America, Please Wake Up: Your Third Party “Protest Vote” is a Waste of Everyone’s Time
Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty
According to recent polls, third party presidential candidates like Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are attracting the support of up to seven percent of the popular vote. In such a bitter, depressing, toxic, never-ending presidential election campaign, it’s not surprising that lots of voters are looking for alternatives to the two major party candidates. But here’s the thing: in America’s two-party system, voting for a third party candidate is a self-indulgent waste of time. Yes, it’s understandable to be angry with the choices that our two-party system is offering to you—but voting third party for president will not help anything; in fact, voting for a third party candidate often has the opposite effect of what you want to achieve as a voter. Even if Jill Stein and Gary Johnson were smart, reasonable candidates (they aren’t), voting for them for president is a waste of your time and ours. Instead of voting for a third party candidate, you and America might be better off if you just didn’t vote at all.
Check out this article from technology author Clay Shirky, who gets to the root of why voting third party is pointless at best, and self-defeating at worst.
A few reasons:
Third Party Voting Has No Place in America’s Electoral System
As Shirky explains, because of America’s two-party system, we already have a pretty accurate idea of who the president is going to be: It’s going to be either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Your favorite third party candidate is never, ever going to win. Yes, occasionally a third party candidate can make some noise and win some votes, like Ross Perot did in 1992 when he won 19 percent of the popular vote—but Perot didn’t win a single electoral vote and was nowhere close to winning the White House.
The entire system is set up so that voters choose one of the two major party candidates to be president. Voting third party essentially says: “I don’t care who becomes president, and I’m going to let other voters decide for me.” Basically, America’s system has no way to acknowledge or process your third party vote. You can “send a message” by voting third party, but our system cannot “receive” that message or compute that input. If you wanted to vote against Trump and Hillary, you should have done it during the primary campaign. But now that they’re on the general election ballot, under the rules and constraints of our two-party system, you really do have to choose one of them.
America is Not a Multi-party Democracy
People who vote third party for president often talk about how they wish there was an alternative to the major parties. OK, that’s fine—it’s understandable to feel frustrated with the limitations of American democracy. But here’s the thing: American democracy is not set up the same way as Germany and Canada and Australia and the UK; we don’t have a parliamentary, multi-party system where people can choose from multiple smaller parties which then get seats in the legislature based on a proportional percentage of the vote.
For example, Germany has a Green Party dedicated to environmental causes, which currently holds 10 percent of the seats in the German parliament; left-wing voters in Germany can vote Green and see their interests represented by an alternative to the center-left mainstream Social Democrats. In a multi-party system, multiple parties have to build a coalition government after each election. This is where compromises happen: After the election. Voters in a multi-party system get to feel more enthusiastic or ideologically pure by voting for the niche party that most accurately represents their values and interests, but their chosen political parties, once elected into office, still have to form a governing coalition and make compromises to suit the realities and interests of the full political spectrum.
America’s system works differently and requires a different sort of compromise: American voters themselves have to make compromises during the party primary campaigns and at the ballot box on Election Day to decide what they’re willing to accept from the two broad mainstream political parties, and decide which party’s candidates best represent their interests. It’s imperfect and sometimes frustrating, but this is how our system works: American voters themselves have to be involved in making unsatisfying tradeoffs and accepting half-measures and living with the results. As Shirky writes, “No one gets what they want in a democracy; two-party systems simply rub voters’ noses in that fact.”
Third party voters always talk about how they’re tired of choosing between the “lesser of two evils”—well, in American democracy, that’s what voting is. Grown-ups have to make hard choices and accept less-than-thrilling results every single day in life, and democracy is no different.