The Czar is still surprised to see non-Democratic voters (not necessarily Republicans, per se) on social media calling for a third party. Many times has the Czar explained that third parties serve only one purpose: getting the other party elected by a wide margin. All protest candidates do this: John Anderson in 1980 and Ralph Nader (four times) cost the Democrats votes; Ross Perot (twice) and Teddy Roosevelt (1912) cost Republicans dearly.

The appeal of third parties emerges from a very basic psychology of frustration: a voter cannot stand either choice, and creates a third option. The reality, history shows, is that the voter merely divides one of the undesirable options into two, smaller undesirable options. And every election has them, if you dig deep enough. Even in the 1968 election, George Wallace ran as a third party, costing the Democrats votes. Normally they are ignored unless they can get substantial television time.

So why is this notion of a third party so appealing and widespread this time around? Three reasons:

1. Social Media. The internet has made it possible to take anybody’s speeches and writing—crackpot or unknown genius—and get them to millions of interested readers. In less than a couple years, third parties have gone from typewritten flyers stuffed under windshield wipers in the Costco parking lot to full-blown websites with clever tweets fired off every few minutes. Ron Paul, for example, went from banging out screeds on a typewriter to prime-time televised debates in no time, garnering millions of votes, simply because of Twitter. Likewise, Governor Scott Walker used social media to transform his attempted demonization back into the hallmark of temperence and foresight. Without social media to combat the suppression of main stream media, the entire Right Wing would be suffering badly right now.

   The Czar bets you can name potential third party candidates on the Right. And where did you learn of them? Not from mailers or flyers stuck to windshields, that’s for sure. Suddenly third party candidates can emerge from the shadows into full-blown campaigns. And woe to those who do not master social media: remember the dismal campaign of Gary Johnson? Had no clue how to use social media; his meager supporters did, and managed to get him national attention. However, Johnson could not sustain his own popularity because he ultimately did not know what to do with it.

2. Democrat Encouragement. Let’s be very honest—a lot of the support for a Right-Wing third party is coming from the Democrats. They know the rules, too: a third party nearly guarantees them an election victory. The Democrats are doing anything they can to promote the idea that Republicans are bankrupt and that intense division exists between them. This isn’t because they hope to swing the independents to the Democrat side because, poll-wise, that ship sailed. The hope then is that they can divide the votes in many elections.

   And while it is clear that Democrats fear the Tea Party beyond reason, they also need to keep promoting the Tea Party as an actual political party and not a whimsically named political action caucus. Democrats in the know really do want to see the Tea Party, or maybe the Libertarians, establish themselves as a viable third party in order to divide their opponents.

3. Emergent Democrat Divisiveness. This is the more historically interesting bit. You cannot have a viable third party until both main parties are divided up.

   For example, the Whigs came to prominence because so many Democrats were disenfranchised with Andrew Jackson. Early Whigs were a blend of liberals who hated Jackson (Horace Mann, Daniel Webster) and conservatives (William Henry Harrison, Hugh Lawson White), at the same time softer conservatives were embracing Jakcsonian politics (John Tyler, James Polk). When both parties are seeing defectors, then you see a viable third party.

   But the Whigs couldn’t fix things. Thanks to slavery, you soon had conservative Whigs (Zachary Taylor, 1848), liberal Whigs (Henry Clay, Daniel Webster), conservative Democrats (James Polk, Lewis Cass), and liberal Democrats (Stephen Douglas and Martin van Buren, initially, although he became an intense supporter of conservative ideas later). This led to the formation of the Republican Party, which soaked up the conservative Democrats (Free Soilers) and conservative Whigs.

   And now today, you see widespread dissatisfaction among traditional Democrat voters: now called independents, these are really Democrats who are fed up with the Leftist tilt and comedic whorehouse that the modern Democratic Party has become. Their numbers are high enough to scare the Democrats.

So what would you need to form a third party? The problem is that independent voters dissatisfied with the Democrats aren’t embracing the Tea Party—they are far more likely going to become establishment Republicans. This explains why more establishment GOP candidates (Rep. John Boehner, Sen. Mitch McConnell, Sen. John McCain) are not about to rock any boats with grandstanding filibusters, budget challenges, and shutdowns: they want to ease the path for these defecting independents into voting Republican.

You would need to see more softer Republicans jumping ship to the Democrats. Then, if history teaches us anything, you might see a viable third party form. In other words, you would need to see the establishment GOP get so fed up with a dominant Tea Party that they start breaking away from the GOP.

Until then, you might shelve any possibility of a third, conservative party. The reality is that the third party does exists: it’s the GOP. It’s the second party—the establishment, vaguely liberal country club Republicans—who would need to start leaving town. In other words, the Tea Party will never be a third party: it is a second party that needs to reassert itself further.

The Czar of Muscovy

Божію Поспѣшествующею Милостію Мы, Дима Грозный Императоръ и Самодержецъ Всероссiйскiй, цѣсарь Московскiй. The Czar was born in the steppes of Russia in 1267, and was cheated out of total control of all Russia upon the death of Boris Mikhailovich, who replaced Alexander Yaroslav Nevsky in 1263. However, in 1283, our Czar was passed over due to a clerical error and the rule of all Russia went to his second cousin Daniil (Даниил Александрович), whom Czar still resents. As a half-hearted apology, the Czar was awarded control over Muscovy, inconveniently located 5,000 miles away just outside Chicago. He now spends his time seething about this and writing about other stuff that bothers him.