Those who voted "third party"....
 

Look at what the third party idiots caused, shame, shame.

50% Obama
47% Romney
3% Other third party candidates

We have several parties to chose from and that's a very good thing that's democracy and not duocracy

Markus

As do we. Rather have it this way than the two party system. :yep:

Everyone have his right to have an opinion and You have the right not to support it, but call a person "idiot" because of what he may believe, is not correct

Markus

Because obviously, those of us who voted for a third party would have voted for Romney otherwise?

:har:

I also honestly don't understand the math. At all. Obama got over 50% (50.42 by what I'm seeing). Of the remaining votes, Johnson got about 1% and Stein got 0.3%.

To suggest that even half of the Libertarians and ANY of the Green voters would go for Romney in any scenario is, at best, wishful thinking. Even assuming it was a (stupid, undemocratic, unfair) forced A/B choice, the election would probably end up 49/51 at best on the popular vote.

Sorry, but little gets me riled up more than people banging their drums on how great America is for being democratic, and then when that democracy happens not in their favour, they invent undemocratic ways of how things should really be. I'm just glad that you guys have a system that, fortunately, has mostly resisted that sort of abuse thanks to all the checks and balances in place.

Look I would love a serious third party candidate but it just is not reality currently and this election was extremely important, it was about obama feeling he had a mandate and free reign come January.Gary Johnson or any of the other morons had no chance of winning but 3% voted for them and left us stuck with Obama.I agree with most libertarian views(apparently Johnson got most of that 3%) but they did nothing but their vote might as well been cast for obama.:/\\!!

Yes - look at what they caused - they kept Romney from losing by 6% instead of 3%.

That isn't what you meant, was it? At best, it would have been a "split" - no way that all of that 3% went with Romney. Your also not dealing with the realities of the Electoral College - so the percentages you throw out have nothing to do with the reality of the election.

Should have, Romney was not my first choice but much better than obama and was only one who had a chance of beating him.

Still amazes me that Romney was the best GOP candidate. I wonder what's next for the party.

FYI to the GOP four years from now I will NOT vote for a scientologist :D

The world thanks you. :yeah:

:up:

The 3rd parties are not to "blame" for anything the GOP did to itself. A number of weeks back, Rick Perry gave a speech to a group of evangelicals where he expressed surprise that libertarians and others of their like didn't rush to the arms of the GOP and their Christain conservatives. I had to laugh when I read the report; people advocating personal liberty and self-responsibility wanting to join with a faction that seems bent on controlling and dictating every aspect of personal life and choice under the banner of "Christian values". It is rather like the Taliban wondering why secular Muslim Turks are not rushing to their banner. If the GOP had given the American voters any better reasons and/or a better candidate, they would have taken the votes away from Obama. There is always going to be about a 5% or less of the electorate who is going to be part of the 3rd party vote. This should be, and is, by those who are realists about elections, factored into the expectations of any party in the presidential elections. They are not out to get a majority of 100% of the voter pool - they have to get a majority of the +/-95% remaining pool. The only real break in this pattern is when there is a populist surge resulant in a3rd party candidacy appealing to some of the more aminstream voters such as Wallace and Perot. Otherwise, both parties should face reality there is no chance they are going to get that +/- 5% chunk...

<O>