My Take: Unfavorable Candidates

The "presumptive" nominees for President from both the Republican and Democratic Parties are carrying historically high unfavorable ratings CNN reports in an article about the topic. 

I have been reading and hearing about the possibility of a third party candidate. Perhaps the poor ratings of the leading candidates gives viability to a non-mainstream candidate. But then I worry that such a candidate would be unable to get Congress to do anything. I guess that is no different than the current situation.

There have been many potentially viable candidates stepping up to the microphone lately. I am concerned because a conservative third party candidate will likely not win and only makes it probable that the Republican nominee will not win which almost assures the Democratic nominee of the Presidency according to an article titled. Could an Independent conservative Candidate Really Compete in the 2016 Election. 

A poll in Florida Politics suggests that 55 percent of Americans want a Third Party candidate to run this year. The problem, however, is that the deadlines to qualify to be on the ballot in many states is coming already or (as in the case of Texas) has passed. Since the Republican and Democratic conventions are not until next month, why are the dates to qualify to be on the ballot so early?

All of this begs the question--should the the bloated and expensive primary system which nominates candidates with incredibly high unfavorable ratings be changed? 

I think the answer to that question is self-evident.

-- Bob Doan, Elkridge, MD