The best way for a 3rd party canidate to actually win the Presidency is in the hands

[Peacetrain]

of the Democrats and the Republicans. I have been avoiding the 2016 chatter for the most part because of focusing on 2014

But with Jeb Bush apparently warming up in the bull pen.. and if Hillary Clinton actually does decide to run (I just don't see it.. but for the sake of argument)

If that is who we had as the Democratic and Republican canidates.. I am not kidding, I think a 3rd party would almost walk away with it.

EDIT TO ADD: reason being, is I truly do not think people in general want to see those two names on the tickets at the same time.. One or the other would work.. but Clinton/Bush.. just brings back too many bad memories..

[DURHAM D]

1. Who is your pick for 3rd party?

[Peacetrain]

2. I am a died in the wool big party Democrat

No third party choices.. just musing

[Blue Idaho]

3. No way a third party candidate can win the Presidency

Until there is a third pary capable of winning local, state, and congressional elections. No chance for a quick and dirty "moon shot" candidate to grab the highest office in the land.

[Peacetrain]

4. You are probably right..

Teddy Roosevelt did it, but he then went back to the Republican party.. and it is most surely a dead man walking proposition because there is not a unified party behind such a canidate.. but honestly Blue Idaho.. I think a lot .. and I mean a LOT of people would stick their heads in a bucket if they saw those two names come up again together.. it makes my eyes glass over just thinking about it myself

[Blue Idaho]

6. You make some great points...

Let's see... Bush v Clinton... Again? Really? There is a real "Goundhog's Day" stink to this line-up that is undeniable. In the same way we have virtual monopolies in the marketplace - seeing two aging political dynasties is going to turn off a bunch of voters.

I'm just saying a viable third (and forth?) party need to start by electing dog catchers and city council members. The real power to change is going to come from the ground up, not the top down.

[Doc_Technical]

5. The only reason a third party candidate doesn't have a chance of winning,

is because most voters think that a third party candidate
doesn't have a chance of winning.

[Blue Idaho]

7. It's not quite that simple...

First they need to get on the ballot in all fifty states. Then they have to have a ground game in all fifty states. That takes money and that takes people - lots and lots of people.

But in the end - you're right. The reason third party candidates can't win is because none of your neighbors know who they are - so they are unwilling to trust them with their vote.

[BuckeyeBrad]

8. I disagree.

The "Clinton fatigue" effect is overrated, and I think more people out there still associate the Clinton name with better economic times than you might think.

[Rstrstx]

10. Have to agree

If it becomes a referendum on the Clinton era vs the Bush era I think it's a no-brainer.

[Cresent City Kid]

9. A third major party would never come to pass without a fourth

If either of the two major parties were to split, both halves would fear that the remaining unsplit party would dominate. If there were four parties, the tea party, the gop, 3rd way dems and progressives, it would make more sense, but fear of the unknown would prevent this from happening as well. Each side would be afraid to move first, it would be more tense than a drug deal "You give me the cash first", "No you give me the stuff first"