Voting Third Party and Getting What You Feared
Voting Third Party and Getting What You Feared
As Americans become more and more frustrated with the two party system of government, millions of voters identify themselves as independents. We can look at the latest presidential election where Donald Trump, promoting himself as an outsider, won the election and Bernie Sanders also acquired a great deal of support, especially with younger voters and those that agreed with his stance on economic inequality. The ‘economy’ and ‘jobs’ are subjects that always attract the attention of voters and understandably so. Of course, the presidential nominee for the Democratic party was Hillary Clinton, but focusing on her would not serve much of a purpose for this article as she was considered a long time insider in American politics. It’s the appeal for that ‘outsider’, the candidate with a different approach as opposed to the same rhetoric that many voters have become frustrated with that we want to focus on. We can say that both Sanders and Trump appealed to a large segment of the population. Both spoke about saving jobs, health care, medicare and many of the same issues that the voters care about. There was, however, a tremendous difference between the two. Sanders spoke about income inequality, Trump bragged about his personal wealth. Sanders and Trump both spoke of investing in infrastructure, both spoke of money polluting politics, both spoke of tax reform and tax cuts for working families, though the plan that was signed by President Trump did not resemble the plan that Sanders would have offered. Nonetheless, both gentlemen had arguments that were appealing to many voters to the degree that a number of Sanders supporters actually voted for Trump.
The Spoilers: Are these third party candidates spoilers or are they necessary to bring certain subjects to the forefront of American politics? It’s fair to say that in the two party system, having a third party candidate win a presidential election is as likely as having a ‘Martian’ land on earth and run for office and win the nomination. Is the system rigged against any of the other political parties? Of course it is. Let’s think of this. If by some fluke a third party candidate had won the nomination for President, what would the members of both parties in congress do? What support would such a president have from the two political parties who would immediately start focusing on winning the White House for the next election? To call these candidates ‘spoilers’ is often times seen as offensive to those that voted for them. Some say their votes are wasted votes while others say it’s their right to vote their conscience. Both very valid arguments. We may never have a third party candidate as president in our lifetimes so we will never know if there is any distinct difference between one of the two party candidates and a third party candidate as president. It may very well be the same feeling of wearing a new pair of shoes, they feel different, look new, but once broken in they lose their luster. Third party candidates seem to have a different approach to politics which if they didn’t, why would anyone bother with them? So how do we know if any of them would be better or worse than where we are now? As far as the ‘spoiler’ argument, let’s look back.
In the 2000 presidential election, Ralph Nader ran as the candidate for the Green Party. In Florida alone, Nader received over 97,000 votes. The Gore-Lieberman ticket lost by fewer than 1000 votes. Though Nader has tried to show through failed mathematics that he was not one of the reasons Gore lost Florida, the math states otherwise. The Nader vote primarily took votes from candidate Gore, clearly the numbers prove he had a huge impact. The interesting factor is that for the majority of the Nader voters, the candidate they preferred not win the Presidency was Bush, they helped him do just that. There are other reasons Al Gore lost the nomination, one for example was losing his home state of Tennessee.
Independent voters needed? For those voters that are self proclaimed ‘independent’ voters, that research and vote according to qualifications and policy issues, they make a valid point especially compared to those that vote strictly down party lines regardless of who the candidate is or represents. Being an independent voter seems on the surface at least that the candidate needs to earn their vote. When voters vote down party lines, that vote wasn’t earned. Let’s look back at another interesting presidential election. The 2008 presidential election. Many believed that John McCain had an excellent opportunity to win the nomination. A war veteran, respected by many from both political parties. But John McCain made a fatal mistake, his choice in running mate. Though many voters were ready and willing to vote for McCain, too many could not accept having Sarah Palin as president should McCain be unable to complete his term in office. Had he chosen a different running mate, the result may have been different. Independent voters most likely played a large role in this presidential contest.
Different times. We hear that all the time, because it’s true. Time doesn’t stand still and the world is constantly changing. “The world is more dangerous than it’s ever been.” We hear that quite often as well, because that’s also true. There are nine (9) countries that possess nuclear weapons totaling more than 16,000 weapons between them, and more countries looking to also join that club. The days of throwing spears and firing cannons at each other are long gone. What does this mean? It means that the type of candidates matter more than ever. We can look also at many other issues that affect our nation. According to FBI data, the number of hate crimes in the US is rising. Coincidentally, we have a president that has obtained the unwavering support of many of these hate groups. He has also done very little to denounce them or their support for him, in fact, following the Charlottesville incidents that turned deadly, many from both parties criticized President Trump for his comments and lack of condemnation.
The bottom line. It comes down to this. For those that have difficulty in supporting a candidate from either of the two major parties, it’s understandable. However, the President does have the power to guide the nation in a certain direction. If you are pleased with the leadership, that’s fine. If however you are not and you did not vote or voted for a third party as a ‘protest’ vote, than you need to re-think your future voting decisions. To say there is a lot at stake in elections is not an understatement, and that would apply to the Presidential nominee as well as a city councilman. Though many dislike the lack of choices, this system is not changing anytime soon, so voting is extremely important. As distasteful as it may be to vote, not for your favorite candidate, but to prevent the one you disagree with the most from winning, it is the reality in which we live in. Most often your second choice is the closest to your views than your last choice.
Lou Dos Santos
