Does anyone know how many different Baptist conventions there are? Just Baptist…

However, that grants no excuse for Federal positions, actions, elections, etc., to be closed to alternative parties.

I don’t know about the 15% rule, but it was probably put into place after Ross Perot got over 5% and scared the bejeezus out of the status quo.

Definitely a root of the problem, and I agree with Johnny on the signatures. Polls are almost always gonna skew towards the two major parties.

Some of these parties are going to have to form coalitions. Libertarian, Constitutional, and Patriot should find some common ground and pool their resources. The answer to that is one issue: religion.

The Green party is very well organized and could make some inroads on its own given the current “climate change” talk. They and the Reform party could make inroads if they would run someone other than Ralph Nader. (Why in the world they won’t get the message that someone that ugly will NEVER get more than 5% of the vote, much less be president, as long as there are TV’s I’ll never guess.)

The real challenge is that almost every other county in the world has TONS of parties that form HUGE “coalitions” in order to be competitive against dominant parties. That’s unfortunately not the American way…too many chiefs and not enough Indians results in splits, not coalitions.

Another challenge is that there are only a few “types” of political parties in the world, some of which just wouldn’t work in the U.S. (ethnic parties, elite parties, etc.). It’s no accident that in a hodge-podge, melting pot, relatively young country such as the U.S. that there are challenges for narrowly focused parties gaining significant political access on the Federal level.

So…who wants to start another party?

well that certainly explains why the number jumped

the 15% number i read quite recently

ross perot could debate because he was higher in the polls, michael badnarik got arrested for trying to gain access to the last debate in 04 even though he was on every states ballot!

“The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates … because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates’ organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.”

wikipedia.org–League_of_Women_Voters

“In 1988, the LWV withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were to be conducted, which ultimately resulted in the Democratic and Republican parties forming the Commission on Presidential Debates which gave the parties greater control over the debate environment.”

Which actually illustrates your point even more. If the Democratic and Republican parties are calling the shots, then it’s no wonder there’s an arbitrary rule exluding others.

Still haven’t found the 15% rule, but it wouldn’t surprise me. Here’s the Commission’s site:

Debates.org