Quote:
Quote by: Jubloz  Which is why I'm not registered with either party. Unfortunately, there's still no 3rd party candidate, as far as I've noticed, that's both of quality and is running in this election. |
Third parties? Well what would these parties need to offer people to get them to vote for them? Brand power I tell you, people only vote for things they believe in, so people would need to believe that these third parties can be counted on. I mean people are used to voting for their parties, It is not common to see people vote for the same party regardless of who is at the helm, so maybe people are lazy, or afraid of change? Funny though to see people wanting changes and yet not voting for them, they know a praty is consitituted of the same people after the election, even the president will have been in that party for some time, so they won't be open to discussing changes that have not been brought forth before within their in house talks. What is proposed is what they have agreed to deliver, what they would like to see happen, so basically presidential speaches are about one person giving their ideas and seeing if people agree with them. It is not about what will happen, it is just a display of their opinions and promises.
A third party would need to be publicised because they need people to know of them. Also people don't have a communications medium where they can see who else in the country is thinking of voting for a 'radical party', so they will think their vote would be wasted, so they vote for the bigger people. If they could converse with the rest of the nation, say on the other side of the country, then they could all say to each other that they will vote for another third party, who is in for it? Seeing as how they are nucleated, people are afraid of wasting their vote. So even if a third party became widely publicised, it would probably fail. Who are they? Are they in for just a term to take our money? These are questions asked of people in the voting. Also, these bigger parties are seen as 'liable', and that is not for sale. It is not like they could dissapear so people think that they can count on them to be there to answer question if things go wrong, so they are seen as true parents of the people.
That is what a third party would need to do, to say they are better suited to handle problems than the major parties, so they would need to snag a few over a floor crossing period. If say Obama went over to a third party, they would take a lot of media publicity with them, but I don't think that they would see it as a sign. I mean they could all say that they are just being paid more there, not really believing they could be president anyway. So 'signing a big star' won't work.
Trying to win people over with new ideas is a funny business, because you can't always back them up can you? You would need to have new ideas though, because the other major parties have years of experience backing them up. So a third party would need to offer radical changes, be publicised, but not need a known nominee, but that could help, a bit, to be noticed, and it would help if they had a great campaign bankroll, as that would fund their 'getting known' part. Maybe if they introduced people from the populace to each other, that would help. But how do you bring people together like that? It would cost way too much, and people don't have time for going around getting to know each other and talk about a party they think is good, but are shy to suggest because they might be laughed at, so these parties get ignored.
I don't think an international party would work either, they would be well funded and people would see them as representing that country, but people would think that the party doesn't represent their needs. If two countries joined, then it would be a free for all, with the country with the bigger population winning. Say China merged with Nepal, then Chinese politicians would find their way into nepal office too.
If people got together and decided that there should be a third party for them, then they would vote for it, because it is like voting for themselves, so if you got people to think they are voting for themselves, like they are not doing now, then people would vote for that party. People nowadays usually think that they are voting for someone else, that the better candidate was going to benefit and then benefit them, but if you got people to vote for someone and thought they were voting for themselves, then they would go for it, or like a neighbour, with the credentials.
People see big parties and big areas, does that person have them in mind when they consider their decisions? If you could convince people that the two major parties do not have them in mind, then yes.
Parties are usually formed after wars, as people are more influential then, and more open to new ideas to represent peace after the war, and keeping it. After that what I have spoken of above comes into play I think.
I don't think a thrid party would come into power after all.