Why can't 2 or more Republicans or Democrats run for President or other office?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why can't 2 or more Republicans or Democrats run for President or other office?

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:10:54 AM EDT

It would seem that Democracy isn't very Democratic when you limit your choices to one candidate. Why can't they all run and let the people choose in the general election?

Just thinking out loud.

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:13:39 AM EDT

[#1]

They can, it's just a matter of money.

It use to be that you voted for the P and VP seperately and not as one ticket.

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:14:15 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
It would seem that Democracy isn't very Democratic when you limit your choices to one candidate. Why can't they all run and let the people choose in the general election?

Just thinking out loud.

Party rules. Why offer 2 choices if the opposing party only offers 1? You're just splitting your own base then.

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:29:46 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
They can, it's just a matter of money.

It use to be that you voted for the P and VP seperately and not as one ticket.

You still do(*), it's in the constitution.

(*)It's actually up to the states, since they choose their own electors however they see fit. Part of the controversy in the 2000 election was the number of Gore/Buchanan "ticket" votes, as Florida (at that time, don't know now).

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:30:58 AM EDT

[#4]

*snipped for my poor reading comprehension*

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:33:22 AM EDT

[#5]

Didn't Theodore Roosevelt do that? Didn't work out too well though.

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:38:16 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
It would seem that Democracy isn't very Democratic when you limit your choices to one candidate. Why can't they all run and let the people choose in the general election?

Just thinking out loud.

That's just the way it works - now, the '3rd candidate' can always go independent or form his own party and still run - it worked for Perot, Roosevelt, etc. Not that they won anything though.

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:39:42 AM EDT

[#7]

Because the parties are organizations and they want the White House. Why split the vote into multiple candidates when they can run just one? If either party tried to run multiple candidates all the other party would have to do to win is run just one (at least, with the current state of American political division).

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:41:57 AM EDT

[#8]

"There can be only one"
It's like Highlander, minus the decapitation.

Posted: 6/7/2008 11:50:18 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
"There can be only one"
It's like Highlander, minus the decapitation.

Unfortunately.

Posted: 6/7/2008 12:23:17 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Didn't Theodore Roosevelt do that? Didn't work out too well though.

No it didn't.

President Woodrow Wilson is the one man most directly responsible for the slow lingering death of our republic.

Funny thing is the Roosevelt/Taft split, and the Jefferson/Hamilton for that matter, are so similar to the current fractures in the GOP. We really haven't resolved much in two centuries.

When W said he was a fan of WW I knew we were in real trouble as a party.

Posted: 6/7/2008 12:24:31 PM EDT

[#11]

Hell, I'd be happy if there was even one Republican running in the next election.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why can't 2 or more Republicans or Democrats run for President or other office?

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us