What are the factors that influence the decision of progressives to either vote for the Democratic presidential candidate or to vote third party? In the context of this question, progressives include those who are registered Democrats, progressive independents, and progressive Greens and other third party supporters. Do NOT assume the focus here is only on progressive Democrats.

I especially hope to hear from non-Democratic progressives about how they make their electoral choices.

FWIW, here are my thoughts about what goes into my own decision making process (i'm a registered Democrat).

1. existing republican control - if republicans control the entire government, i am more likely to vote for a Democratic candidate. as the duration and "republicanness" of that adminstration increase (i.e. in control longer with harsher, non-progressive policies), i am more likely to vote for a Democratic candidate even if i don't like that candidate.

2. the situation in the world - in stormy times, with significant controversy on key issues or the US at war or about to go to war, i am more likely to vote for a Democratic candidate.

3. the integrity of the Democratic candidate - even when i disagree with the Democratic nominee, sometimes even on key issues, I am more likely to support them if I believe they mean what they say and are not just finger in the wind candidates. The two worst sins in a candidate are phoniness and hypocrisy.

4. issue positions - i am not a single issue voter. i will, however, rule out a candidate on differences of opinion on one of many "single issues". We cannot make progress in this country if we elect candidates who put corporate interests above the interests of WE THE PEOPLE. If a candidate is a corporate shill, regardless of how progressive they might purport to be, things will not actually be progressive under their leadership. You cannot serve two masters. Key issues for me include, first and foremost, restoring real power to the people, removing big money from the political process, altering US foreign policy and domestic policy to benefit the country instead of narrow commercial interests, and avoiding war in all but the most dire circumstances. Candidates who don't "get this", regardless of party, will not receive my support or my vote.

I have voted for every single Democratic presidential candidate I was eligible to vote for. I was very unhappy with Kerry in 2004 because of his support for continued war in Iraq. I strongly supported the ticket, however, because of reasons 1, 2 AND 3 above. In different times, his war position might very possibly have resulted in a vote for a progressive candidate from another party.

Looking ahead to 2008, my current feelings are that the nightmare bush/cheney/rumsfeld/rice/ashcroft/gonzales have brought will be crushed into the "greatest failures and threat to the republic" dumpster of history. I expect my vote to be LESS influenced by item #1 above.

On item #2, i expect the danger in the Middle East to be MUCH GREATER than it is today. That does NOT mean that I would be as worried about US policy there as I have been under bush. The only republican whose Middle East policy would deeply concern me, based on my current knowledge, is McCain. A McCain candidacy would make it much more likely I would vote for a Democrat if that Democrat did not also call for a hawkish stance in the region.

On item #3, let me just say that I believe some current Dems are all smoke and others are people of great substance. It is NOT the point of this thread to name names or distinguish between one candidate and another. Suffice it to say that some have more integrity than others and this will likely be one of the significant factors in my decision making process.

And finally, item #4. Those who just don't get it, meaning their whinings will influence exactly no one, make statements like "if you don't remain loyal to the Democratic Party, you'll just elect republicans". As I said, they just don't get it. They think they're right when they say this and they think third party voters are wrong because they disagree. Well, surprise. They don't disagree! No one believes a third party candidate is going to win anytime soon. The problem with the "you MUST remain loyal" crowd is that they fail to see the problem through the eyes of third party voters. You can't influence anyone if you can't or aren't willing to walk a mile in their shoes.

If your vision is that big money and mega-corporations have control of our government, political parties become LESS RELEVANT. critics of third party voters love to overstate the case when they argue that third party voters believe there is no difference between the parties. there is definitely a difference. but in the end, third party voters, i believe, ultimately view the progressive changes Democrats are more likely to bring than republicans, as not making enough difference because they do not return control of the government to the American people. Again, you cannot serve two masters. the view is that things will be better with Democrats in power than republicans but that neither party is willing to take on big money in Washington and genuinely restore power to the people. You cannot serve two masters.

So, those are the factors I see in the decision making process. I hope this does not become yet another idiotic thread about Nader or hating Greens or any of that other bandwidth wasting garbage. I don't care whether you hate third party voters or demand absolute loyalty to the Democratic Party or anything else. This is not intended to be a discussion about whether third party voters are making good choices or bad choices but rather about HOW THEY ARE MAKING CHOICES. again, I would be especially interested to hear from those who have or who might consider voting for a third party presidential candidate.