Third Party Disaster Watch

MPEP Random

2010-02-03T10:42:00.001-08:00

PatentNerd is a web-page that randomly selects a page out of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. A great study tool or to quiz yourself on the go on your cell phone. Bookmark the automatically loading page at http://www.patentnerd.webs.com/autoload.html

Study for the patent bar for free on your mobile phone

2010-01-10T08:21:00.000-08:00

One good way to study for the patent bar for free is to use PatentNerd and PatentNerdAuto. The site randomly select a page out of the entire MPEP, think of it as a word of the day. It's a useful tool for getting to know the entire MPEP, and it helps you quiz yourself on the context of specific rules. Great for studying on your mobile phone while at a stop light.

2007-10-29T10:16:00.001-07:00

OpinionJournal - The Journal Editorial Report

Gigot: But Collin, a lot of these social conservatives would say, Look, you guys--they're thinking about a third party run, some of them, and they say, Look, you guys at The Wall Street Journal wouldn't support a candidate if they supported a tax increase, so why should we support a candidate who favors abortion rights?

Levy: I think it's really a test for the social conservatives as much as this is in any way a test for Giuliani, because you have a situation now where if they did something like that and actually ran a third-party candidate, they would so marginalize themselves they'd basically undo all the progress that they'd sort of made in becoming part of the political mainstream since Reagan.

Ms. Riley: I think they realize that, and I also think they are somewhat politically savvy in the sense that if you talk to people on the ground--I was in Birmingham, Ala., a couple weeks ago. The pastors of megachurches there will say, Look, we understand the result of a third-party candidate could really be Hillary, and we don't want that. And they know that, especially for their socially conservative position, going for a third-party candidate or even going for a lesser-known Republican candidate is really going to be a problem.

Gigot: Steve, how serious are people like Jim Dobson, Tony Perkins, Richard Land? I know Richard Land. He's a very serious guy. But he's talking about this third-party option. How serious is that as a proposition?

Moore: I don't think the third party is the big problem for the Republicans. I think the bigger problem is just demoralization of that conservative base. But you look at the people like Tony Perkins and Dobson and you wonder, OK, if you don't like Rudy Giuliani, who do you like in the Republican field? They don't particularly like Romney because he's Mormon. They don't like John McCain because of his issues on free speech and so on. And so the problem for the religious right, right now, is they don't have a candidate. But it's an example though of where I think the flock is going in a different direction. Rudy Giuliani's doing pretty well in the polls with religious conservatives.

Gigot: And Rudy Giuliani has one answer, which he's been using continuously, which is the Supreme Court is the most important factor in things like these cultural issues, because they've become the ultimate arbiter, and I will name judges like Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. And he's got people like Ted Olson, conservative, Steve Calabresi, a conservative professor, supporting him on the judges issue. Naomi, is that a trump card for Rudy?

Ms. Riley: It may well be. If you say the word "judges" to some of these pastors, that will be enough for them to, I think, pull the lever. But I think Steve is right that voter turnout is going to be a huge issue. You can see, in polling that's been done recently, support has been slipping from Republicans among younger white evangelicals, but it hasn't been going to the Democrats. You can just see these people kind of saying, I'm going to stick on my couch on Election Day and not even worry about these people.

Major Third Party Candidate in 2008 Election Doubtful

2007-10-29T10:14:00.001-07:00

VOA News - Major Third Party Candidate in 2008 Election Doubtful

Some conservative activists have raised the prospect of a third party candidate in next year's U.S. presidential election if former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani becomes the Republican Party nominee. In the fifth and final part of his series on the 2008 election, National correspondent Jim Malone looks at the possibility of one or more major third party candidates making a run for the White House next year.

It does not happen often, but every once in a while a third party candidate has had an impact on U.S. presidential politics.

Larry Sabato directs the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

Ralph Nader ran for president under the Green Party banner in 1996 and 2000

"Look at American history. We have third party candidates that are significant about once every five elections," he noted. "Now we had a very significant independent in 1992, Ross Perot. We had a minor third party candidate who determined the result in 2000, Ralph Nader. He gave the election from Al Gore to George W. Bush. He tilted both Florida and New Hampshire to Bush. All Gore needed was one of those two states to win. So, even minor third party candidates can determine the results of a presidential election."

The Ron Paul Third-Party Scenario

2007-10-28T10:27:00.001-07:00

Chris Weigant: The Ron Paul Third-Party Scenario - Politics on The Huffington Post

This is pure cynicism distilled from the entrenchment of the two-party system in American politics. The problem is, when you've identified yourself as a one-issue (or even handful-of-related-issues) voter, and the party doesn't nominate someone reliably on your side, what do you do? The evangelical right is terrified that Rudy Giuliani will win the nomination, because he's tolerant on almost all the things the religious right demands intolerance on: God, guns, and gays -- as well as the 800-pound gorilla in the room, abortion.

Time will tell whether (1) Giuliani even gets the nomination, and (2) whether the religious right will bolt the GOP en masse in the election or not. But assuming for the sake of argument that Rudy walks off with it in February, and the family values crowd isn't bluffing, it opens up another third-party scenario for the election.

Enter Ron Paul. Since if (1) is true and Paul loses to Giuliani, he will be free to be courted as a third-party candidate. This is about the point that everyone will realize the fact that Ron Paul has already run as a third-party candidate. In 1988, Ron Paul was the Libertarian Party's nominee for president. He's really a Libertarian in Republican clothing to begin with, so this wouldn't be an enormous philosophical political journey for him to make.

Will religious right bolt GOP over Giuliani?

2007-10-26T23:12:00.001-07:00

2theadvocate.com | Features | Will religious right bolt GOP over Giuliani? — Baton Rouge, LA

"For some of us, the most important thing is not to beat Hillary, it is to defend life," Perkins said after a Sept. 29 meeting in Utah in which 45 influential social conservative leaders "kicked around" the notion of a third-party run.

Sorry, but the two are mutually exclusive.

Rudy a Lefty? Yeah, Right.

2007-10-26T23:07:00.001-07:00

Rudy a Lefty? Yeah, Right. - washingtonpost.com

Ultimately, the use of the labels "liberal" and "moderate" matters less than the reason why they're used: to suggest that core Republican voters won't support Giuliani's candidacy. But the numbers say otherwise. Although some right-wing religious leaders are talking about backing a third-party candidate if Rudy is nominated, few primary voters are likely to follow. Not only has Giuliani consistently led the GOP field, but pluralities of survey respondents tend to agree that he "shares the same values as most Republicans" and that on social issues he's neither too conservative nor too liberal but "about right."

Fla. GOP boss: Party disunity = Hillary presidency

2007-10-18T13:30:00.001-07:00

Fla. GOP boss: Party disunity = Hillary presidency | Q: The Florida Politics Blog

Backing a third-party candidate, as some evangelical Christian leaders have discussed, is tantamount to voting for Hillary Clinton for president, Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer warned during a visit to a Palm Beach County GOP meeting Wednesday night.

Why there will be no third party candidate for Christian conservatives

2007-10-18T13:02:00.001-07:00

Betsy's Page

Jay Cost exactly puts his finger on what is going on with the group of Christian conservatives who floated the idea of a third party candidacy if Giuliani got the nomination. First of all, it would be difficult to recruit such a candidate when the only possibilities for such a candidacy is either ticking off conservatives and being blamed for a Hillary victory or doing so poorly that the power of the Christian right is forever after pooh-poohed. Cost theorizes that the real purpose of their recent announcement was to call attention to Rudy's positions on social issues and get the message out to voters who might be unaware of where Rudy stands on issues like abortion and gay rights.

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Christian conservative leaders to meet again on Saturday about third-party candidate

2007-10-18T12:34:00.001-07:00

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Christian conservative leaders to meet again on Saturday about third-party candidate

In other words, Weyrich thinks social cons should be in it to win it, not just to make a show of withholding their vote from Rudy. Who could they get to run as an independent, though, who might stand a chance of attracting "major figures" away from the GOP nominee and making a race of it? The only person of that stature I can think of is Newt, but I can't see him jumping in and splitting the conservative movement knowing the Clintons will be the ones to benefit. Huckabee's a decent match with the religious right on policy positions, but he's also getting crushed in fundraising by Ron Paul. What's a disgruntled social con to do?

The Loft » Blog Archive » Still Thinking Third Party?

2007-10-18T12:31:00.001-07:00

The Loft » Blog Archive » Still Thinking Third Party?

What does this all mean? Does this mean we should all jump on the Giuliani bandwagon right now? Of course not. This is the primary election season. We should be out there working and campaigning hard for the candidate that most reflects our values. These candidates will battle it out in state primaries and caucuses. When the dust settles, one will emerge as the Republican nominee. I will support that nominee. Supporting a third party candidate in 2008 will ensure that Clinton wins. The country can not afford the damage that will be done if the Democrats hold the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives.

TheRealityCheck.Org Guest Writer

2007-10-18T12:30:00.001-07:00

TheRealityCheck.Org Guest Writer

I would suggest that the candidates closest to being worthy of election in addition to the California Congressman, Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, join his campaign. It is the last best hope for America in 2008 in this writer's view. Put the three campaigns into one and we can give the "bourgeois 4" (McCain, Romney, Giuliani and Thompson) a huge run for the money. These are the only candidates with any name recognition that we should support.

San Francisco Bay Times

2007-10-18T12:27:00.001-07:00

San Francisco Bay Times

This week, I've been reading the craziest array of comments from conservative mucky mucks. You recall that last month, the usual suspects got together for a confab in Salt Lake City, where - in an indirect attack on Giuliani - they threatened to support a third party candidate rather than vote for a pro-choice Republican nominee. And prior to that announcement, Focus on the Family's James Dobson sent around an e-mail saying that Fred Thompson couldn't campaign his way out of a paper bag and he, Dobson, would never vote for him. "Not for me, my brother! Not for me!"

The back-to-back developments triggered a worried scuffle throughout the evangelical block, where many voters fear a Hillary Clinton presidency more than a centrist Republican. Obviously, setting up a third party candidate to strip far right voters away from the GOP will hand the election to the Democratic nominee.

Catholic Pillow Fight

2007-10-18T12:26:00.006-07:00

Catholic Pillow Fight

Hey Cap, if Rudy is nominated, what are the chances that the pro-life community would come to the conclusion that it's better if a pro-abortion Democrat is elected rather than a pro-abortion Republican?

How about if there's a concerted effort to stick our thumb in the eye of the Republican party and give them their worst nightmare?

This sort of dismissive, pragmatic sh*t is almost enough to make me want to pull Hillary's lever.

PoliticalDerby.com: Home of the Original 2008 White House Power Rankings

2007-10-18T12:26:00.005-07:00

PoliticalDerby.com: Home of the Original 2008 White House Power Rankings

Another interesting result from the CLC straw poll. Given Ron Paul's convincing victory, are we surprised more people wouldn't consider a third party (presumably Libertarian) candidate?

"How likely would you be to consider voting for a third party (not-major) candidate for president in the November 2008 General Election?"

Very likely
18.18%

Somewhat likely
17.58%

Somewhat unlikely
15.15%

Very unlikely
49.09%

CommonConservative.com - Throwing Down the Gauntlet - Thomas Clark and Marcie Packard

2007-10-18T12:26:00.003-07:00

CommonConservative.com - Throwing Down the Gauntlet - Thomas Clark and Marcie Packard

Exhibit C -- Look at the risks involved with the folly:

There are six Supreme Court jurists that are age 68 and older:

Justice John Paul Stevens is 87.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 74.
Justice Anthony Kennedy is 71.
Justice Antonin Scalia is 71.
Justice Stephen Breyer is 69.
Justice David Souter is 68.

The next President could have as many as four appointments coming during their term in office. These justices are anything but spring chickens, and we know more than one is not in good health. So imagine if "President Hillary Clinton" or any of the other candidates on the Democrat side were elected. Abortion is the least of our worries in the justice system right now. Lawyers continue to challenge the detainment of illegal enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay with demands of habeas corpus rights. Environmental lawyers are presenting cases at the federal level that side with the fallacy that global warming exists, and mankind is responsible for it rather than admitting that this is part of a continuing cycle. ACLU lawyers march into court right around Christmas time and Easter time to end any sort of "overtly religious" displays on public grounds. Some cases have even challenged these displays on church grounds; a blatant violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The sort of justices appointed by Democrats will be of the activist mindset, and will rule wrongly on case after case. Furthermore, if they do get the chance to appoint jurists, they will make sure Roe is never overturned.

CommonConservative.com - Throwing Down the Gauntlet - Thomas Clark and Marcie Packard

2007-10-18T12:26:00.001-07:00

CommonConservative.com - Throwing Down the Gauntlet - Thomas Clark and Marcie Packard

Exhibit A -- Third party candidates have no chance

We know a lot of people who always like to look to third-party candidates as the solution to our political woes, but in our current system these candidates don't stand a chance. They're rarely allowed to participate in presidential debates. They can't raise the funds that the two main parties can (due mostly to the fact they lack the party fundraising apparatuses), and their candidates have never had a platform that makes people jump up to support them. As a matter of fact, the last three third-party candidates have been more along the lines of a spoiler. Ross Perot served Bill Clinton's successes well by drawing votes away from George H. W. Bush and Bob Dole in 1992 and 1996, respectively. In 2000 Ralph Nader served as the spoiler to Al Gore. In 2004, Mr. Nader didn't have nearly the impact as many pundits had predicted, but it was still enough to hand John Kerry a loss. For the most part a third-party candidate will serve only to draw votes away from one side or the other, and based on the strategy that the values voters have, they will draw from the Republican nominee -- not by much, but likely enough -- which clears the way for a Democrat to be the next resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Will Christian right leave GOP at altar?

2007-10-14T20:18:00.001-07:00

SignOnSanDiego.com > News > Politics -- Will Christian right leave GOP at altar?

But this year's Pew polls show the Christian right's support for Republicans shrinking to 60 percent. The slide is deeper among other religious voters who supported Bush – down to less than 40 percent among practicing Catholics and 20 percent for other Christians.

"That's really quite a dramatic change," said John Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron and a senior fellow in religion and politics at the Pew Forum.

A significant number of religious people "are ready to make a change and consider voting for a Democratic candidate" in the 2008 presidential race, Green said.

An important dynamic, he said, is that many conservative Christians are increasingly expressing concerns about such things as the war in Iraq, AIDS in Africa and global warming.

Dissident Voice : James Dobson and the Implosion Factor

2007-10-14T19:08:00.000-07:00

Dissident Voice : James Dobson and the Implosion Factor: "

Is the Christian Right's threat to consider supporting a third party candidate smoke and mirrors?

by Bill Berkowitz / October 13th, 2007

...

Bear in mind that Dobson has been down this road before. He periodically threatens to bolt the party over one issue or another. The threat could be seen as a way to force the party into putting a candidate acceptable to the Christian right, such as former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, on the ticket as vice president. Huckabee, who has performed well in recent polls but is still sitting in the second tier of candidates, is a Baptist minister who opposes abortion and gay marriage, making him an attractive candidate to Dobson, et al.

Successful political movements — and the Christian right has been both successful and decidedly political for nearly 30 years — encounter their ups and downs. Key leaders pass on, member organisations overreach and lose their focus, the unaffiliated public loses interest in what they’re selling, and internal differences develop.

The threat leveled by Dobson and other leaders of the Christian right against the Republican Party could be seen as a politically savvy stare down, or a desperate attempt to hold onto the levers of power within the party. Dobson is betting that Republican officials will blink.

Reckless Threats Regarding Third Party Candidacy :: Abortion :: ProLifeBlogs

2007-10-10T21:26:00.001-07:00

Reckless Threats Regarding Third Party Candidacy :: Abortion :: ProLifeBlogs

Conservative Christian leaders' willingness to support a third party candidate for U.S. president, if the Republicans nominate abortion-friendly Rudy Giuliani as their pick, is a rash and reckless move.

Think fairly recent past history and flashback to 1992.

Then remember how Texas billionaire H. Ross Perot's third party candidacy split the vote enough to help Bill Clinton win the presidential election.

If third party candidate history repeats itself, the country might be stuck with another member of that dynamic political duo out of Arkansas, former First Lady and U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton.

I shudder at the thought.

Columnist Kathleen Parker offers a reasonable human solution to conservatives' dilemna over the chummy with the choice crowd Republican frontrunner Giuliani. The answer is Mitt Romney.

"Romney right for values party ," reads the headline on one of Parker's columns that ran on Sunday in the Albany Times Union.

As Parker notes, and I agree, Romney supports traditional values and lives it in personal life. He has succeeded in private enterprise, politics and managed to clean up a major money mess as the CEO of the Organizing Committee for the 2002 U.S. Olympics. Plus, he is now unapologetically pro-life.

Some people accuse Romney of being too clean.

Mr. Clean works well for me. I'll take Romney anyday over a narcissitic former N.Y. City mayor or an overly ambitious carpetbagging U.S. Senator presidential-dynasty-wannabe.

2007-10-10T15:15:00.005-07:00

The Liberty Papers »Blog Archive » Is Ron Paul Howard Dean Redux, Or Ross Perot Reborn ?

There's been much discussion of late analogizing the rise of the Ron Paul phenomenon in the run-up to the 2008 to Howard Dean's nearly successful run for the Democratic nomination in 2004.

At least one liberal blogger, though, argues that the analogy is not well-placed:

Paul's ability to raise money online is one superficial similarity with Dean, but that's pretty much where the similarity ends. Despite attempts by conservatives to paint Dean as some sort of fringe leftist, the fact is that Howard Dean was a thoroughly mainstream candidate with a long record of moderate policy positions. He raised WAY more money than Paul has and came very close to winning his party's nomination (he was even endorsed by his party's previous nominee, Al Gore). He then went on to become the head of the Democratic National Committee, primarily because of his popularity among the Democratic rank-and-file.

Ron Paul truly is a fringe candidate, a guy whose writings (as Kevin Drum recently put it) have a "Unabomber-esque" quality to them. Perhaps that's a bit harsh, but it's certainly true that Paul endorses a number of positions that have very little mainstream support (returning to the gold standard, abolishing the Federal Reserve, getting rid of most federal agencies, etc.). Moreover, many of Paul's positions on key issues of the day are diametrically opposed to those held by most of the Republican base, which explains why Paul was overwhelmingly named the "Least Favorite Person on the Right" by this recent survey of right-wing bloggers.

While equating Ron Paul's ideas or even his writings to the Unabomber is ironic given the fact that the Unabomber's Manifesto reads more like a first draft of Earth In The Balance than anything Ron Paul ever wrote, the author does have a point. The scream notwithstanding, Howard Dean was, at heart, a mainstream Democrat; that's why he nearly won the Democratic nomination, and it's why he become chairman of the DNC. Say whatever you will about his ideas, but it's clear that Ron Paul stands outside the Republican mainstream as it exists today. And the chances of him becoming chairman of the RNC anytime soon are pretty slim.

Do Redstaters really want 1992 all over again? | Redstate

2007-10-10T15:15:00.003-07:00

Do Redstaters really want 1992 all over again? | Redstate

First off, let me say that Rudy Giuliani is not in my top two for presidential candidates. On the plus side, he's a proven leader and I think his positions on the War Against Militant Islamism are the right ones. But I can't get past his positions on other issues, specifically abortion and the Second Amendment. Rudy not only supported (or supports) abortion "rights", but he actually gave his own personal money to Planned Parenthood. I also can't get past his sleazy personal life. To me, there are other better candidates more deserving of being our party's standard-bearer for the 2008 presidential election.

However, if Rudy is nominated, I will support him. Why? For one, there's no way I could favor another Clinton in the White House. Do we really want a person who is more left-wing than Bill Clinton as president? Do we really want Hillary Clinton in charge of appointing Supreme Court justices? Do we really want a return of the Clinton machine, with all the attendant dishonesty and dirty tricks? Do we really want a larger federal nanny state? Do we really want a Democrat such as Hillary controlling our military in a time of war? My answers are no, no, no, no and hell no.

Two, I will support Rudy--albeit not wholeheartedly--because widespread support of a third-party candidate will guarantee that another Clinton will be in the White House. Also, Rudy has made pledges that assuage my concerns. On abortion, he said he would appoint Supreme Court judges in the mold of Roberts and Alito. If Rudy appoints another Souter or O'Connor, then that's a deal-breaker for me. I have differences with Rudy on the Second Amendment, but it's a dead issue. Conservatives won the debate, and Democrats are no longer interested in bringing up gun-control initiatives because it tends to cost them votes.

I can understand why social conservatives are concerned about Giuliani, but I'm more concerned about fellow conservatives wanting to choose a third-party candidate over Rudy, assuming he gets nominated AND assuming conservative Christian leaders decide to back a third-party candidate. According to Rasmussen, 27% of Republicans would pick door #3 under that scenario. If that happens, the upcoming election will be 1992 all over again, and a Clinton will come out on top once again. This is giving me a disturbing case of deja vu.

2007-10-10T15:15:00.001-07:00

» RE-POST: Why Al Gore Makes the Perfect Third Party Candidate

(I posted this originally back in March. I'm posting it again because neither Obama nor Clinton are worthy of your vote, if you consider climate change a critical issue. Edwards may be viable, but I don't see him doing much to get the nomination from the Dems . . . mostly because the Dems are increasingly out of touch)

Yes, I know it is crazy to think of Al Gore as a third party candidate. Yet, just for fun, why not suspend your initial dismissal of this idea for a moment and walk through this thought-exercise with me? I'm betting the Republicans of 1912 would have dismissed the notion of a third party Theodore Roosevelt, but look what happened when they took Teddy's supporters for granted - it cost them the White House.

2007-10-10T11:58:00.001-07:00

The Left Coaster: Evangelicals Serious About Running A Third Party Candidate?

Suddenly this doesn't seem like a bluff, especially when his Holiness himself Dobson pontificates in a high profile forum such as the NY Times. When you think about it, these people aren't exactly going to sing "Hallejulah" for a pro-choice, gay parade marching, pro-gun control, pro-stem cell research, three times married repeated adulterer candidate like Mr. 9/11.

So what would this mean? TPM Election Central uses a Rasmussen Poll to conclude:

"The poll finds that 27% of Republican voters would rather vote for a third-party Christian right candidate in a general election than vote for Rudy Giuliani -- and that's in a three-way race with Hillary Clinton.

The hypothetical three-way race shows Hillary with 46% support, Rudy at 30%, and the third-party conservative with 14%. Among self-described pro-life voters, Rudy gets only 36% support, with the third-party candidate at 29% and Hillary with 23%. Not just that, but Rudy gets only 25% of pro-choice voters, with Hillary still walking away comfortably with 65%."

2007-10-10T11:57:00.002-07:00

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Christian leaders may back third-party candidate if Rudy wins GOP nomination

Shrewd move. The GOP's already looking at near-certain defeat so evangelicals can walk away without worrying overly much about costing Republicans the election. Plus, the fact that they're willing to make good on their threat will put the, ahem, fear of God into the rest of the party ahead of 2012 and restore some of the emphasis on "values" that's been lost in the jumble of terrorism and Iraq. In fact, if I were Dobson, I'd almost hope Giuliani wins the nomination just so I can play my trump. That sort of power play will inevitably and irretrievably alienate a few centrist conservatives like me but the GOP can afford to shed us. They can't afford to shed Christians. That'll mean leftist rule for awhile but eventually the MoveOn crowd will overplay its hand and alienate some centrist Democrats and things will even out. Let's hope it doesn't take too long.

Exit question: Who'll be the "Christian nominee"? Forget Newt; he's too much of a party man to play Nader to Rudy's Gore. The WND article mentions someone named Foster Friess, but it'd be stupid to nominate a no-name like that who can't attract any votes that aren't being handed to him by Dobson et al. How about Alan Keyes?

2007-10-10T11:57:00.001-07:00

Bring It On! Religion and Society » The religious right's threat of a third-party candidacy

Here's a poll: How many of you think all the major GOP presidential candidates are sweating buckets right now that leaders of the religious right suggested they may back a third-party Presidential candidate in 2008 , due to less than enthusiastic support for the current crop of candidates?

Giuliani's camp fought back by pumping the media with stories about how the GOP has "to have a candidate that can run in all 50 states," and arguing that he's the only Republican contender who can do so.

McCain's camp arranged for him to give an interview to Beliefnet , where he slandered Islam and suggested that he'd only be comfortable with a Christian president.

Thompson's been trying to thwart attention from his religion to his tax proposal , in hopes of convincing the religious right to vote with their pocketbooks instead of their bibles.

Huckabee issued a statement saying that a third-party backed candidate would hand Hillary Clinton the election.

And this past weekend, the Boston Globe reported that Romney is doubling his efforts to lure the support of the religious right, by asking Rev. James Dobson of Focus on the Family (the media's anointed leader of the religious right) to take a second look at his candidacy.

At that's just the news from the past few days. My god, I don't even know if the children of Elm Street were this afraid when they went to sleep!

No third party candidate if it's Mitt

2007-10-10T11:47:00.001-07:00

Mitt Romney for President My Man Mitt - Mitt Romney for President!: No third party candidate if it's Mitt

There seems to be a growing consensus that Mitt Romney is the conservative of choice for leaders of the religious right. I think that they are hesitant to come right out and endorse him, but it is clear enough after they have eliminated essentially every other choice.

2007-10-09T19:33:00.001-07:00

Matthew Yglesias (October 09, 2007) - Power (Media)

Steve Benen echoes my thoughts on why religious right leaders are likely to mount a third party bid if Rudy Giuliani becomes the Republican nominee. Kevin Drum says :

This sounds right to me, though there's a good counterargument: judges. Dobson might be pissed, but what he really cares about is judicial appointments, and he knows that even Giuliani will appoint judges that he likes. Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, by contrast, certainly won't. So in the end, even if Rudy gets the GOP nomination, he'll swallow hard and endorse him.

It's important to distinguish between two cases here. One is that Giuliani is going to be looking for judges who'll uphold unlimited executive power, unrestrained corporate greed, and be unsympathetic to criminal defendants and that judges who hold their views are, statistically speaking, likely to issue more Dobson-friendly rulings on sex-and-death issues than are Clinton or Obama judges. I think that's clearly true, but key religious right leaders can't afford to be persuaded by it. A power broker needs to be seen to have power, and vague promises to appoint strict constructionists coming from a pro-choice, pro-gay, twice divorces lapsed catholic don't seem to me to demonstrate any particular clout on the part of religious right leaders.

Now Rudy has flirted with something more drastic, namely an explicit promise to only appoint justices who'll vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Rudy could point out that pro-lifers have never gotten a promise like that from their pro-life GOP nominees, and could note that Ronald Reagan (Kennedy, O'Connor), George H.W. Bush (Souter), and George W. Bush (Harriet Miers) have all tried to put unreliable votes on the bench.

That, it seems to me, would have to be good enough for Dobson or anyone else. Rudy would be blatantly kowtowing, all the other candidates would need to follow suit, and the pro-life movement would have demonstrated its clout. That would create problems for Giuliani in a general election, but nothing like the nightmare of a third party challenge. So why doesn't Rudy do it? My guess is he's ornery and doesn't like the idea of kowtowing. But from the perspective of a Dobson, that's precisely the problem.

2007-10-07T12:28:00.001-07:00

Republican Split Equals Clinton Victory | Redstate

A third party conservative, though desirable for some will only insure another Clinton election and the beginning of socialism in America. The end of American strength both militarily and economically as taxes are raised through the roof to support Hillary's government programs and her complete and utter decimation of U.S. forces because of her disdain of the military.
We cannot allow a headline like that mentioned at the beginning of this post to occur by splitting the party and being one issue voters. Though a Thompson supporter, I will support whomever the GOP nominee to prevent the election of any Democrat especially Hillary Clinton.

Dear Pro-Lifers: THAT'S WHY WE HAVE PRIMARIES!

2007-10-06T16:09:00.001-07:00

These ideas floating about for a third party pro-life candidate if
Rudy Guliani wins the republican nomination are self destructive and
unprincipled. If you really want a pro-life candidate now is the the
time to ensure he's on the ticket. By giving him the nomination.

With as many as 6 supreme court justice appointment possible over the
next 8 years, a democratic president, and a democratic congress, the
far right risks losing the abortion battle permanently. This is
particularly strange as the most important strategic asset in the
pro-life battle, judicial appointments, will likely have a
historically high turnover in the next 8 years and all the Republican
candidates have promised to deliver the appropriate judicial style.
Strategically subverting the Republican candidate and handing the
Presidency to a Democrat and risking Democratic control of all three
branches of government is beyond foolish. It's so obtuse that the
claim of voting on "principal: seems dishonest.

It's time to grow up. Running a third party pro-life candidate is by
far and away most damage you could do to the unborn.

Tom Tancredo

2007-10-06T15:43:00.001-07:00

Rocky Mountain News - Denver and Colorado's reliable source for breaking news, sports and entertainment: Elections

"From the beginning, we've had no intention to run as a third-party candidate, ever, and we'll never consider that because he's a Republican, period," said T.Q. Houlton, spokesman for the newly formed Tancredo for a Secure America Exploratory Committee.

2007-10-06T15:40:00.001-07:00

VOA News - Third Party Presidential Candidates Can Affect Election Outcome

While political parties in the United States other than the Democratic and Republican have fielded presidential candidates for years, they have never won the White House. VOA's Jeffrey Young explores how these third party candidates have nonetheless influenced the outcome of elections.

Ron Paul

2007-10-06T15:38:00.001-07:00

The Ron Paul Factor, What Does The Future Hold For The $5 Million Man? - CBS News

Paul has repeatedly said that he will not run on a third-party ticket; this week he told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that "the system is so biased against a democratic process of allowing competition. You know, we can't get in the debates, it's hard to get on ballots."

Benton, Paul's communications director, echoes that sentiment.

"He has run as a third party candidate before," said Benton. "You spend half your time and two-thirds of your money just getting on the ballot. In his mind, the only type of candidate that could run a successful third party campaign would be a very, very wealthy person that could self-finance."

"You never say never, but it's 99.9999 percent," added Benton. "It's as close to absolute as possible."

2007-10-06T15:37:00.001-07:00

Townhall.com::Third-Party GOP Candidate A No-Go::By Amanda Carpenter

Reed said raising a third-party candidate would be difficult to do this late in the 2008 campaign cycle. He noted a third-party candidate would "have to get going virtually today and I don't think will get going today because they don't know have an answer on whether or not the Republican nominee is going to be someone they can work with until probably February or March."
But, what if a pro-choice candidate, like former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani keeps his lead in the polls and captures the Republican nomination? Would social conservatives be forced to make a decision between principle and electability?"
Reed said no.
"The decision between do we stand on principle or we go with electability is a false choice," Reed said. "The reality is, in a free society, it's always a mixture….If you stand on principle and elect no one to office and don't have the ability to do anything, your principles suffer because you can't do anything to save the unborn, to strengthen marriage, to lower taxes, to protect the state of Israel and or to make sure we have an offensive strategy, instead of a defensive strategy on the war on terror."

2007-10-06T15:35:00.001-07:00

Election 2008 -Romney, Huckabee Respond to Conservative Threats To Run Third-Party Candidate if GOP Nominates Abortion-Rights Supporter

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination, has increased his efforts to gain support of Christian conservatives in response to threats by conservative group leaders considering running a third-party presidential candidate if the Republican Party nominates an abortion-rights supporter, such as former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the Boston Globe reports (Kranish, Boston Globe, 10/5).

Almost everyone present at a meeting of a group of Christian conservatives on Saturday supported the statement, "If the Republican Party nominates a pro-abortion candidate, we will consider running a third-party candidate," some participants at the meeting said ( Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 10/4).

Romney last week met with about 200 members of the conservative Council for National Policy and assured them of his opposition to abortion rights, the Globe reports.

Good News:

2007-10-06T15:33:00.001-07:00

Huckabee Declines Christian-Backed Third Party | Christianpost.com

WASHINGTON – Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said he would not seek, nor accept an invitation to run for president through a third political party supported by Christian conservative leaders upset over the prospect of a pro-choice Republican candidate like Rudy Giuliani.

Enlarge this Image

(Photo: AP Images / Cheryl Senter)

Republican presidential hopeful former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, at a house party in Londonderry, N.H., Saturday, Sept. 29, 2007.

Related

Giuliani, Evangelical Rift Grows Over Abortion

"No, I think a third party only helps elect Hillary [Clinton]," the ordained Baptist minister and staunch conservative told The Washington Post on Thursday. "I don't see that being a good strategy for those who really care about pushing a pro-family, pro-life agenda."
Rather, the White House hopeful said "the smart thing" for pro-life Christian leaders to do is to unite and support him as the Republican candidate.
"If they do that, I'll become the nominee, I'll win the White House," Huckabee contends.

2007-10-06T15:32:00.001-07:00

Election Central | Talking Points Memo | Dobson Makes It Official: Religious Right Leaders Will Back Third-Party Challenger Against Rudy

That's pretty definitive. The group also discussed the possibility of creating a third party themselves, though there was no consensus on that question. Still, according to Dobson, they will almost unanimously endorse a third-party challenger. This could obviously have a major impact on the race by splitting the GOP vote.
Indeed, a new poll out from Rasmussen today says that more than a quarter -- 27% -- of Republicans would vote for such a pro-life third-party challenger. What's particularly interesting about this poll is that it offers GOPers this choice while explicitly naming Hillary and Rudy as the major party nominees -- suggesting that even the specter of a victorious Hillary wouldn't dissuade many Republicans from going third party.

2007-10-06T15:31:00.001-07:00

RedBlueChristian » Blog Archive » WHAT HAPPENS IF THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT BACKS A THIRD PARTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE?

Earlier this week, radio personality and psychologist James Dobson described a meeting of leaders of the Religious Right in which he participated. According to Dobson, the Salt Lake City gathering passed a resolution, the gist of which was:
If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual [for President] who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate.
According to Dobson, "Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous."
Frankly, I hope that the members of this group follow through on their threat. Not necessarily because it would result in the election of a Democrat, which it incidentally might.
No, my interest in seeing the Religious Right shorn of its influence and power is entirely spiritual, not political.
For nearly three decades now, beginning with the formation of the Moral Majority by Jerry Fallwell in 1979, Religious Right politicos have presumed to speak, if not for all Christians, then for all who label themselves evangelicals. (Although a Lutheran, I classify myself as an evangelical because as the root word, evangel, implies, I believe in the Good News that all who turn from sin and believe in Jesus Christ will live with God forever.)

I've heard this rational in a few places and I think it's wrong. First, I don't think it will purge the Republican party of the religious right's influence. In fact it will strengthen, as if a third party stunt results in the election of Hillary Clinton, the lesson will be clear: appease the religious right or face electoral disaster! Secondly, it's not worth enduring Hillary Clinton generally. It's just not.

2007-10-06T15:25:00.001-07:00

The Associated Press: Conservatives Consider 3rd-Party Run

Conservatives Consider 3rd-Party Run
By RACHEL ZOLL – 5 days ago
Some of the nation's most politically influential conservative Christians, alarmed by the prospect of a Republican presidential nominee who supports abortion rights, are considering backing a third-party candidate.
More than 40 Christian conservatives attended a meeting Saturday in Salt Lake City to discuss the possibility, and planned more gatherings on how they should move forward, according to Richard A. Viguerie, the direct-mail expert and longtime conservative activist.
Other participants in the meeting included James Dobson, founder of the Focus on the Family evangelical ministry in Colorado Springs, Colo., and, according to Viguerie, Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, a conservative policy group in Washington.
However, Dobson spoke out against the idea of a third party even if "both Democratic and Republican nominees are known to be entirely unsupportive of the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage and other aspects of the pro-moral agenda," according to Gary Schneeberger, a spokesman for Focus on the Family Action.
A spokesman for Perkins did not respond to requests for comment Monday.
Viguerie would not give specifics of the proposal or reveal additional names of participants, but said President Bush "would not have been elected in '04 without the people in that room."
"There is such a jaundiced feelings about any promises or commitments from any Republican leaders," he said in a phone interview. "You could almost cut the anger and the frustration with a knife in that room it's so strong. Because they don't know what else to do, they're talking third party."
A spokesman for the Republican National Committee did not respond to a request for comment.
The participants were in Salt Lake City for a separate meeting of the secretive Council for National Policy, a group of conservative business, religious and political leaders that was co-founded years ago by Tim LaHaye, author of the "Left Behind" series of books. Vice President Dick Cheney flew into the city Friday to address the group, according to The Salt Lake Tribune.
Christian conservatives, who hold considerable sway in the Republican Party, have been deeply unhappy about the field of GOP presidential candidates.
Dobson has said he wouldn't support Rudy Giuliani, calling the former New York mayor an "unapologetic supporter of abortion on demand." Dobson has also rejected former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson as wrong on social issues, and wouldn't back John McCain because of the Arizona senator's opposition to a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Viguerie said conservatives "are still open" to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, but said, "we haven't seen anything that guarantees that we will hold to the positions that he's articulating." Romney has been questioned about his record on gay rights.
However, the proposal to consider a third-party candidate comes from anger that the Republicans whom Christians have helped elect for decades have failed to act on policy issues important to evangelicals on abortion, marriage and school prayer.
"Conservatives have been treated like a mistress as long as any of us can remember," Viguerie said. "They'll have lots of private meetings with us, tell us how much they appreciate it and how much they value us, but if you see me on the street please don't speak with me."
A third-party run would be a long shot, requiring millions of dollars and challenges to ballot access. Such a bid could prove disastrous for the GOP by splitting the vote.

2007-10-06T15:10:00.000-07:00

A third party candidate in the 2008 election will guarantee the election of the democratic candidate.