Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (5468)	6/8/2007 9:25:58 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25737

Re: ...will definitly lose about 1/2 of one party will "consider". I wouldn't say that ANY of this is 'definite'. :-) Re: "Pretty thin gruel to try to feed a campaign on." Actually this (the LOWEST percentage of the public registered in EITHER of the old Parties, and the HIGHEST percentage of registered Independents within modern memory) is a long way from 'thin gruel'. I believe it portends possibly the most fertile ground for a Third Party within living memory. (Exceeding the Perot era....) Re: "... At most only one party will look like certain losers." Nah. You'll have to click further back on the links for the actual percentages from each Party, (I was quoting from memory, and might have somewhat understated the percentages of Republicans who indicated they might be willing to switch if their Party's nominee looked set to lose... when I said "more then 1/3rd." Anyway, with the drop of Republican registration numbers in the past couple of years (and the rise in Dem.), there is about a 10 point or so spread between the two right now, so the percentages of potential 'switchers' is perhaps statistically more alligned then you might have first thought. So, I certainly WOULDN'T conclude that there would be 'only one loser' under all scenarios. <g> ESPECIALLY when you look into the possible ramifications if, for example, a well-financed third Party run prevented a straight win for anybody in the Electoral College, took the election for President to the HOUSE (where each STATE only gets ONE VOTE, and the election for Vice President into the SENATE. Interesting stuff! See this: Electoral Chaos: How Michael Bloomberg Could Deadlock Both the Electoral College and the House of Representatives Message 23603920 27% Likely to Vote for Bloomberg as Third Party Candidate Message 23603948