"A credible, nonpartisan ticket"? Third-party candidates have historically done very poorly in American presidential elections. There is no reason to expect this one, even if it comes off, to do any better. I don't see the effort as "credible". And it certainly won't be "non-partisan". The mere fact that they want someone to vote for the ticket makes it "partisan". At best, the organizers want to straddle some kind of middle-ground between Republicans and Democrats, but that middle ground is a fantasy and, despite the expressed desire to "force Democrats and Republicans in the nation's capital to start bridging their cavernous ideological divide", that divide is unbridgeable at this point. Republicans believe they can win by not compromising. They have been busy not compromising for Obama's entire time in office. The effort could only succeed if it convinces Republicans that they have more to gain by compromising than by stonewalling, but Republicans are very good at holding the line. More likely this effort will siphon off Democratic voters. Do you remember how voters for Nader drew enough voters in Florida from Gore to (after Supreme Court intervention) throw the election to Bush? Are the organizers of the Internet primary moderate Democrats or Republicans? Who would have the most to gain?