So speculation about a legitimate third party is brought up again. It has been dismissed previously because of factors such as the difficulty of establishment, lack of sufficient enthusiasm, splitting the vote so as to give the opposition solidarity, and diluting the message of the constituency. Nate expresses an opinion thusly:
Nate comments upon Thomas Friedman’s continued desire prediction of a third party. Is a third party possible for 2012? Is one plausible in 2012? Could a third party actually be successful in 2012 or would it just spell long-term success for the Democrats?
Multiple parties can and do exist in other countries. Sometimes they do well. I’ll let Filistro comment on Canada’s system. But I suspect that given America’s continued polarization, we will continue to be a two party system. It’s us vs. them. The ultimate football rivalry. Bama vs. Auburn. Ducks vs. Beavers.
This scenario is perpetuated by everyone but I’m putting the majority of blame squarely in the Republicans lap. Their obstructionism, their solidarity of opposition to the elected administration, their absence from the discussion speaks volumes. They are the children at recess who, after losing, take their toys and go home. Despite that untenable strategy, they continue to impede the governance of the country and it is not a popular ideal. It has created a fringe element; an extreme conservative movement so far to the right that it almost comes back around to bite itself in the ass.
There may just be enough anger, dissatisfaction, and motivation to create a third party. Will it be successful? Depends. It will likely be successful for the Democrats. Now if only the Democrats could grow a spine strong enough to do something about it.