The above post shows a misunderstanding of the relationship between thrid parties and the tow major parties.
Williams Jennings Bryan was a populist who ran for president as a Democrat three times and lost. It was Wilson who won when Roosevelt ran under the Bull Moose Party, and like Ross Perot later, syphoned off enough votes from the Republicans to give the Presidency to the Democrats. Wilson appointed Byran to be secretary of state. But Wilson ran on an anti-war platform and then took the nation into the war so Bryan resigned from Wilson's cabinet.
A third party only gets its views into the major party when the major party recognizes that the third party is drawing votes away. Usually it is after they have lost because the major party never believes it before hand. For years the Democrats scoffed at the Socialist Party issues but then FDR learned to incorporate some of the basic issues and resurected the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party of today has totally turned its back on FDR's new deal version of socialism-lite and for that the Democrats now have no rudder to their ship of state.
The system that not only "props up" but actually requires the two-party system is called the Electoral College. By making elections winner-take-all in each state to get all of a state's electoral college votes, and then by making the majority winner in the Electoral College the president the system guarantees only two parties can realistically compete. Since, a large party with a plurality competing against two lesser parties would always have a total domination of a state's electors the only way to prevent one party from always winning is to have two strong parties which take turns winning.
If three parties make it to the Electoral College and result in a three-way race where the candidate only receives a plurality and no candidate has a majority, then the election for president goes to the House of Representatives with each state getting one vote per state. This result is seen as so disasterous that no state will change its system of all or nothing electors to the Electoral College.
Only two states (Maine and Nebraska) have a system of picking electors which gives winner take all to parties by congressional district, but this modified proportional system still favors the two party system locking out third parties.
Colorado currently has an initiative to institute real proportional representation of electors and this offers the best hope of braking the stranglehold the two parties have on the election system.
Minnisota was a unique situation since no majority is required in the Gubernatorial election Ventura was the plurality winner of a fluke set of political conditions. His was a vote for him personally not for a party.
The point is that he did not make any such statement and it is just rumor mongering to continue to pass along the impression that he did.
Cobb is consistent where ever he goes. He says "I want your vote."
That is false information. Cobb consistently says "vote for me" even in the so-called battleground states. David Cobb does not endorse a "safe states" strategy of telling people to vote for Kerry or the Democrats in the battleground states states. Cobb never advises people to vote for Kerry. Cobb's position is "Vote your conscience." (BTW, this is the same position that Nader takes.)
Cobb has a "smart states" strategy which is focusing on building the party through using the Presidential election to focus support on local issues and the importance of shifting people toward the party that really represents their views regardless of the individual for whom they cast their vote in any particular election.
Slashdot Mirror
The above post shows a misunderstanding of the relationship between thrid parties and the tow major parties. Williams Jennings Bryan was a populist who ran for president as a Democrat three times and lost. It was Wilson who won when Roosevelt ran under the Bull Moose Party, and like Ross Perot later, syphoned off enough votes from the Republicans to give the Presidency to the Democrats. Wilson appointed Byran to be secretary of state. But Wilson ran on an anti-war platform and then took the nation into the war so Bryan resigned from Wilson's cabinet. A third party only gets its views into the major party when the major party recognizes that the third party is drawing votes away. Usually it is after they have lost because the major party never believes it before hand. For years the Democrats scoffed at the Socialist Party issues but then FDR learned to incorporate some of the basic issues and resurected the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party of today has totally turned its back on FDR's new deal version of socialism-lite and for that the Democrats now have no rudder to their ship of state.
The system that not only "props up" but actually requires the two-party system is called the Electoral College. By making elections winner-take-all in each state to get all of a state's electoral college votes, and then by making the majority winner in the Electoral College the president the system guarantees only two parties can realistically compete. Since, a large party with a plurality competing against two lesser parties would always have a total domination of a state's electors the only way to prevent one party from always winning is to have two strong parties which take turns winning. If three parties make it to the Electoral College and result in a three-way race where the candidate only receives a plurality and no candidate has a majority, then the election for president goes to the House of Representatives with each state getting one vote per state. This result is seen as so disasterous that no state will change its system of all or nothing electors to the Electoral College. Only two states (Maine and Nebraska) have a system of picking electors which gives winner take all to parties by congressional district, but this modified proportional system still favors the two party system locking out third parties. Colorado currently has an initiative to institute real proportional representation of electors and this offers the best hope of braking the stranglehold the two parties have on the election system. Minnisota was a unique situation since no majority is required in the Gubernatorial election Ventura was the plurality winner of a fluke set of political conditions. His was a vote for him personally not for a party.
The point is that he did not make any such statement and it is just rumor mongering to continue to pass along the impression that he did. Cobb is consistent where ever he goes. He says "I want your vote."
That is false information. Cobb consistently says "vote for me" even in the so-called battleground states. David Cobb does not endorse a "safe states" strategy of telling people to vote for Kerry or the Democrats in the battleground states states. Cobb never advises people to vote for Kerry. Cobb's position is "Vote your conscience." (BTW, this is the same position that Nader takes.) Cobb has a "smart states" strategy which is focusing on building the party through using the Presidential election to focus support on local issues and the importance of shifting people toward the party that really represents their views regardless of the individual for whom they cast their vote in any particular election.