Title: Film of DC rally (How many does it look like to you?) Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Sep 14, 2009 Author:. Post Date:2009-09-14 12:37:53 by christine Keywords:None Views:1729 Comments:117
Honestly, unless there is a third party movement from this, if it is called "The Tea Party", or what ever, I'm not paying much attention.
Honestly, if it turns into a third party movement, I'll stop paying attention. Get this: It is mathematically impossible for a third party to be viable in a winner-take-all election system, such as the one we have in the US. Got that? 2 + 2 = 4, and third parties cannot be viable. Both statements are true with the same level of strength and certainty.
Yes, I know. The Republican Party displaced the Whig party. The operative word, however, is replaced. That's not just an accident of history. It was mathematically required.
The question, then, is what are the chances of a new party replacing one of the existing ones? A rough estimate would have to be once every 235 years, based on US history. Not good odds. It's much more likely that a determined group of activists might be able to take over an existing party from within. That's happened many times in US history.
Not in any absolute sense. But I don't currently see any viable alternatives. I'd listen to any proposals that seem well-founded, plausible and implementable...
Good. :) Seems to me the claim is only true assuming Union. There are many such winner-take-all games at different levels in the Union, and I think a local or regional third party could be successful, locally or regionally replacing one of the two primary parties. Especially secessionist.