I think you may be taking for granted the political dupoloy and candidate equality. Third-party candidates are almost always unknown and remain unknown to the

I think you may be taking for granted the political dupoloy and candidate equality. Third-party candidates are almost always unknown and remain unknown to the public, because they have no money to advertise and achieve name recognition, get their message out. The pay-to-play nature of elections preserves the duopoly of the major parties. Consider also primary campaigns: typically an incumbent has vastly more money to spend than challengers, who are again usually unknown. When it comes to general election campaigns between two duopolist candidates, there is usually less of a difference in fundraising ability, so it may seem like money doesn't matter a lot. I see campaign donations as more of an entrance fee than a guarantee of victory. It's gatekeeping, where the gates are closed to any politician who can't be purchased by wealthy interests.