An introduction to lesser known candidates
You all know who Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are, but are you aware that there are actually hundreds of other presidential candidates who are just as legitimate*? (*Ed. note: This is a lie). Here’s some of the most interesting:
Gary Johnson – Libertarian: After its stunning defeat at the polls last election, the Libertarian Party decided to bet on a candidate who hasn’t been photographed licking the ice cream of someone who was not his wife. Enter, Ex-Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson. This time, they’ve got a shot!
Positions
Those who are only familiar with libertarianism through former-congressmen/Goldfinger impersonator Ron Paul should already be acquainted with Johnson’s positions.
He’s against virtually every federal acronym you can think of (IRS, DOE, and the FED, to name a few), and against all bailouts and most entitlements. He also wants to legalize marijuana and keep the US out of the rest of the world’s affairs.
But he’s not in favor of a gold standard. Boooooring! Paul gets the edgy college student vote because he’s willing to bring just a little bit of crazy to the table. Johnson is pretty much Rick Perry without the hawkish foreign policy and more pot. How is that going to generate excitement?
Jill Stein – Green Party
Keeping with the theme of candidates from parties you’ve probably heard of, Jill Stein is the liberal ying to Johnson’s yang. In the post-Ralph-Nader era, the Green Party has successfully replaced its reputation as a hatable spoiler with a new legacy of virtually anonymous candidates, and Stein is a continuation of this strategy.
Positions
Stein advocates instituting a modern WPA where the federal government will employ 25 million Americans in various government jobs, including positions in “sustainable organic agriculture.” Way to go after that Whole Foods vote!
Other than the FDR-esque employment program, Stein takes the usual liberal positions (single-payer health care, Employee Free Choice Act, get out of wars), but with random craziness to keep you on your toes.
For example, she wants a more progressive income tax, but with a 90% tax on the bonuses of bailed out bankers (that’ll teach you to make your company money!) and advocates “a binding international treaty to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide.” No word on how this treaty would be enforced, but I can only assume the 82nd Airborne would be involved.
Merlin Miller – American Third Position Party
Now that the two most popular lesser-known candidates are out of the way, it’s time for the deeper cuts. And don’t let his shockingly nice website fool you—Miller is way off the deep end.
Combining communist paranoia, libertarian ideals, and some of that olde tyme racism, Miller represents exactly why most third-party candidates are ruining it for the few sane ones.
Positions
I’ll just start with the mission statement of the American Third Position Party:
The American Third Position Party believes that government policy in the United States discriminates against white Americans, the majority population, and that white Americans need their own political party to fight this discrimination. Our government no longer represents us.
And it pretty much goes downhill from there. Among other highlights, Miller calls for the courts to “systematically apply capital punishment for those convicted of murder, terrorism, and certain sexual offenses.”
He also bemoans the fact that many Americans “have to relocate from one town to another to escape criminal gangs.” And that’s just off one of his position pages.
Which of these candidates would you vote for if you had to? Let us know in the comments.
This is pretty much a perfect example of “Remember to vote…but only for Obama.” Belittling the legitimacy of third-party candidates is closed-minded and stifles political discussion.
Where does this post say anything against Romney?
First of all, if anything, this post might say “Remember to vote…but only for Obama OR ROMNEY.” There is nothing in here against Romney.
Secondly, guess what? Voting for third party candidates is a waste of a vote, and in some cases can actually be hurtful to the causes you care most about. You can have your idealism all day long, but, as both major-party candidates are fond of saying, you can’t have your own facts. Let’s go down the list.
Fact: No third-party candidate in this election is anywhere close to being able to win the presidency. Many of them are not even on the ballot in most states. Voting for such a candidate is a wasted vote at best.
Fact: It could actually be worse than a wasted vote. If you live in a swing state and vote for a third party, the only impact you are having is taking away votes from your preferred candidate of the two major party candidates, which benefits your least preferred major party candidate. Ask Ralph Nader’s Florida voters in the 2000 election how they feel about having given the election to George Bush. Sure it’s relatively harmless if you live in NY, or Georgia or whatever, but swing state voters should consider the actual impact their votes will have, and not just stand on some high-horse idealism. Second best is always preferable to absolute worst.
What’s with all the vitriol? It’s a “fact” that third party votes are wasted? Have you not moved past comparative politics 101? If you don’t incentivize the Democrats to stick to the left, they’re just going to wind up looking like poor man’s Republicans. That’s why (on foreign policy) Obama gets away with drone strikes and sticking to the pre-2008 GOP timetables for Iraq and Afghanistan. Why on climate change, Obama worked with China against the EU to sink the Copenhagen Climate Conference. Why when the DC establishment was committed to passing healthcare reform after Bush left, Obama was able to push through the most conservative of all possible solutions – a giveaway to mandatory private insurance companies. Why no risks were taken with the CFPB, we’ve had insanely expensive bailouts (which again Obama promised initially not to vote for) and banks that are enshrined post-collapse as too big to fail. Why on civil liberties Obama lied about vetoing FISA, sticking up for whistleblowers, expanding surveillance, reviewing drug incarceration, worked to pass SOPA in private, etc.
Normally, I’d say vote third party anyway. But in this case, there’s really even less difference than usual between Obama and the GOP. Immaturity in politics, if there is such a thing, isn’t idealism — it’s voting for a candidate that looks cool even though you disagree with their positions! But hope change whatever, maybe next term Obama’ll really change the course of government this time.
Major party candidates do NOT always disappoint this badly. If there was a time to vote third party, it’s now. The Greens and Libertarians get more professional every cycle, and every vote for them builds a foundation for future growth so that they can elect national leaders with substantive platforms later on. Especially in a noncompetitive state like…well, like all 50 states, because this election was never really in play, but especially in NY where Obama’s win is a given and the strength of third party ideas is not. Romney may well be the worst
The idea that a third party run is forever impossible is of course not a natural fact; but it’s not supported by history either. Perot was #1 in the polls until he made mistakes. And Nader was not the reason for Gore’s loss; Katherine Harris/Jeb Bush were. As if being stuck having to choose between bad candidates would make voting for a legitimate (albeit third party) candidate any less valid.
If you’re not strongly to the right, I don’t see why you would vote for Romney OR Obama. Fact: It’s moral to vote for the candidate you want to win in an election. Fact: It’s anti-intellectual to pretend that the corporate platforms of either major party are at all acceptable.
To anonymous: Congratulations on your thrown away votes in the name of “incentivizing” Democrats to move to the left. While you’re doing that, if you live in a swing state, you are giving elections to Republicans. You can pretend that they’re the same party all day long but I would be very fascinated to hear you tell me that there is no substantive difference between Justice Scalia and Justice Sotomayor, or Justice Alito and Justice Kagan. Try and make that case if you want to.
You can say anything you want about how Obama isn’t good enough. I might even agree with you. But go ahead and pretend he’s not better than Bush or Romney — I’m not going to take that journey with you, because the Supreme Court actually matters. And when it comes to the Supreme Court, presidents from different parties make very different choices.
Obama CC’83.
Your article on A3P is infantile non factual and appears written by someone with limited education!
Mr. Davidson, thank God you are not a true politician.
Merlin Miller is a West Point graduate and Vietnam veteran. No one can question his patriotism or America First! position.
If he heard you denigrate his character he would probably hand you your teeth.
I’m glad I don’t make decisions using a kid’s opinions.
I’m not voting for the special interest obligated two party twins. Merlin Miller is military and loyal American. Thank you!
I’m a war veteran too, and also a loyal American. Bonus point: I’m not a racist. Vote for me?
RON PAUL!!! <3