How can you even discuss wacky third-party candidates without mentioning the Burge-Goldstein Presidential Campaign? Their analysis of major party opponents is sadly dead-on!
[External Link]
"Dennis Kucinich --- Roswell escapee"
Bang on (and I'm not referring to his red headed trophy wife).
Let's say both major parties nominate "moderates". The Democrat carries all the Kerry states from 2004. The Republican carries all the Bush states except Texas, which for reasons not yet clear, goes to Paul. The election goes to the House. The House votes by states, with 26 needed to elect. The House is close to evenly divided and a tie means the State casts no vote. Maybe 23 Democrat and 22 GOP with the others split.
Is this beginning to look like chaos? Or maybe 1860?
Just because McKinney, Paul, Nader, Buchanon, Perot, et al. look like nuts doesn't mean they can't cause great damage. The closer the electorate is divided, the more likely it is. The current lack of enthusiasm for the major party candidates also makes mischief more likely.
PS, in the event the House cannot choose a President, the Senate would elect an acting Vice President. The Democrats will probably hold the Senate. A ticket of Obama-Clinton gives us an Acting President Clinton, who only holds on to her job by preventing a closely divided House from voting in Obama. Three or four Republican defections and she's out. Fun!