Why is there no real 3rd party option for president?

[jberesford]

I was refreshing myself on the 1992 election, the first I was old enough to follow when I was younger. Ross Perot ran as a 3rd party and got shut out of electoral votes but he still got almost 20 million people to vote for him. That was good for almost 19 percent of the vote.

We knew terrible vs terrible was a long time coming in 2024. This replay has been setting up for over THREE YEARS. Plenty of time for a 3rd party to run a real campaign, but no one has. Your extremists on both sides will still vote D or R to oppose the other team, and that's not going to change anytime time soon, but my god there has never been more of a time to snatch votes from reasonable people that can see how ridiculous the choice is. Seriously, what gives? Is there some illuminati shit and they got to any challengers before they could arise and said they'd be taken out if they tried?

I really did forget how many votes Perot actually got and I was stunned when I looked it up. Substitute Biden and Trump for Bush and Clinton and imagine what happens in '92.

 

[Bank of Hawk]

I like the idea but it’s too late in the game for 24

 

[QChawks]

Americans are too stupid to let go of the thought there can be other options than the left/right

 

[83Hawk]

People complain that we need a 3rd party....but won't ever vote 3rd party because they are told they are throwing their vote away. And the only way we will EVER get a viable 3rd party is if people start to vote that way. Which they won't.

It's a vicious circle, and just one reason why this country will likely never have a viable 3rd party.

 

[TJ8869]

 

[Huey Grey]

Electoral college

 

[Jerome Silberman]

Americans are too stupid to let go of the thought there can be other options than the left/right

Our entire election structure leads us to a two-party system. Americans aren't stupid, they just don't have any real incentive to vote third party.
Voting third party under the current electoral system is in a sense a protest vote, and nobody is listening.

 

[THE_DEVIL]

I seem to remember back around Bush1 or Clinton both parties got together and brought about a huge overhaul of election criteria that basically eliminated the possibility of a third party.

 

[win1forthe]

I think $ is a factor as well. Would take a long time to raise the funds to get close to the playing field of the established parties.

Plus, philosophy and respectability has a lot to do with it. I believe a third party might be able to make if they court the moderates of each party.

 

[bdcolt45er]

Our entire election structure leads us to a two-party system. Americans aren't stupid, they just don't have any real incentive to vote third party.
Voting third party under the current electoral system is in a sense a protest vote, and nobody is listening.

Exactly the structure encourages 2 party formation. The parties essentially reinforce one another. They mostly define themselves as being the opposite of the other party. Single party primaries encourage farther left and right candidates and discourage moderates. 3rd parties can't get a representative foothold unlike other systems.

This freakonomics podcast discusses the issue.

https://freakonomics.com/podcast/americas-hidden-duopoly_radio/

 

[DeangeloVickers]

The mega corporations and special interest donors that control our media and both political parties will never allow it. Really is that simple.

 

[BubsFinn]

There will never be a viable third party because the two parties in power will not allow it. A third party makes the corruption that is so much a part of our government a lot harder.

 

[nelly02]

The fact Perot got zero electoral college votes is why. People know it is basically a protest vote and with the stakes of this election no one wants to do that. We need to change our system but that is incredibly difficult because neither of the current parties in charge are going to vote to allow anything like that to happen. If we really want a third party to become a challenger we need to band together and build one from the ground up starting with local and state elections and make it a force to be reckoned with. Unfortunately that is also very unlikely because of how divided we are as a country.

 

[ConvenientParking]

The reasons third parties don't work is not that voters are stupid. It's that elections are first past the post winner take all. We would need a completely different political system for more parties to matter

 

[ConvenientParking]

The mega corporations and special interest donors that control our media and both political parties will never allow it. Really is that simple.

Special interests and mega corporations exist in countries with parliamentary systems with multiple parties too. If you want that to stop, we need guillotines.

 

[The Tradition]

The two party system is good for the two parties.

 

[peacehawk]

Get rid of the electoral college and you end the two party system within a decade. Otherwise it is what it is.

 

[torbee]

This details it quite well:

 

[DFSNOLE]

Electoral college

100% this.

The United States has been the only democracy in the 21st century that still uses an electoral college to select its executive president. The other democracies that used an electoral college for these elections switched to direct elections in the 19th or 20th century.

Electoral college - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[seminole97]

Our entire election structure leads us to a two-party system. Americans aren't stupid, they just don't have any real incentive to vote third party.
Voting third party under the current electoral system is in a sense a protest vote, and nobody is listening.

Y’all are just afraid to protest when it counts.

 

[BubsFinn]

Get rid of the electoral college and you end the two party system within a decade. Otherwise it is what it is.

Yes, but you also get rid of candidates going to states like Iowa. They'll focus on seven or eight large cities and ignore the rest of the country. This might be seen as a good thing for Iowans who are sick of all the campaigning done before the Primary, but becoming a non-factor will be worse. At least now they have to pretend to care.
Third party candidates will be the first to turn their backs on places like Iowa.

 

[DFSNOLE]

Yes, but you also get rid of candidates going to states like Iowa. They'll focus on seven or eight large cities and ignore the rest of the country. This might be seen as a good thing for Iowans who are sick of all the campaigning done before the Primary, but becoming a non-factor will be worse. At least now they have to pretend to care.
Third party candidates will be the first to turn their backs on places like Iowa.

Fear mongering. Does the government in every other country in the world ignore the smaller provinces, states, cities, ect.?

100% this.

The United States has been the only democracy in the 21st century that still uses an electoral college to select its executive president. The other democracies that used an electoral college for these elections switched to direct elections in the 19th or 20th century.

Electoral college - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[artradley]

I was refreshing myself on the 1992 election, the first I was old enough to follow when I was younger. Ross Perot ran as a 3rd party and got shut out of electoral votes but he still got almost 20 million people to vote for him. That was good for almost 19 percent of the vote.

We knew terrible vs terrible was a long time coming in 2024. This replay has been setting up for over THREE YEARS. Plenty of time for a 3rd party to run a real campaign, but no one has. Your extremists on both sides will still vote D or R to oppose the other team, and that's not going to change anytime time soon, but my god there has never been more of a time to snatch votes from reasonable people that can see how ridiculous the choice is. Seriously, what gives? Is there some illuminati shit and they got to any challengers before they could arise and said they'd be taken out if they tried?

I really did forget how many votes Perot actually got and I was stunned when I looked it up. Substitute Biden and Trump for Bush and Clinton and imagine what happens in '92.

I disagree with the premise that all candidates have been bad for years. I’ve voted in 12 Presidential elections and in every election I felt both candidates were competent administrators and up to the task of leading our nation with the exceptions of Dubya and Trump.

Until 2016 my lifetime has seen predominantly smart, charismatic, decent people running for office. Hell, the 1992 election featured two of the most competent leaders we’ve had running for the major parties. That Perot received so many votes says more about how spoiled we are and how lazy we are when we vote,

 

[artradley]

Yes, but you also get rid of candidates going to states like Iowa. They'll focus on seven or eight large cities and ignore the rest of the country. This might be seen as a good thing for Iowans who are sick of all the campaigning done before the Primary, but becoming a non-factor will be worse. At least now they have to pretend to care.
Third party candidates will be the first to turn their backs on places like Iowa.

More accurately, with the EC they concentrate on a very small number of white, rural Americans while ignoring the country at large.

 

[Tiny Hands Trump]

Yes, but you also get rid of candidates going to states like Iowa. They'll focus on seven or eight large cities and ignore the rest of the country. This might be seen as a good thing for Iowans who are sick of all the campaigning done before the Primary, but becoming a non-factor will be worse. At least now they have to pretend to care.
Third party candidates will be the first to turn their backs on places like Iowa.

Right now they go to a few of the largest cities in a few select states that are toss ups. Iowa isn't really a tossup anymore, you aren't going to see a ton of campaigning in Iowa.

California has more republicans than any other state. The GOP isn't going to campaign there.

 

[Scruddy]

Could you imagine the rage reactions to commentary like this today? Ross Perot would get the Harrison Butker treatment and then some for making such obvious statements today.

 

[Scruddy]

 

[tarheelbybirth]

I really did forget how many votes Perot actually got and I was stunned when I looked it up. Substitute Biden and Trump for Bush and Clinton and imagine what happens in '92.

Let's imagine it. And let's imagine that this third-party candidate actually wins 150 EC votes. Neither of the major candidates gets to 270. Let's imagine Biden gets 240 and Trump gets 148. What next?

The election goes to the House. Where every state delegation gets a single vote. SO Wyoming gets exactly the same weight as CA or TX. Both major parties claim the third-party vote favors them. And a majority of state delegations are controlled by the GOP. So Trump finishes third and still becomes president. The country erupts in chaos.

Moral: Be very careful what you wish for.

 

[Scruddy]

The special interests would never allow a candidate like this to emerge.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Get rid of the electoral college and you end the two party system within a decade. Otherwise it is what it is.

You'd either have to allow a plurality president or have a runoff. Don't even propose ranked choice voting. Multiple GOP-led states have or are in the process of banning it. More would follow if you eliminate the EC. The states set the rules for their elections...federal included. It's in the Constitution.

So what do you get? A 40% president? What does a run-off get you? A two-party choice.

If you want more than two parties, you need a parliamentary form of govt that gives the smaller parties a reason to exist.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

I was refreshing myself on the 1992 election, the first I was old enough to follow when I was younger. Ross Perot ran as a 3rd party and got shut out of electoral votes but he still got almost 20 million people to vote for him. That was good for almost 19 percent of the vote.

We knew terrible vs terrible was a long time coming in 2024. This replay has been setting up for over THREE YEARS. Plenty of time for a 3rd party to run a real campaign, but no one has. Your extremists on both sides will still vote D or R to oppose the other team, and that's not going to change anytime time soon, but my god there has never been more of a time to snatch votes from reasonable people that can see how ridiculous the choice is. Seriously, what gives? Is there some illuminati shit and they got to any challengers before they could arise and said they'd be taken out if they tried?

I really did forget how many votes Perot actually got and I was stunned when I looked it up. Substitute Biden and Trump for Bush and Clinton and imagine what happens in '92.

The only thing the Two parties hate more than each other is a “third party”.

They’ve rigged the system to make it extremely difficult for a third party candidate.

They spend most of their $$$ just trying to get on the ballot in a lot of states.