As for Republicans, it's almost impossible to foresee a path to victory that isn't either Trump himself or a Trump endorsee.  Given how fickle he is, it's hard for me to imagine anyone managing to hold his endorsement for long -- eventually, he HAS to bash them for something, because that's who he is.  Nobody can ever be as "great" as he is.

And therefore my money is on Trump himself running -- either for the Republican nomination (which he'd win), or third party (where he'd have a huge following).

[ConservativeElector2]

7 minutes ago, Patine said:

I'd rather just a not a looming threat of a rematch of the dotards, or their direct ideological cronies, and have fresh candidates with new ideas to move FORWARD and address many ignored and languishing issues plaguing the country. But such a simple hope (far less wishful than my earlier gripes today), also seems to be a pipe dream, unfortunately. Beating the dead horse seems the plan, instead...

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I have no desire for Trump mounting another campaign, but on the Democratic side, what's the alternative? Harris? Thanks, I prefer Biden in that case.

[vcczar]

3 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I have no desire for Trump mounting another campaign, but on the Democratic side, what's the alternative? Harris? Thanks, I prefer Biden in that case.

I don't understand why there aren't like 12 enticing options for both parties. It seems like there is generally the front-runner and the main alternative to the front-runner. 

Honestly, I though the 2020 Democratic primary had a ton of amazing options. It was something of an all star cast. I'll say the same for the Republicans (even if I disliked about all of them) in 2016. Name recognition wins. Imagine a president Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Steve Bullock, John Hickenlooper, etc. They were all all star Democratic politicians (and one caucus-only Democrat). 

[vcczar]

@Patineif you're going to comment on my threads, please take the polls first. 

[MrPotatoTed]

Just now, Patine said:

Every time you say this, you sound like a damned Norse Heathen Polytheist Fatalist. You seem to not understand that the great changes, new ideas, reforms, revolutions, and mass movements of history - for better or for worse - were not, at all, made with this attitude, but despite it, and ignoring those who chanted it. Just so you're aware.

Sure -- when someone was willing to lead them.  I'm not running for the office.  You're not eligible to.  

"I want other people to behave differently!"

That's not some new idea that you've just had.  That's just whining.

[MrPotatoTed]

5 minutes ago, Patine said:

You're going back to your old, bad, obnoxious habits. I'm ending this conversation, but conceding nothing.

Because you resorted to your old routine of personal attacks.  ;c)  But I accept the ending of this conversation, and the lack of concessions.

[MrPotatoTed]

10 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I don't understand why there aren't like 12 enticing options for both parties. It seems like there is generally the front-runner and the main alternative to the front-runner. 

Honestly, I though the 2020 Democratic primary had a ton of amazing options. It was something of an all star cast. I'll say the same for the Republicans (even if I disliked about all of them) in 2016. Name recognition wins. Imagine a president Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Steve Bullock, John Hickenlooper, etc. They were all all star Democratic politicians (and one caucus-only Democrat). 

Honestly, if we didn't have the obvious sitting President running for re-election, there would be 12 or more enticing options on the Democrat side.  I'd assume most of the 2020s to run again (minus maybe Bernie, who successfully inspired the next generation and can now step aside), plus some new faces.  

But on the Republican side, the party is just Trump.  It will be that way at LEAST until he eventually dies, plus another decade or two for a generation of politicians who aren't tainted by Trump's direct influence to rise up.

To be fair, the Democrat party was kind of like this with the Clintons for a while.  Hillary ran the party for a long time -- even when she lost the nomination to Obama, there was still real hesitancy within the party to challenge her -- the only reason most of us have ever even heard of Bernie is that most of the rest of the party wouldn't dare cross her in 2016.

But after being crushed into defeat, she had the good grace to back off and cede control of the party.  Not only did she not run, but she avoided endorsing or supporting anyone until Biden was the clear nominee -- even then, she waited until after President Obama endorsed him first.

Trump lacks the grace to walk away.

 

[Zenobiyl]

No way a viable anti trump party will form. A lot of the liberal New England republican types are already tentative Biden supporters, so I doubt they would abandon him to support a party with no chance of winning (and a chance of throwing the election to Trump).

[Zenobiyl]

On 5/13/2021 at 12:58 PM, MrPotatoTed said:

Honestly, if we didn't have the obvious sitting President running for re-election, there would be 12 or more enticing options on the Democrat side.  I'd assume most of the 2020s to run again (minus maybe Bernie, who successfully inspired the next generation and can now step aside), plus some new faces.  

But on the Republican side, the party is just Trump.  It will be that way at LEAST until he eventually dies, plus another decade or two for a generation of politicians who aren't tainted by Trump's direct influence to rise up.

To be fair, the Democrat party was kind of like this with the Clintons for a while.  Hillary ran the party for a long time -- even when she lost the nomination to Obama, there was still real hesitancy within the party to challenge her -- the only reason most of us have ever even heard of Bernie is that most of the rest of the party wouldn't dare cross her in 2016.

But after being crushed into defeat, she had the good grace to back off and cede control of the party.  Not only did she not run, but she avoided endorsing or supporting anyone until Biden was the clear nominee -- even then, she waited until after President Obama endorsed him first.

Trump lacks the grace to walk away.

 

A post trump Republican Party will be interesting indeed. If nothing else he managed to prove that the Christian Right could be manipulated into supporting economically left wing / populist programs (stimulus, protectionism, etc etc) if appeased with a few single issue policies. This could mean a crop of populists rising up in the next generation to challenge the old school reaganomics supporting establishment. While fascinating to watch, I can only imagine this would be hell to Libertarians and Budget Hawks.