Discover more from Chasing Liberty
The Third Party Paradox and the Illusion of Choice
Why are Americans trapped in a two-party system?
In the American political landscape, there has long been a recurring phenomenon that I will call the "Third-Party Paradox." It refers to the consistent trend where a significant number of Americans express a desire to vote for third-party candidates, seeking alternatives to the two major parties, yet fail to follow through with their intentions when it comes time to vote.
A recent poll conducted by NewsNation and Decision Desk HQ revealed that nearly half of voters are opposed to a rematch between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election. The survey found that 23.38% of voters said they are very likely to consider voting for a third-party candidate if the two were to face off again, while 25.67% said they are somewhat likely to do the same.
When asked about potential third-party candidates, Senator Bernie Sanders emerged as the top choice with 20.60% support, followed by former Wyoming GOP Representative Liz Cheney at 10.25% and Senator Joe Manchin at 7.20%. Additionally, the poll highlighted the ongoing unpopularity of President Biden, with 54.24% of respondents expressing disapproval of his job performance.
As the 2024 presidential election approaches, President Biden is seen as the likely Democratic nominee, facing minimal competition in the primary. The Democratic Party is squashing any other possible primary contender.
On the other hand, Donald Trump leads a crowded field in the Republican primary. At this point, the nomination is his to lose.
Furthermore, the poll indicated a significant lack of optimism among voters about the country's trajectory, with 70.74% believing that the United States is on the wrong track, compared to only 18.14% who think it is on the right track. This sentiment aligns with other polls that reflect a low level of confidence in the direction of the country.
Yet, when Election Day comes around in 2024, the vast majority of voters will pull the lever for Republicans and Democrats even though they wish there were another option. But the reality is, there are other options, but Americans, by and large, are not willing to commit to supporting them.
This puzzling inconsistency raises important questions about the dynamics of the two-party system and the factors that prevent viable third-party candidates from gaining substantial electoral support.
For starters, one major reason behind the Third-Party Paradox is the fear of wasted votes. Many Americans believe that voting for a third-party candidate is a futile endeavor because such candidates rarely secure electoral victories. Republicans and Democrats both use this fear to terrify the electorate into supporting their candidates, even if they are about as appealing as a bowl of brussel sprouts that have been dipped in battery acid and left out in the sun for a week.
The media isn’t much of a help either. In fact, they are the prime purveyors of the notion that voting for someone other than a Republican or Democrat will result in a disaster because the guy on the opposite team might win. America has not yet woken up to the reality that the GOP and Democrats are, in general, not different enough from one another for it to truly affect their quality of life and liberty.
This strategic voting mindset often compels individuals to opt for the perceived lesser evil among the two major party candidates, perpetuating the uniparty’s dominance.
Secondly, third-party candidates often face significant disadvantages when it comes to media coverage and campaign funding. The media tends to focus on the major party candidates, allocating disproportionate attention and airtime to them. Consequently, voters receive limited exposure to alternative candidates and their policy platforms.
Additionally, this makes securing adequate campaign funding a formidable challenge for third-party contenders. They struggle to compete with the well-established fundraising networks of the major parties, which often receive substantial contributions from corporations, interest groups, and individual donors.
The two major parties have a longstanding stranglehold on the electoral system, which makes it difficult for third-party candidates to gain access to the ballot in many states. The Democrats and Republicans have used their positions of dominance to employ stringent ballot access requirements, such as high signature thresholds and specific registration deadlines.
In Texas, Republicans attempted to pass a measure that would have made it harder for third parties to gain access to the ballot by pricing them out. Fortunately, that bill failed — but this does not mean they will not try again.
These measures often prove to be daunting obstacles for a third party. These barriers are designed to discourage potential supporters from rallying behind third-party candidates, limiting their viability and undermining their chances of securing ballot access across the country
Then, there is the spoiler effect, which reinforces the Third-Party Paradox. It posits that third-party candidates, particularly those ideologically aligned with one of the major parties, can inadvertently draw votes away from their similar-party candidate, thereby altering the election outcome in favor of the opposing major party.
This is a widespread perception that has pervaded American politics for years. You have probably heard Republicans complaining about Libertarian candidates “stealing votes” from GOP candidates, thereby ensuring that Democrats are elected. The spoiler effect creates a strategic dilemma for voters who may genuinely prefer a third-party candidate but feel compelled to vote strategically to prevent the candidate they least favor from winning.
Indeed, the fearmongering coming from both parties has a powerful impact on the voter’s psyche. They have managed to convince most people that letting the other party get into power by voting third party will have disastrous results.
The Third-Party Paradox presents a conundrum in American politics, where a significant portion of the population expresses interest in supporting alternative candidates but struggles to convert that enthusiasm into votes during elections. Factors such as the fear of wasted votes, limited media coverage and funding, structural barriers, and the perception of the spoiler effect contribute to this persistent pattern.
Overcoming these challenges will require the electorate to realize that, in reality, there is no two-party system. Instead, there is a uniparty made up of Republicans and Democrats who often work together to rule the rest of us. People will finally have to wake up and see through the illusion that the two parties are significantly different. When this happens, the fear tactics employed by Team Red and Team Blue will no longer be as effective.
This will not happen overnight. But by pushing liberty-focused candidates at the local level, we can have an easier time getting people into office who genuinely want to remove the government’s boot from our necks.
Chasing Liberty is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, please become paid subscriber!