69 million page views

Who's lonely?

Reader comment on item: Blowback from Criticizing Trump

Submitted by Michael S (United States), Jul 28, 2016 at 11:56

Hello, Daniel

I can see by the number of responses, that you're anything but lonely.

On a practical level, I don't see a snowball's chance in Hades of the election going to the House of Representatives. That would require a third party candidate actually winning a STATE, which won't happen. Let me run through historical Presidential elections, in which third party candidates have had strong showings and/or won a state:

1. 1992. Ross Perot and the Reform Party won 18.9% of the popular vote, and NO STATES. Polls leading up to the election showed him to be highly competitive, and capable of coming in first or second; but the voters closed ranks as the election drew near, supporting the major parties. The net result was a loss for the Republicans. I voted for Perot, because I was disgusted with GHW Bush's "Read my lips" lies, and his support for a "New World Order".

2. 1968. George Wallace and the American Independent Party won only 13.5% of the popular vote, but five states with 46 electoral votes. He was able to win in Deep South states, because of his highly regional appeal. Nationwide candidates like Perot are not able to do this; and neither can the Libertatrian and Green Party candidates in 2016. Ne net result was to give the election to Richard Nixon.

3. 1960. Harry Byrd won zero percent of the popular vote, but two states and 15 electoral votes. Even though the Dems and Reps were split 50:50 in the electoral vote, this was not enough for Byrd to become a "kingmaker" because Kennedy controlled big states like Texas and Illinois. I imagine many Mexicans voted from Texas graveyards, and Cook County voters turned out in massive numbers at unusual hours to accomplish this, which shows that entrenched parties with strong local machines trump third parties any day.

4. 1948. Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats won four states and 39 electoral votes, with only 2.4% of the electoral vote. Like Wallace and Byrd, he accomplished this through regional appeal. Truman won the election handily, though the morning newspaper had declared Dewey the winner. If the race were as evenly divided as the press thought it would be, perhaps Thurmond's electors would have had a voice. It wasn't, and they didn't.

5. 1924. "Fighting Bob" La Follette Sr. and the Progressive Party won 16.6% and 13 electoral votes, all from his home state of Wisconsin. He had strong local appeal, and my grandfather voted for him; but Coolidge won by a landslide.

6. 1912. Teddy Roosevelt and the Progressive or "Bull Moose" party won 27.4% of the popular vote, six states and 88 electors. He managed to outperform the Republican incumbent, Taft, in all three categories, in what was clearly a grudge match. Woodrow Wilson won by an electoral landslide, haveing won less than 42% of the popular vote.

Roosevelt was an egomaniac kamikaze, who committed political suicide and took his former party down with him. If the Ted Cruz were anywhere near as popular as "Bully Bully" Teddy, this is what would happen in 2016. Even Jeb Bush couldn't win his own state of Florida in the primary against Trump; so I seriously doubt he could win it or any state in the general election.

The last and only time a "third party" candidate won an election, was when Abraham Lincoln won an electoral landslide in 1960. In that election, the opposition was fragmented among several independent candidates; and Lincoln's Republicans were essentially a reincarnation of the Whigs, and the Federalists before them. Gary Johnson is not Abraham Lincoln.

I honestly LIKE Donald Trump; and I will be happy if and when he is elected. Seeing that a parade of candidates I DIDN'T like have won the Presidency since Ronald Reagan, however, I have learned not to get too excited about these things. In the end, God will give us a President in line with His plan for the US. Unfortunately, I fear His plan is for judgment and destruction -- the sort of thing a President Hillary is likely to produce. I would like to be wrong in this.

So, who's lonely?

Shalom shalom :-)

Dislike
Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Daniel Pipes replies:

Your historical review is interesting but not terribly relevant given the unusual nature of this election.

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (112) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Who might be most amenable to constructive pressure? I think it is Clinton. [105 words]Dina Grossman KjaergaardOct 3, 2016 06:40233134
The MSM shifts the balance [87 words]John HOct 2, 2016 15:22233118
Donald J Trump - Lawsuits -- Not True [584 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Nancy ASep 17, 2016 11:47232784
1Thank you! [122 words]JudyAug 14, 2016 10:27231376
2Donald Trump 1 Mrs Clinton 0 after Trump's Detroit Economic Club speech [119 words]PrashantAug 8, 2016 23:05231262
The bottom-line issue in the 2016 US Presidential Election [224 words]Michael SAug 15, 2016 18:47231262
1The coming world, with or without Trump or Hillary [948 words]Michael SAug 8, 2016 13:37231257
The RIGHT Approach [200 words]Shoshannah SomervilleAug 28, 2016 12:25231257
1Thank you :-) [10 words]Michael SAug 31, 2016 09:30231257
DONALD TRUMP'S ECONOMIC POLICY [23 words]Michael SAug 7, 2016 14:46231245
Response/Economic strategy [63 words]Shoshannah SometvilleSep 3, 2016 14:55231245
1Trump Economic Plan Detailed [384 words]Michael SSep 4, 2016 12:13231245
support [44 words]marcus jorisAug 7, 2016 03:38231236
Thank you for your stand [10 words]steve HagermanAug 6, 2016 22:16231233
4bite the bullet [63 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
rwAug 4, 2016 04:24231193
1Daniel, your stance still does not appear right [327 words]Michael SAug 7, 2016 03:56231193
2How do you know that Trump will do something about [89 words]walterAug 12, 2016 13:40231193
3Hillary is good for Jihad Daniel [25 words]DavidAug 3, 2016 20:31231186
4... reasoning [134 words]pfwagAug 1, 2016 09:11231123
I agree [7 words]Michael SAug 3, 2016 06:11231123
Not voting for Trump is practically the same as voting for Hillary. [421 words]Michael SAug 3, 2016 17:06231123
1Who's lonely? [698 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Michael SJul 28, 2016 11:56231006
2I am at a loss, to understand your reasoning. Exactly how is Clinton of a better "character" than the Donald? This is a real mystery [109 words]Michael SAug 2, 2016 00:45231006
I admit it -- this election is unusual. I wish what we're witnessing were actually more "out of the ordinary" [354 words]Michael SAug 2, 2016 05:01231006
3Words and facts [143 words]agJul 27, 2016 18:42230982
2I'm glad the oddsmakers don't choose our presidents [125 words]Michael SJul 31, 2016 03:05230982
1Trump? [135 words]Dan SchnittkerJul 27, 2016 17:18230977
1Armageddon's close at hand, so maybe Hillary will win after all [294 words]Michael SJul 31, 2016 03:49230977
the problem in general [335 words]vcragainJul 27, 2016 10:46230971
Ah, a person after my own mind! [305 words]Michael S.Jul 31, 2016 18:13230971
1Putin-Trump connection [119 words]FabioJul 26, 2016 14:51230906
1Irrationality springs eternal [160 words]Ray ExleyJul 29, 2016 08:34230906
1RUSSIA CLINTON CONNECTION [226 words]Jill von VinkerJul 29, 2016 13:49230906
I posted BEFORE the 30k emails declaration by Trump [51 words]FabioJul 31, 2016 02:02230906
Trump's babbling not the issue [48 words]FabioJul 31, 2016 02:06230906
1The alternate reality of Obama and Clinton [587 words]Michael SAug 1, 2016 13:15230906
Your comments baffle me [186 words]Ray ExleyAug 3, 2016 13:51230906
One scandal does not annul the other [487 words]FabioAug 7, 2016 09:10230906
1Why I Just Quit the Republican Party," [19 words]Balarabe AbbaJul 26, 2016 04:40230883
Trump v Hillary [343 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Ray ExleyJul 25, 2016 21:37230874
1my response to your staffs referal of me to your prior comments. [469 words]Ray ExleyJul 27, 2016 18:28230874
7My WaPo Letter In Response To Their Anti-Trump Editorial [199 words]DaveJul 25, 2016 18:31230868
3I agree with Mr Trump on immigration. [132 words]PrashantJul 26, 2016 15:01230868
1Agreed [122 words]Kepha HorJul 25, 2016 11:40230857
3Trump vs Clinton [402 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Charles MartelJul 25, 2016 10:47230849
2Either way We're screwed [104 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
SteveJul 25, 2016 10:43230848
3Baffled...? [117 words]KenMJul 24, 2016 23:23230838
4Unthoughtful and Destructive Choice [158 words]Frank RiderJul 24, 2016 21:08230833
Good for You [153 words]Todd RobinsonJul 24, 2016 12:14230810
2Yeah, But. . . . [229 words]Warren MillerJul 24, 2016 10:47230808
Afraid of neo-fascists [192 words]Independent against TrumpJul 27, 2016 07:25230808
With You 100% [5 words]Jonathan BurackJul 23, 2016 21:54230794
3Praise of Your Stance - and of Cruz [84 words]Morris HertzJul 23, 2016 17:47230792
the alternative [10 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
PAUL SEVERIENJul 23, 2016 17:00230788
vote [24 words]irving karabellJul 23, 2016 16:59230787
3Why not form a new Political Party? [58 words]Joshua Zev Levin, Ph.D.Jul 23, 2016 15:55230784
Holding my nose. [157 words]Kepha HorJul 25, 2016 11:32230784
Blowback from Criticizing Trump [98 words]Vishu MenonJul 23, 2016 08:16230776
How to stop Trump [56 words]Tamar KupersteinJul 22, 2016 21:40230761
Realtor Billboard Speaks For Many [45 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
DaveJul 22, 2016 20:33230759
"I want no part of it" [22 words]Peter ChewJul 22, 2016 19:39230758
2Pick your Poison. [195 words]julesJul 22, 2016 18:17230754
2 choices?! [29 words]DanielJul 24, 2016 15:12230754
1Choices [478 words]JoeJul 25, 2016 18:03230754
3Gary Johnson [45 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Peter ChewJul 22, 2016 18:07230753
1What's so bad about cannabis? [386 words]Anne JulienneJul 23, 2016 22:29230753
Re: Gary Johnson [17 words]DanielJul 24, 2016 15:09230753
house and senate [120 words]Anne JulienneJul 25, 2016 17:30230753
Thank you... [11 words]Peter ChewJul 22, 2016 17:48230752
1I support you, Daniel Pipes [49 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Peter ChewJul 22, 2016 17:40230751
Your blog subscribers... [97 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
CJul 22, 2016 16:15230742
1Response [109 words]Dennis MillerJul 22, 2016 15:58230739
Trump on NATO [64 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Jeffrey SheffJul 22, 2016 15:55230738
Understand your reasoning [62 words]Mary Ellen GoldfarbJul 22, 2016 15:11230733
Do right [22 words]BillRJul 22, 2016 15:04230731
1You're Right [177 words]MichaelJul 22, 2016 14:59230730
Dealing With Impossible Situations In Good Faith [70 words]A Sad AmericanJul 22, 2016 14:37230729
4You are wrong. [111 words]E. W. CloughJul 22, 2016 14:24230728
4We can no longer "Wait for Godot" [490 words]Rich McJul 22, 2016 14:05230726
1Your threat to refrain from voting ... [187 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
JayJul 22, 2016 13:00230717
1By agreeing to pay for NATO you are embracing socialism [53 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
andrew dahlJul 22, 2016 12:37230713
3A Reply to Pipes' Reply [318 words]Stuart FaginJul 22, 2016 12:25230712
1... now and forever [112 words]Dr. TomJul 22, 2016 12:08230706
3I disagree with your approach to Trump [55 words]Saied AssefJul 22, 2016 11:52230703
2Common Ground [82 words]JohnJul 22, 2016 11:35230698
support of quitting the GOP [61 words]Anita SavoyJul 22, 2016 11:01230693
1Agree completely. I call this the dog crap election. [71 words]BruceJul 22, 2016 10:52230690
Good. [22 words]Peter HerzJul 25, 2016 11:42230690
3Blowback [98 words]Lee PhillipsJul 22, 2016 10:51230689
6Why Trump should be supported. [169 words]David GoldensonJul 22, 2016 10:49230688
I agree 100% with Dr. Pipes [30 words]DanJul 22, 2016 10:34230687
I appreciate you [104 words]ThalpyJul 22, 2016 10:20230686
2mistake on Trump [121 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
chris gallagherJul 22, 2016 10:18230685
2Mistake on Trump [194 words]Chris GallagherJul 25, 2016 16:26230685
1Thank you Daniel Pipes [15 words]Michael SedleyJul 22, 2016 09:34230682
4Let us have an Honest review [73 words]Michael Hanni MorcosJul 22, 2016 09:26230681
2Reaction to "Its time to quit the GOP [60 words]C. E. PfeiferJul 22, 2016 09:21230677
1Maybe you should reconsider? [236 words]Gene TagliaJul 22, 2016 08:35230671
5You support Hillary by default [23 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
beckwithJul 22, 2016 08:09230668
Problem is... [52 words]Jiri SeveraJul 22, 2016 08:07230666
Make America Strong Again? [143 words]LynnJul 22, 2016 07:48230664
2The ballot in the USA does not include "none of the above" [247 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Dr. Aaron LernerJul 22, 2016 07:13230662
1Bravo! Though I disagree. [77 words]Ladd TomlinJul 22, 2016 06:33230660
4Opposition to Islamic Immigration gets My Vote For Trump [58 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
GamalielJul 22, 2016 05:21230656
1Mr Pipes, you are baffled? [42 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
BaffledJul 22, 2016 03:32230648
2Here's the Deal :o) [120 words]Akbar PalaceJul 25, 2016 14:08230648
1Mr Pipes, you are baffled? [53 words]BaffledJul 26, 2016 02:40230648
9Neither is not an option [49 words]Michail KalmanJul 22, 2016 02:08230637
1The state of denial [169 words]Vadim AnshelevichJul 22, 2016 12:23230637
Neither Might Be an Option - A Lot Can Happen Between Now and November [397 words]M ToveyJul 22, 2016 15:35230637
7They may both appear bad but un-equal. [103 words]stevenlJul 22, 2016 01:18230635
2Trump and bust! [66 words]ElspethJul 22, 2016 01:06230633

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)