u May 18 Gatnos v Yes Only if there is a run-off election if one candidate does not receive a majority of the votes. Post
May 16 armed_liberal v Yes Someone other than Ralph Nader (Communist). Ross Perot would have been a great president. Post
u May 12 URBS v Yes Problem is that currently a third party candidate is not viable. It will take a number of elections to get a viable third party going. Post
May 10 BEKennedy v Yes An Independent would most likely serve the people rather than these greedy corporations. The people haven't had a voice in years. An Independent is our best option now. I would rather this not boil down to a forced Redress but if it does, then so be it. This Government obviously needs to be put in check. Post
o May 10 TheHandsomeOne v Yes I want a third and even a tenth party option ALONG WITH actual representation as our founders intended to never exceed 1 representative per 35,000 voters. I think 1 per 15,000 is viable. The concept of 535 being adequate is a joke played on the people who should all be able to see that 535 is a number that suits the joker owners as being easy enough for them to buy and control, the wants and wishes of the constituents be damned. Post
u May 9 gumbii v Yes A third party candidate with enough clout would toss a wrench into what has become a very destructive machine. I say go for it. Post
u May 8 tomincali v Yes we do need a new party,one that does not have its hand in special interest unless it is the interest of the American citizen. Post
May 6 Prime_Meridian v Yes Yes, THIRD AND EVEN FOURTH PARTY CANDIDATES. Because the monopoly of two is the reason our country is having so many problems now. It's the MEDIA'S FAULT that we have been having only two, one from each major party. They've been shutting out viable candidates with reasonable, logical, and intelligent platforms just because Americans have not gotten a chance to hear about them. Who's fault is that? The medias. Let Americans hear about other candidates as much as you focus on the 2 major candidates! B1 Post
May 5 RoyFloyd v Yes Yes, yes and HELL YES! Democrats represent corporate interests and big money most of the time while Republicans represent corporate interests and big money all of the time. Doesn't leave the working stiff with much representation. I want a viable third party and, while we're dreaming, a parliamentary system. Post
May 2 Nlyle v Yes Yes! It seems the past few elections I'm having to choose the "lesser of the two evils" to run the country. ID love to pick someone I want in the drivers seat! Post
u May 1 debido v Yes We can no longer tell the difference between the democrats and republicans! Post
u May 18 Gatnos v Yes Only if there is a run-off election if one candidate does not receive a majority of the votes. Post
May 16 armed_liberal v Yes Someone other than Ralph Nader (Communist). Ross Perot would have been a great president. Post
u May 12 URBS v Yes Problem is that currently a third party candidate is not viable. It will take a number of elections to get a viable third party going. Post
May 10 BEKennedy v Yes An Independent would most likely serve the people rather than these greedy corporations. The people haven't had a voice in years. An Independent is our best option now. I would rather this not boil down to a forced Redress but if it does, then so be it. This Government obviously needs to be put in check. Post
o May 10 TheHandsomeOne v Yes I want a third and even a tenth party option ALONG WITH actual representation as our founders intended to never exceed 1 representative per 35,000 voters. I think 1 per 15,000 is viable. The concept of 535 being adequate is a joke played on the people who should all be able to see that 535 is a number that suits the joker owners as being easy enough for them to buy and control, the wants and wishes of the constituents be damned. Post
u May 9 gumbii v Yes A third party candidate with enough clout would toss a wrench into what has become a very destructive machine. I say go for it. Post
u May 8 tomincali v Yes we do need a new party,one that does not have its hand in special interest unless it is the interest of the American citizen. Post
May 6 Prime_Meridian v Yes Yes, THIRD AND EVEN FOURTH PARTY CANDIDATES. Because the monopoly of two is the reason our country is having so many problems now. It's the MEDIA'S FAULT that we have been having only two, one from each major party. They've been shutting out viable candidates with reasonable, logical, and intelligent platforms just because Americans have not gotten a chance to hear about them. Who's fault is that? The medias. Let Americans hear about other candidates as much as you focus on the 2 major candidates! B1 Post
May 5 RoyFloyd v Yes Yes, yes and HELL YES! Democrats represent corporate interests and big money most of the time while Republicans represent corporate interests and big money all of the time. Doesn't leave the working stiff with much representation. I want a viable third party and, while we're dreaming, a parliamentary system. Post
May 2 Nlyle v Yes Yes! It seems the past few elections I'm having to choose the "lesser of the two evils" to run the country. ID love to pick someone I want in the drivers seat! Post
u May 1 debido v Yes We can no longer tell the difference between the democrats and republicans! Post
Apr 30 Calfkiller v Yes I'm increasingly becoming convinced that their is no 'substantial' distinction between Democrats and Republicans. Until the tea party made an appearance there has not been any significant distinction between the D's and R's in 40 years or more. They are both after the same things 'obtaining power for themselves, whilst tightening their control over their livestock' which happens to be me and you. All of us, me included, seem to walk around convinced that we are free men, the reality is that we are no better off than citizens of the Soviet Union. Granted we can run our mouths a lot more than the commies, but in the end we are nothing but known quantities that th... Post
Apr 30 mimi57 v No They have no chance at winning and only succeed at dividing the party, especially the Republican Party. r1 reply Post
May 10 BEKennedy The 2 parties are splitting themselves, amongst themselves. They all have different views & no longer see the people's views. They raise taxes & prices on everything every year, without credible reason. They've become mad with power. That power that they love so much outweighs the American way of life now. B1 Post @BEKennedy
Apr 29 harold_lloyd v Yes I'd love a thrid party candidate, as long as he isn't a total loon. And by loon I mean Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, or any Paul. Post
u Apr '12 jov8 v Yes It's been too long, both parties serve the same corporate masters. We the people are secondary and really do not have a seat at the table. B2 e67 endorsed Post
u Apr '12 stimpy v No Only obama and the liberals want a third party candidate cause they know it'll divide the Republican votes. B1 e13 endorsed Post
Apr '12 KnutEF v Yes Democracy need more options to function well and have the necessary momentum to develope. B1 r1 reply e9 endorsed Post
u Apr '12 stevie v Yes George Washington thought political parties were a bad idea and I have to say, the fact that we have a two party system seems to be the root of all the problems we have in government today. I think it would be better if we had more parties or no parties. Maybe more things would get done in Washington and there'd be more willingness to work together instead of just following party orders (or you don't get reelection money, or get the cushy committee appointment). r1 reply e6 endorsed Post
Apr '12 Andresalaz v Yes We need more then just three parties. We need to stop end the barriers to entry into running for national office and stop the corrupt duopoly the parties have over the country. B1 e5 endorsed Post
u Jun '12 Forsooth v Yes I'd rather see a 3rd party candidate in office but I don't think it will ever happen until the electoral system is changed. The Electors are from the big 2 parties and until others get a fair shake only someone from those 2 parties will win. e4 endorsed Post
Apr '12 Hebisner v No I would argue its better to develop unique candidacies in the existing parties than to endorse a third party for a few reasons. First, third parties have had limited electoral success and act usually as spoilers, something that third party candidates and parties don't acknowledge as the reality. Second, the two main parties better represent the country when they manage to incorporate unique and dissenting voices under their own tents. This benefits the electorate since these parties enjoy a near unbreakable hold on government in the United States. B2 r2 replies e2 endorsed Post
Apr '12 sarge7us v Yes In this country we are all about protecting our Constitution supposedly. So why don't we have a Constitution Party candidate for President? We need one if we wish to preserve what little of the Constitution is left that is slowly being eroded every day. B1 r2 replies e2 endorsed Post
May '12 douglasrhall3 v No Not in this election, because President Obama is the smartest most honorable man up for the job this cycle. A third party would just be a distraction. r4 replies e3 endorsed Post