Talk Elections

What State will be the first to vote for a 3rd party candidate? When will it happen?

MS, AL, GA, LA.. that is if Rudy and Edwards in 2008 and Roy runs...

Minnesota.

When?

All states already vote for third party candidates.

I think your question is "Which state will be the first to have a third party candidate win that state?"

That has already happened too.  Republican party (in the 1800's) Bluemoose party.  Perhaps even a couple of socialist wins?  I don't know too much history, but I'm sure a google search would turn up the answer - let's see.....

From wikipedia.
In the 1860 election, the Constitutional Unionists got nearly all of their votes from former southern Whigs, and managed to win three states - Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee.

The know-nothing party
The height of their success came in the Election of 1856, in which they threw their weight behind Millard Fillmore (a Whig who had been president from 1850 to 1852). Fillmore lost, but won 22% of the popular vote and Maryland's 8 electoral votes.


2 Progressive parties
Roosevelt ran on the Progressive Party ticket in the 1912 Presidential election. Roosevelt had the satisfaction of defeating Taft in the popular vote, and by a large margin of 88-8 in the electoral vote, but the split engendered in the Republican vote allowed Woodrow Wilson to win the presidency.

The second was formed under the leadership of Robert M. La Follette, Sr. of Wisconsin, another erstwhile Republican, in 1924. La Follette's politics ran toward the socialist end of the spectrum; he favored public ownership of railroads, etc. His run for the presidency under this ticket garnered 17% of the popular vote, but carried only one state (his native Wisconsin).

Dixiecrat party
Thurmond subsequently ran for President on the Dixiecrat ticket in the 1948 election, and carried the previously solid Democratic states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina, receiving 1,169,021 popular votes and 39 electorial votes.

American Independent Party
The party was established in 1968 by Alabama governor George Wallace. Wallace was on every state ballot. Wallace and his running mate Curtis E. LeMay received 13.5% of the popular vote and 46 electoral votes.

So it appears that the first state to chalk up a win for a third party is the constitutionalist union party in 1860, and the last party to do so was the American Independant party in 1968.

The next most likely IMHO is WI with a Libertarian win.  Maybe this cycle, maybe next.  Might have to wait until Ed Thompson wins the governor's race, and people can accept that the world will not dissolve into anarchy if a Libertarian comes into power.

Whether we win or not, we aren't going away.  We are close to a breakthrough.  We are building our party from the ground up.  We are now winning city and county elections on a regular basis, and state office wins are becoming more common.

We're here, we're near.  Get used to it.

In what election?  Currently, Vermont elects a socialist Congressman. Vermont might also elected a "Progressive" Governor this year who is a protege of Bernie Sanders...although he is running as a Democrat just for this election.

Connecticut, Maine, Alaska, and Minnesota have all had 3rd party or Independent Governors in the recent past.    But all of these were much more "cults of personality" than legitimate 3rd party movements.

And for the libertarians, if you guys want to be taken seriously, stop running candidates in every election that fail to get 1% of the vote.  You're just embarrassing yourselves when you keep whining about not being respected as a major party, but never backing it up at the polls.  If you're really serious, move to New Hampshire and restart your crusade at the local level.  

For any third party to ever make a dent, they will have to win some local elections, and then, state-by-state, convince state legislators to change the vote counting rules to something like preferential voting.  The Libertarians, Greens, etc, will never get anywhere with first-past-the-post.

The Libertarian got 0.26% of the vote in the 2000 presidential election in Wisconsin.   The Libertarian won't break 1% there in 2004 or 2008.

How do libertarians expect people to trust their ideas about government when they are so freakin' delusional about political realities!  

We're less delusional than you think. Maybe you just don't like our optimism. ;)

Edit - also, our gubentorial candidate in WI(Ed Thompson) got 11% of the vote in 2002. We also stand a good chance of getting a representative into the state house there(he's raised more funds than all his opponents combined, and Ed Thompson got 32% of the vote in that district).

I'm sorry, but there are people on this forum who actually think Badnarik might WIN THE ELECTION.  
It's as though they have absolutely no contact with the world around them.

Oh, we all realize it's unlikely he'll win, but we do think he has a good chance of making an impact. There's a chance, albeit a VERY slim one that he'll win, but a lot of things will have to happen(which require some funding). We'll work towards the goal of victory, whether you like it or not. At the very least we hope for name recognition from this election.

Regarding the initial question, perhaps Libertarian in New Mexico?  I know they currently have 5% of the vote there, which actually is quite a lot.

And this is before the advertising campaign. I'm wondering what it will be afterwards.

40% :D

Indiana might go Badnarik.  He's at 14% now, with 40% undecided.  Most likely it won't go 3rd party, but that's what they said about Jesse Ventura.

http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0409/gividen.html

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi

The LP is now at the cusp of being actively fought against, peole don't laugh anymore.  Through it all, we have grown.  We are not a personality cult, we are not going away.

We're here, we're near - get used to it.

We have 602 libertarians in local offices,  That's more than all other 3rd parties put together.  We have had state rep office holders in the past, and we will again in the future (perhaps Florida this cycle)


http://www.politicalgateway.com/cand.php?id=40&page=cand

You know, I hope the Libertarians do well here. If they won the state, I would laugh my a$$ off for months. :) They SO could have taken the State Auditor office in 2002 if they'd bothered to run a freakin' candidate! There was an unopposed Dem with a LOT of ethics issues. I even suggested this to a Libertarian voter registration guy, but nothing happened. :( At least, y'all could've gotten a good percentage...

Tex - the gubentorial candidate(Gividen) is at 14%, not Badnarik(whose mother is running for lieutenant-govenor with Gividen). Still, looks promising for Gividen.

You can make it happen in NM WMS; All you have to do is vote Badnarik, and tell your friends.  Trust me, it doesn't hurt much the first time.  ;)

PS where are these econ / social numbers everyone keeps posting.  what is the link?

PPS to John - OOPS! you are right.  My bad.  Still, if that many people are considering voting Lib for Gov. Gividen might have some coattails.

The 14% was in an online poll done by a TV station, so it wasn't scientific.

Check the sig...I already AM going to vote for Badnarik. :) Yes, even if I am more of a mild Christian Democrat (but a federalist one!), Badnarik is the best of the options out there for me. I took some flack from my ABB parents over it though. ;) And most people I know are parochials who vote how the party bosses tell them to. :( But the 5% I saw was quite encouraging - I think you have room for growth here because of the problems both Dems and Reps have in running on their records (you can't run on a void) :D

Numbers from the Political Compass, http://www.politicalcompass.org/

And I scored 50% on both axes on the Libertarian Self-Test you all run...can't get any more Centrist than that. :D

That's the idea behind the Free State Project (http://www.freestateproject.org).

You are voting Badnarik - oh good.  I must be getting tired, perhaps I should hang it up for the night (morning actually)

thanks for the link, here's my numbers.

Economic Left/Right: 8.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.18

I'm on the right side of the econ , but how come I'm not a stronger social libertarian???  Oh well.

My mother and father are divorced.  I almost have my father convinced to vote Libt this time, but my mother is one of those who would vote for Bush no matter what.  go figure.

Well, I have nothing against those who go to the FSP, but I'm not packing up and leaving - I'll preach libertarianism where I am thank you very much. I happen to like Georgia - it's nice here, and I'm not giving up on making it nicer.

S'ok - it's late here too. Now post your numbers with pride in your signature! :) And my mom, stepdad, dad, and stepmom are all ABB and voting Kerry. My brother is leaning Libertarian but voting Kerry. But Badnarik will get one vote, anyway. :)

New Hampshire

That is, if the "Free State" project works.

Also, plenty of states have voted 3rd Party in the past, but I get what you mean.

Yes, I know.  I think this is the best ideas the libertarians have ever had.  

Third parties need to start by establishing a small geographic base of support.  They can't expect to grow by running candidates everywhere that get 1% and thinking that somehow they will magically transform that into a win somewhere.

Someone mentioned NM & the Libertarians, and how they got almost 5%, and how special that is.

In 2002, the Indepdence Party (of MN) got ~15%, IIRC.

8)

I'd go with that.

Verin,

If former Governor Ventura ran for president would he win Minnesota?

Perhaps.  I'm not sure.  Minnesota has a love/hate relationship with him... mostly hate ;)

Hah, Libertarian delusions of power.  Badnarik has absolutely ZERO chance of winning the election.  He would lose even if the Dems and Reps didn't run a candidate.  He would lose to write-in candidates.  

Libertariansim is not the wave of the future, but is a far out, immoral way of governing.  A zero rules, anything goes type of society.  Ouite scary actually.

Aditionally, please, go waste your vote on him.

Don't worry, we will.  But my fondest wish is that in so doing, we take Bush down.  Here's the link on why we should.
http://www.rationalreview.com/tlknapp/072904.shtml

Oh yeah, go read the poll totals in some of these battleground states.  You saw what happened in 2000 with Al Gore and Ralph Nader?

Well get ready for president Kerry pal.

Be seeing you

Ah, ignorance... zero rules is anarchy, not libertarianism. Libertarianism bases itself off of freedom to do what you like so long as it does not harm others or infringe upon their rights. How exactly is minding your own business immoral as a principle of government?

In what election? Greens have gotten up to 17% in some races here, and Libertarians close to that in other ones. And that's Independence. :P

Governor!

Oh, and, by the way, they're the Indepdence Party here, so HA!

(Just kidding ;D)

It's not zero rules.

Equating the Libertarian Party is like calling the Republican Party fascists or the Democratic Party communists.  It's lazy and wrong, just a way to see the most extreme elements.

It's not zero rules, it's just fewer LAWS.

Oh, I'm not saying it's monumental.  Third-party candidates have even won states before (e.g., Theodore Roosevelt in the Wilson-Taft-Roosevelt election).  It's more than any other third-party candidate has in any single state that I know of, however.

Nader got 10% in Alaska in 2000, I think.