NationStates Jolt Archive

OK, first, let me make an attempt at squashing personal attacks by letting everyone know upfront that I am not presenting facts and I am not claiming to be right! The following statement is just my opinion, nothing more! The question that follows is something I am genuinely curious about and I just want to hear other opinions!

In the 2004 presidential election, both candidates representing this nation's two 'major' political parties were incompetent morons! Why then do we, as a nation, feel obligated to vote only within/between these two parties? Why does everyone insist on voting for the 'lesser of two evils' in the powerhouse parties! Why not diversify and give the third party people a chance?

In the 2004 presidential election, both candidates representing this nation's two 'major' political parties were incompetent morons! Why then do we, as a nation, feel obligated to vote only within/between these two parties? Why does everyone insist on voting for the 'lesser of two evils' in the powerhouse parties! Why not diversify and give the third party people a chance?

Because the United States utilizes a single-member first-past-the-post electoral system. There is only one seat to win, and only the one "winner" gets to occupy it. Thus, winning that seat by getting the most votes is the chief concern; representing the full range of ideological options is not. As such, the largest parties will automatically gravitate toward the ideological position that represents the "center" of the given political culture, in order to maximize the number of potential voters. Naturally, this practice tend to eliminate from discussion more "extreme" or "ideological" parties, because they do not represent the center, thereby vastly reducing the number of influential parties to exactly two, "Winner" and "Winner next time."

See also: Maurice Duverger and his law. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/duverger's_law)

Not always – there is also what is commonly referred to as the 51% strategy.
This is only possible with our very low level of voter participation – this strategy is quite the opposite of trying to run for the center. It boils down to pandering to your extreme end in the hopes that you will get the fanatics motivated to go vote – thus they come out in droves to vote. Even though they are nowhere near a majority of people, they get high enough turnout to control the election.

Third party candidates make an impact in local elections, as they can (and have) win elections. This is generally limited to state government (including a couple of governorships) but there are the occasional independent congressmen. The federal races tend to be impacted only by the third candidate splitting the vote of one of the parties – sometimes this forces the two parties to realize that there are a lot of people concerned about whatever issues to make a grab for those votes.

Unfortunately, both the Democrats and the Republicans have a vested interest in keeping everything a 2 party race – so while they may be bitterly fighting, they will collude to keep anyone else out.

So long as the majority of the population remains so woefully ignorant, and considers voting for anyone else to be a ‘wasted’ vote – we will still be left with only 2 choices.

This is why some of the founding fathers were against the creation of a party system at all – and I happen to agree. We should judge a candidate based on the individual rather than on the two parties (whose members hold such a wide rang of positions as to be almost meaningless).

Third party candidates make an impact in local elections, as they can (and have) win elections. This is generally limited to state government (including a couple of governorships) but there are the occasional independent congressmen. The federal races tend to be impacted only by the third candidate splitting the vote of one of the parties – sometimes this forces the two parties to realize that there are a lot of people concerned about whatever issues to make a grab for those votes.


A two party system does not make it impossible for a third party to have influence. There is simply a vast gulf between the overall influence of the two largest parties and 3rd place.