AH Challenge: Have a major American Political party die out

1992: Ross Perot never drops out, he wins the popular vote but the electoral collage is all tied up, in the House HW Bush wins though he was second in popular votes and 3rd in electoral. Perot says that he'll be back in 1996 his running mate James Stockdale says he'll join Perot there. Perot and Stockdale from the Reform Party shortly after Bush is sworn in. in 1994 Reform beats both Dems and the GOP all over American (though they take more GOP seats) the Dems hold in the house with 202 seats. Perot/Stockdale beat Buchanan/Dornan and Gore/Bradley headly and gain in congress (though it isn't till 2003 that they get a majority) most moderate/non-religious Republicans go over to Reform along with conservative Dems. by 2008 the GOP is a deep right religious holding on in the deep south and else were, but now looks like in this election (2008) will die out once and for all.

the house was democratic so no way does Bush win the election
 

JohnJacques

Banned
the house was democratic so no way does Bush win the election

The House gets one vote per state- so you have to look beyond the numbers.

Dem
  1. Alabama
  2. Arkansas
  3. California
  4. Delaware
  5. Georgia
  6. Hawaii
  7. Idaho
  8. Illinois
  9. Indiana
  10. Kentucky
  11. Maryland
  12. Massachusetts
  13. Michigan
  14. Minnesota
  15. Mississippi
  16. Missouri
  17. New Jersey
  18. New York
  19. North Carolina
  20. North Dakota
  21. Ohio
  22. Oklahoma
  23. Oregon
  24. Pennsylvania
  25. South Carolina
  26. South Dakota
  27. Tennessee
  28. Texas
  29. Utah
  30. Vermont
  31. Virginia
  32. Washington
  33. West Virginia

Rep
  1. Alaska
  2. Arizona
  3. Florida
  4. Iowa
  5. Kansas
  6. Nebraska
  7. New Mexico
  8. Wisconsin
  9. Wyoming

Split
  1. Colorado
  2. Connecticut
  3. Louisiana
  4. Maine
  5. Montana
  6. Nevada
  7. New Hampshire
  8. Rhode Island

However, you're still right. I think there might be a case made for some Southern Dems switching, but not enough to swing 9 states away from Clinton.
 

JohnJacques

Banned
i was shooting that off the top of my head. Clinton works in Bushs place, not as well but oh well,

One thing Black Angel- a Reform Party will likely not yield a viable third party.

The Gingrich Revolution was the Republican attempt to grab Perot voters. And it mostly worked, although Perot-minded voters had much, much lower turnout in the mid-terms.

Now, if the Reform Party does even better in 1992, the Democrats will likely get the message. The 103rd Congress Democrats and President Clinton will actually make an effort to grab those Perot voters as well.

So, you end up with a more Democratic Congress for Gingrich to deal with.

Reform was not well set up to win anywhere- they didn't win in Congressional districts or state wide, even if they got high vote totals, and they were overall just too diverse and spread out a faction to turn into a viable party. Beyond that, they had no chance of recruiting candidates.
 
One thing Black Angel- a Reform Party will likely not yield a viable third party.

The Gingrich Revolution was the Republican attempt to grab Perot voters. And it mostly worked, although Perot-minded voters had much, much lower turnout in the mid-terms.

Now, if the Reform Party does even better in 1992, the Democrats will likely get the message. The 103rd Congress Democrats and President Clinton will actually make an effort to grab those Perot voters as well.

So, you end up with a more Democratic Congress for Gingrich to deal with.

Reform was not well set up to win anywhere- they didn't win in Congressional districts or state wide, even if they got high vote totals, and they were overall just too diverse and spread out a faction to turn into a viable party. Beyond that, they had no chance of recruiting candidates.

thats why the election had to end up in the Congress, people feel cheated out of "their" President so stay loyal to Perot and Reform, it's a long shot for sure, because as you said Reform voters were too diverse and spread out.
 

JohnJacques

Banned
I don't see it happening. Oh and Perot may get a plurality, but not a majority. Something like Jesse Ventura's 37% is his high mark.

To tell you the truth, I don't see any modern 3rd party making this happen. They are too focused on the Presidential elections and have failed to make anything functional on a lower level.
 
I don't see it happening. Oh and Perot may get a plurality, but not a majority. Something like Jesse Ventura's 37% is his high mark.

To tell you the truth, I don't see any modern 3rd party making this happen. They are too focused on the Presidential elections and have failed to make anything functional on a lower level.

true, but thats why we're here to change that and make ATLs :)
 
I don't see it happening. Oh and Perot may get a plurality, but not a majority. Something like Jesse Ventura's 37% is his high mark.

To tell you the truth, I don't see any modern 3rd party making this happen. They are too focused on the Presidential elections and have failed to make anything functional on a lower level.

Agreed on that point. The only 3rd party in American history to upset and replace a standing major party was the Republicans in the 1850s, and they did so by standing candidates at all levels of governement. The "top-down" approach that modern 3rd-party presidential candidates have taken is totally bass-ackwards.
 

JohnJacques

Banned
true, but thats why we're here to change that and make ATLs :)

But third parties never succeeded in the American system.

The Republicans didn't even exist until the Whigs fell apart. Calling them a third party is factually incorrect.

Whenever a third party looked to present a threat to the two-party system, one or both parties absorbed the third party. And its been pretty much foolproof, even for the era you indicated. Prohibition? Mostly absorbed by the Republicans when they provided the margin of defeat and sent Democrats to the House. Progressives? More an afterthought of the movement, and better represented in the two parties. Greenbackers and Populists? Just wanted to commandeer one of the two parties in power. Socialists? Never a threat, they could be ignored.

Third parties simply do not work under a first-past-the-post system. Only a nearly insurmountable issue (slavery) could topple the system of two "broad-tent" parties.
 
Top