Top 3 reasons why we need a conservative third-party candidate

No Trump No Clinton

It must be a cold day in hell. I’m agreeing with Mitt Romney. The former GOP nominee for President believes that we need a third-party conservative candidate to run against Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and he’s 100% correct.

I’m not crazy about one of his two current choices. John Kasich had his chance. If any candidate needs to be running as a conservative, it’s Ted Cruz. That won’t happen, so I’m a bit perplexed that Romney would be going for someone who already tried to win states and failed in all but one.

His other choice, Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, may be a perfect fit. He’s likable, conservative, has a history of going after both Trump and Clinton, and might just have the mojo to pull it off.

There are many reasons why a conservative third-party candidate is needed, but here are the top 3:

  1. No Conservatives are Currently Running.: No, Trump is not a conservative. The same could have been said about the last five GOP nominees, but all of them from G.H.W. Bush through Romney himself were at least moderate conservatives (yes, even Bob Dole). Trump is nowhere near conservative. He wants the wall and his immigration policy seems to be conservative, but on everything else from fixing the economy to transgender bathrooms, he’s left-leaning at best.
  2. They Don’t Need 270. They Need to Prevent 270.: Many believe that the two-party system prohibits the possibility for another person to win. This isn’t true. Just because it hasn’t been done in modern history doesn’t mean it can’t. If someone like Sasse or Cruz are able to win enough states to keep both Trump and Clinton from getting 270 electoral votes, the President is elected by fifty votes – one for each state – cast by members of the House of Representatives. This scenario makes it nearly impossible for Clinton to win. In fact, an argument can be made that as Trump pushes further to the left, a third-party conservative candidate is the easiest way to keep Clinton out of the White House.
  3. Support is Limited. The Voters are Against the Alternative.: There seems to be less support for the two presumptive nominees than we’ve seen in any Presidential election, ever. Many Republicans are rallying against Clinton. Many Democrats and Independents are rallying against Trump. They each have their base, but it’s nothing close to the passionate support that they’ll need to win the election outright.

If it were up to me, there’s a ticket that I could see almost certainly winning. If, for the betterment of the country, far-right Cruz could team up with far-left Bernie Sanders, we might actually see a ticket that could get to 270 and shatter the left v. right two-party system that has plagued our country for decades. To my conservative friends who cringe at the thought of Sanders as VP, we have to remember that the backup quarterback almost never gets into the game. Sanders would actually be less harmful to the country as VP than with his current status as a U.S. Senator. Of course, we’d be praying that nothing ever happened to Cruz, but if the ticket could win, it’s worth the risk.

It’s time to bring an end to the DC cartel’s stranglehold on power. The best way to do that is to run a viable third-party conservative. Otherwise, we’ll be forced to decide which candidate will do less damage to the country. At this point, it’s a tossup.

JD Rucker

JD Rucker is Editor of this site as well as Soshable, a Federalist Christian Blog. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, and co-founder of the Federalist Party. Find him on Twitter or Facebook.

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

© 2017 The New Americana