Pollster Schoen: Many Americans Would Embrace Third Party

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Politics can indeed make strange bedfellows .....

The case for a third party candidate
By: Douglas E. Schoen
October 9, 2011 11:18 PM EDT

The signs of dissatisfaction, disaffection and just plain discontent are everywhere in America today.

The thousands of Occupy Wall Street protesters, who have congregated for more than three weeks in downtown New York’s Liberty Square, and at spinoff rallies in Atlanta, Chicago, Boston and Seattle, to protest the financial sector’s mismanagement of the U.S. economy, are now joining forces with a wide array of groups — including Move¬On.org members, union activists, community organizing groups and ordinary disgruntled citizens nationwide.

Despite their seemingly left-wing orientation, the Occupy Wall Street protestors have explicitly avoided any partisan reference. They blame both parties for what many protestors call the rigged financial system.

Similarly, the tea party movement — which has already demonstrated an unprecedented level of activism and influence during the 2010 midterms, as well as in the debt ceiling debate – continues to advocate for policies that reinforce core constitutional principles. They are seeking to reduce the size and scope of government.

Like the Wall Street group, the tea party blames politicians from both parties for our current problems – even as they focus on influencing the Republican Party.

The two groups – Occupy Wall Street and the tea party movement – could not be more different. But both reflect the public’s fundamental dissatisfaction with the state of U.S. life and governance.

That disaffection is creating circumstances which make an alternative third party particularly appealing for 2012. Voters express declining confidence in government across the board. They confront a deteriorating economy and the almost complete failure of the two parties – at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue — to address the problems in a constructive and cooperative way.

Polling reveals this general voter discontent. In varied polls, for example, U.S. political institutions now garner among the lowest ratings for credibility that they’ve ever received. Gallup’s annual governance survey, updated Sept. 8-11, showed a record-high 81 percent of Americans dissatisfied with the way the country is being run.

Meanwhile, confidence in Congress hit a new low, 31 percent, this September. Other recent polling by CBS and Fox News puts congressional job approval as low as 11 percent.

The administration has also hit a low point – with Obama’s job approval ratings at a record low for this White House — down to 39 percent in the recent McClatchy/Marist poll. Just 36 percent approve of the way the president is handing his job overall, according to an Economist/YouGov poll released the last week in September — the lowest in Obama’s presidency.

A recent Gallup poll showed the president’s ratings on the economy are even worse, plummeting to 26 percent — down 11 points since Gallup last measured this in mid-May.

In my recent polling, both parties and the congressional leadership all draw net negative ratings.

So there is good reason to believe that a credible third party may be on the ballot in 2012 — and would garner far more support than most political analysts would expect.

I recently polled for Americans Elect, a nonprofit political organization that is now planning an Internet convention to select a third presidential ticket for the 2012 election. They are in the process of securing ballot access in all 50 states.

This demonstrates that an increasing number of Americans are now searching beyond the two parties for effective leadership. Many now support an alternative 2012 ticket to break the two-party duopoly’s stranglehold.

Fifty-seven percent of voters surveyed say there is a need for a third party, while only one-quarter say the two major parties adequately represent the American people.

Voters favor by 58 percent to 13 percent the idea of having an alternative presidential ticket, independent of the Democratic and Republican Parties, on the ballot in 2012. There is also a broad appeal among voters across the political spectrum to participate in the online nominating process and convention.

Indeed, 64 percent of voters polled say they are interested in learning more about how an independent, online convention would nominate a balanced ticket.

In keeping with these findings, 55 percent of respondents in a September Gallup poll said there is a need for a third party. For the first time in Gallup’s history, a majority of Republicans also embraced the idea. In addition, 30 percent of respondents in a September Newsweek survey we conducted, said that a president unaffiliated with either the Democratic or Republican parties would be more effective than a partisan pick in solving America’s problems.

This is far more than just a reaction against the status quo from an electorate tired of politics as usual.

Voters desperately want the opportunity to change the political system. Polling showed they are looking for their voices to be heard by electing a centrist alternative to the Democratic and Republican presidential tickets in 2012. They believe, our results show, that this could force the two parties to work together, bringing logical ideas from both.

To be sure, there have been a number of concerns raised about such a ticket.

First, the major impediment may be ballot access — as it was for the third party presidential candidacies of John Anderson in 1980 and Ross Perot in 1992.

But the Americans Elect effort to have ballot access in all 50 states could remove this major obstacle.

Both Anderson and Perot’s candidacies had exceptionally high public support initially. Perot actually lead for several months, securing 430 electoral votes by The Hotline estimates, before temporarily withdrawing from the campaign. He was still able to claim nearly 20 percent of the vote on Election Day.

Similarly, in 1980, Anderson was competitive with Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan during the first few months. But he was stymied when it came to gaining ballot access and raising necessary funds.

Now, given the broad dissatisfaction with the political system and growing support for a third party presidential ticket , it should not be surprising that there is far more support for an independent presidential candidacy in 2012.

We are at a unique moment. An online nominating process and 50-state ballot access for an independent candidate could provide a key resource as American voters seek to revitalize our dysfunctional political system.

Douglas E. Schoen is a Democratic pollster and strategist. He is the author of “The Political Fix: Changing the Game of American Democracy, From the Grass Roots to the White House.”

Link to original article:

The case for a third party candidate
 

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
I just do not understand the constant attempts to put the tea party an wall street protesters in the same corner. Yes they both want change but one seems to want more government while the other wants less. One has peaceful protests and clean up behind themselves the other trashes most places they are. At times do not follow the law and get permits. I see two vastly different groups.

The idea of a third party is intriguing but so is Bungie jumping. I cannot help but fear it would guarantee a win for the left for a decade or more while the movement builds strength. Do we take the chance that the long term good would outweigh the short term damage. And no I am not saying the right would be great ind infallible in power but I would much rather take my chances on that side of the ticket.
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
If you fear change, you will never get change. All these people WANT change - however, they fear it. I'm guessing I won't see anyone voting for a third party either.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
A third party would win today, IF and only IF, they fielded QUALITY candidates at EVERY level. Without a congress controlled by that party NOTHING will get done. Right now, there are NOT quality candidates on the radar screen from ANY party. Same old stuff.
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
A third party would win today, IF and only IF, they fielded QUALITY candidates at EVERY level. Without a congress controlled by that party NOTHING will get done. Right now, there are NOT quality candidates on the radar screen from ANY party. Same old stuff.

Quality is irrelevant when the MSM will totally ignore an outside-the-box candidate. Just look at what they've done to Ron Paul.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Quality is irrelevant when the MSM will totally ignore an outside-the-box candidate. Just look at what they've done to Ron Paul.

Well, I have NO idea what MSM has done or not done in regards to Dr. Paul. I think he would make a quality surgeon general. I don't believe he is a "quality" candidate for president.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
I just do not understand the constant attempts to put the tea party an wall street protesters in the same corner. Yes they both want change but one seems to want more government while the other wants less.
Perhaps the simple truth of the matter is this:

There are areas in which more government (or more appropriate government) is warranted, just as there are certainly areas where less is called for.

Of course, obtaining agreement on which is which is the trick - it would take a true leader, or leaders, to step up and lead to that consensus ....

One has peaceful protests and clean up behind themselves the other trashes most places they are. At times do not follow the law and get permits. I see two vastly different groups.
Yes they are .... which one is more akin to the actions of the Founding Fathers in terms of conduct or tactics ?

Not that I'm for or against either ..... jus' saying .....

The idea of a third party is intriguing but so is Bungie jumping. I cannot help but fear it would guarantee a win for the left for a decade or more while the movement builds strength.
Ahh yes .... nothing quite like a life lived in constant fear ..... :rolleyes:

Do we take the chance that the long term good would outweigh the short term damage. And no I am not saying the right would be great ind infallible in power but I would much rather take my chances on that side of the ticket.
Well ..... yeah ..... but:

"Insanity is when you keep doing the same things expecting different results"

and

"The significant problems we face cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them." -- Albert Einstein
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
If you want to see what those in the Soapbox feel about a third party or making a difference in politics, all you have to do is go back and look at the the overwhelming:rolleyes: discussion when I presented this:

goooh

I was correct, people of the soapbox would rather sit on the sidelines and complain about what is going on in this country and do nothing but listen to their beloved party and their overpaid entertainers that just tell them what they want to hear.

I wonder if the person that said, "Oh I most likely will join, just doing a bit more research",and "I will have time this weekend to look at it more." actually did.

I doubt it.
 

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
A third party would win today, IF and only IF, they fielded QUALITY candidates at EVERY level. Without a congress controlled by that party NOTHING will get done. Right now, there are NOT quality candidates on the radar screen from ANY party. Same old stuff.

There i not one third party candidate that could win the presidential race today regardless who it was.

Quality is irrelevant when the MSM will totally ignore an outside-the-box candidate. Just look at what they've done to Ron Paul.

Ron Paul needs no help making sure the American public realizes he is not fit to be our president, he does that very well on his own.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
There i not one third party candidate that could win the presidential race today regardless who it was.



Ron Paul needs no help making sure the American public realizes he is not fit to be our president, he does that very well on his own.



Oh, I do believe that an honest person of good character, integrity and true leadership skills could whip ANY candidate the other two criminal organizations we call political parties.
 

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Oh, I do believe that an honest person of good character, integrity and true leadership skills could whip ANY candidate the other two criminal organizations we call political parties.

Come on back Layout reality is calling. :D
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
Ron Paul needs no help making sure the American public realizes he is not fit to be our president, he does that very well on his own.

...He says as he watches the MSM put tin foil hats on people they disagree with...

I know you're no fan of Ron Paul. But you're only another part of the problem if you're willing to put your trust into one of the "regular" crowd, rather than think outside the box yourself. Ron Paul is not appealing to the TELEVISION-watching crowd, because the MSM portrays him in a bad light. However, the youtube crowd, who gets to hear EVERYTHING, overwhelmingly supports him.
 

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
...He says as he watches the MSM put tin foil hats on people they disagree with...

I know you're no fan of Ron Paul. But you're only another part of the problem if you're willing to put your trust into one of the "regular" crowd, rather than think outside the box yourself. Ron Paul is not appealing to the TELEVISION-watching crowd, because the MSM portrays him in a bad light. However, the you tube crowd, who gets to hear EVERYTHING, overwhelmingly supports him.

The MSM had nothing to do with it. When I sit and watch and listen RP himself talk about his views on Iran and a few other things such as drugs I have no need for him in a position of power like the president. I do not think he is a bad guy I think he has some great ideas and agree with many of them. He has a couple that would keep me from voting for him.

Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean it has anything to do with what is said on tv and such. To suggest such shows me where the real closed mind might lay and says only those that think like me are right the others are just brainwashed by media because that could be the only reason they think like they do. Sometimes certain candidates just say some things along the way that you cannot agree with. Heck some people think Obama is great. Some of them are actually informed and just have a completely different view of what is right or wrong for this country.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
I wonder if anyone caught Ken Burns' special on Prohibition?

The reason I ask this is because the first part breaks down some of the political issues that were important at the time and I think are applicable even now.

BUT going back to the subject of the thread, when we speak of a candidate who may be qualified, why is it that we select governors?

I wonder if anyone gets the idea that a governor does not want to limit their state government because that is a sign of an unsuccessful term in office. They impose laws that sometimes damage the populations' rights or in some cases try to solve inequities in their state by favoring one group over another.

maybe a third party is what we need, maybe stepping away from the idea of what qualifies a person is a needed thing.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
A third party would win today, IF and only IF, they fielded QUALITY candidates at EVERY level. Without a congress controlled by that party NOTHING will get done. Right now, there are NOT quality candidates on the radar screen from ANY party. Same old stuff.
Well, it's good to see we have confirmation of the establishment "National Security State" viewpoint ...... albeit only from a former, and not current, government shill .... (tho' once you're in that deep, you're in for life)

Roughly translated: That's right - apathy is the correct viewpoint - don't bother doing anything .... move along .... nothing to see here ...

Of course, that will yield "no change" ..... not that the establishment would want that or anything ..... :rolleyes:
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Fear does not keep people from attempting things it simply causes a person to stop and think before proceeding.
LOL ..... has that been your observation in life ?

It hasn't exactly been mine ....

While it is true that fear will often cause folks to stop themselves, it also often prevents them, ultimately, from pursuing their own goals and purposes .....

Sad, but true .....

And personally it's also been my observation that most of the so-called "thinking" that gets done by folks who are chronically in a state of fear (terror, etc.) tends not be real rational. In fact, much of it, tends to be quite irrational .....

Of course, YMMV - but if that's the personal condition that you are looking from, I would suggest that that itself may tend to color your observations ..... of a great many things ....
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
There i not one third party candidate that could win the presidential race today regardless who it was.
Well, fact of the matter is, is that the election isn't today - it's not for another 12 months or so ..... and we have miles and miles of road to travel before then .....

That is the current reality - and a lot can happen in 12 months.

The mood is for change - and it has been for sometime.

Do you see conditions changing in the next 12 months so that that need of, or desire for, "change" goes away .... or even dissipates ?

Personally, I don't - if anything, I see it increasing.

Ron Paul needs no help making sure the American public realizes he is not fit to be our president, he does that very well on his own.
I'm sure that his message is fairly unpopular with those that would prefer the "nanny state" (in one form or another) ..... and simply desire "to be taken care" by Uncle ...
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
If you want to see what those in the Soapbox feel about a third party or making a difference in politics, all you have to do is go back and look at the the overwhelming:rolleyes: discussion when I presented this:

goooh

I was correct, people of the soapbox would rather sit on the sidelines and complain about what is going on in this country and do nothing but listen to their beloved party and their overpaid entertainers that just tell them what they want to hear.

I wonder if the person that said, "Oh I most likely will join, just doing a bit more research",and "I will have time this weekend to look at it more." actually did.

I doubt it.

Well, maybe you'll believe me when I say I missed the whole thing - I want to read it, [because I agree, doing something other than 'what we've always done' is waaay overdue] but I want to take the time to absorb it, and right now, it's nap time [driving all night.]
Thanks for reposting it - it's good to see things outside the 'Obama is a communist' & 'liberals are stoopid' theme for a change. :rolleyes:
 
Top