3 ms·

Does the 3rd party make sense in the US election system? My impression was that 3rd parties are unhelpful, since they steal voters from ideologically similar pa

Does the 3rd party make sense in the US election system? My impression was that 3rd parties are unhelpful, since they steal voters from ideologically similar parties, thus helping the opposition.

fighterpilot 5y ago
After Ross Perot's modest success in 1992 I think a very charismatic person could do it. But Yang lacks charisma and the mainstream media hates him (remember MSNBC and CNN editing him out of 30 infographics, which Yang says is intentional) so I don't think he can pull it off at the end of the day, even though his ideas are the ones that could actually unite the country.
- torginus 5y ago
  My impression of the US media is that they are for-hire mercenaries, rather than journalists in any meaningful sense. They ganged up on Yang, Tulsi Gabbard, and Bernie, despite most of them having policies they claim to support.
citboin 5y ago
Right now a third party is a wasted vote so we need more than 3 national parties in order for them to be viable alternatives to the current two. The Forward party and Green Party could cooperate in order to make this happen, but that’s probably just wishful thinking on my part.
- smolder 5y ago
  I really can't see how multiple small parties teaming up helps anything. Maybe you can clarify? For as long as the big two are considered the big two, any number of additional parties act as spoilers.
TulliusCicero 5y ago
Generally that's true, but some polities have started doing ranked choice voting, which may give third parties a way in: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_... > Ranked-choice voting is used for state primary, congressional, and presidential elections in Alaska and Maine and for local elections in more than 20 US cities including Cambridge, Massachusetts; San Francisco, California; Oakland, California; Berkeley, California; San Leandro, California; Takoma Park, Maryland; St. Paul, Minnesota; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Portland, Maine; Las Cruces, New Mexico; and St. Louis Park, Minnesota.[1] New York City is the largest voting population in the US using RCV.[2]
vintermann 5y ago
It can make sense as a regional party, especially in states where one party is extremely dominant. But you don't get the president that way.
bobthepanda 5y ago
third parties in the US are historically not very successful, but mostly because they tend to shoot for broke by running for President and failing. In other places where FPTP results in more than two parties, this is usually because they run at lower levels first, to set the expectation that they can run something. it is also usually less costly to run in such races as the required outreach networks are smaller and media campaigns less expensive. And US election campaigns at the national level are very expensive because it takes a lot of funding to do outreach to 330 million people over 9M sq km, plus media advertising slots are very pricey. Bernie Sanders spent $220M on his 2016 campaign, and that was for the primary. To put that in perspective, the maximum a UK political party was allowed to spend on all seats in Parliament was 19.5M GBP in 2019; the maximum spend on any single seat is 30,000 GBP.
space_fountain 5y ago
I don’t quite know how to make it happen, but because of the nationalization of politics there are also plenty of places where only one party is competitive so it feel like those places might be an opportunity for a third party
ZeroGravitas 5y ago
The parties have changed in the past, so if you felt that a shift was coming up, then you might want to get ahead of it. I don't want to seem too optimistic but the US seems overdue for a more European style politics so if a big shift happened you could still end up with two parties, broadly left and right and Democrats (that remain) could be either of them.

Does the 3rd party make sense in the US election system? My impression was that 3rd parties are unhelpful, since they steal voters from ideologically similar parties, thus helping the opposition.

fighterpilot 5y ago

After Ross Perot's modest success in 1992 I think a very charismatic person could do it. But Yang lacks charisma and the mainstream media hates him (remember MSNBC and CNN editing him out of 30 infographics, which Yang says is intentional) so I don't think he can pull it off at the end of the day, even though his ideas are the ones that could actually unite the country.

torginus 5y ago
My impression of the US media is that they are for-hire mercenaries, rather than journalists in any meaningful sense. They ganged up on Yang, Tulsi Gabbard, and Bernie, despite most of them having policies they claim to support.

citboin 5y ago

Right now a third party is a wasted vote so we need more than 3 national parties in order for them to be viable alternatives to the current two. The Forward party and Green Party could cooperate in order to make this happen, but that’s probably just wishful thinking on my part.

smolder 5y ago
I really can't see how multiple small parties teaming up helps anything. Maybe you can clarify? For as long as the big two are considered the big two, any number of additional parties act as spoilers.

TulliusCicero 5y ago

Generally that's true, but some polities have started doing ranked choice voting, which may give third parties a way in: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_... > Ranked-choice voting is used for state primary, congressional, and presidential elections in Alaska and Maine and for local elections in more than 20 US cities including Cambridge, Massachusetts; San Francisco, California; Oakland, California; Berkeley, California; San Leandro, California; Takoma Park, Maryland; St. Paul, Minnesota; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Portland, Maine; Las Cruces, New Mexico; and St. Louis Park, Minnesota.[1] New York City is the largest voting population in the US using RCV.[2]

vintermann 5y ago

It can make sense as a regional party, especially in states where one party is extremely dominant. But you don't get the president that way.

bobthepanda 5y ago

third parties in the US are historically not very successful, but mostly because they tend to shoot for broke by running for President and failing. In other places where FPTP results in more than two parties, this is usually because they run at lower levels first, to set the expectation that they can run something. it is also usually less costly to run in such races as the required outreach networks are smaller and media campaigns less expensive. And US election campaigns at the national level are very expensive because it takes a lot of funding to do outreach to 330 million people over 9M sq km, plus media advertising slots are very pricey. Bernie Sanders spent $220M on his 2016 campaign, and that was for the primary. To put that in perspective, the maximum a UK political party was allowed to spend on all seats in Parliament was 19.5M GBP in 2019; the maximum spend on any single seat is 30,000 GBP.

space_fountain 5y ago

I don’t quite know how to make it happen, but because of the nationalization of politics there are also plenty of places where only one party is competitive so it feel like those places might be an opportunity for a third party

ZeroGravitas 5y ago

The parties have changed in the past, so if you felt that a shift was coming up, then you might want to get ahead of it. I don't want to seem too optimistic but the US seems overdue for a more European style politics so if a big shift happened you could still end up with two parties, broadly left and right and Democrats (that remain) could be either of them.