Why Are Third-Party Candidates at a Systemic Disadvantage in U.S. Elections?

Third-party candidates in the United States face significant disadvantages when competing for office. This article explores the systemic barriers that hinder their success and discusses why major parties often prevail.

Historical Context and Isolation of Third Parties

The history of third-party candidates in the U.S. is quite grim. While Democrat Abraham Lincoln secured the presidency in 1860, succeeding incumbents have struggled to secure the same level of support. The initial success of third-party candidates is exceptional, with subsequent efforts tending to result in electoral defeat.

While third-party causes can sometimes triumph, leading to meaningful policy changes, these instances are the exception rather than the rule. The U.S. political system does not readily embrace coalition governments, as seen in parliamentary systems. Instead, it is dominated by the two-party system, which has further consolidated its power in recent times due to decisions like Citizens United.

The Role of Party Alignment

A significant issue for third-party candidates is their alignment with the major party that shares many of their views. When two minor parties split the vote of supporters who align with their principles, the candidate from the other major party tends to win. This often guarantees a victory for the major party that a third-party candidate might prefer to avoid. The solution here is often ranked-choice voting, but major parties often resist this reform.

Partisan Voting Patterns

A large portion of the electorate votes strictly along party lines. To win as an independent candidate, a third-party candidate must present a compelling platform and campaign. This is a significant challenge when competing against major party incumbents who have years of established loyalty and funding.

Systemic Obstacles and Voter Suppression

The two major parties regularly engage in antitrust violations, preventing third parties from reaching the ballot and participating in presidential debates. They also spread misinformation to discourage voters from considering third-party candidates. This conduct is indicative of a system where both major parties hold considerable influence over the electoral process.

The lack of impartial oversight from attorneys general further exacerbates this issue. All Attorneys General in the U.S. come from the major parties, which means there is no significant pressure against the two-party system. Additionally, both parties have been accused of engaging in voter fraud, further eroding trust in the electoral process and potentially disenfranchising supporters of third-party candidates.

Solving the Electoral Quagmire

To level the playing field, reforms are necessary. Implementing open primaries would allow more candidates to compete and increase the visibility of third-party candidates. Additionally, if campaigns were funded exclusively by the government, it would reduce the influence of private money and political action committees (PACs), thereby reducing the corrupting influence on elections.

Adequate political awareness and a more open and honest electoral process could significantly change the landscape of U.S. politics. By dismantling the barriers that third-party candidates face, the U.S. could witness a broader range of ideas and perspectives represented in the political arena.