It’s now all but certain that Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump will be the major party candidates in the November presidential election — an astonishing feat, since polls suggest neither candidate is all that well-liked by voters.
As a result, there’s talk that this may be the year a third-party candidate could break through — from the Libertarian Party, say, or possibly an independent run backed by Bill Kristol, the longtime Republican and editor of the conservative Weekly Standard.
Could it really happen? Joel Mathis and Ben Boychuk, the RedBlueAmerica columnists, debate the issue.
JOEL MATHIS
Certain fans of “The Simpsons” — middle-aged folks who grew up with the show during its early 1990s heyday — will remember a classic election-oriented episode in which Homer Simpson unmasks the two presidential candidates, a Democrat and a Republican, to be hideous space reptiles in disguise.
The revelation means little: “It’s true!” one of the aliens announces. “But what are you going to do about it? It’s a two-party system! You have to vote for one of us!”
A citizen in the crowd pipes up: “Well, I believe I’ll vote for a third-party candidate!”
“Go ahead! Throw your vote away!” the alien replies, laughing maniacally.
Sad to say, the alien was correct in his assessment of our politics.
Despise Donald? Hate Hillary? It’s absolutely your right to vote for a candidate who makes a better appeal to your sensibilities. The Libertarians and the Green Party, among others, are always out there seeking your vote — and Never Trump Republicans may offer their own alternative candidate this year. Just don’t expect any of them to win, or even come close — not even in this extraordinary political year.
Maybe it’s time to change the rules.
The best option? A turn to instant runoff voting, in which a voter ranks candidates in order of preference. If a candidate captures more than half the first-preference votes, he or she wins. Otherwise, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated and the ballots are retabulated. If your first-choice candidate was eliminated, your second-choice preference will get the vote instead. Repeat the process until one candidate gains a clear majority.
It’s slightly complicated but also a bit brilliant. It lets voters demonstrate their preferences without worrying that they are throwing their votes away. Want to vote for the Libertarian candidate? Go ahead. If he’s eliminated, your support can automatically shift to a candidate who has a better chance of winning.
It seems clear that this election will provide satisfaction to few voters. But it’s also clear the system isn’t necessarily designed to provide that satisfaction. Want to make a change? Start with the rules that discourage third-party votes in the first place.
BEN BOYCHUK
Americans love third-party outsiders, mavericks and independents. Just ask former presidents Eugene V. Debs, George Wallace, John Anderson, Ross Perot and Ralph Nader — as soon as you find your way into the weird parallel universe where those guys were elected.
In our world, the enthusiasm for third-party presidential candidates never quite translates into electoral majorities. Historically, third-party candidates don’t win presidential elections; they spoil them. More often than not, they don’t even crack double digits in the popular vote.
Perot was an exceptional case in 1992. The Texas multimillionaire ran a campaign similar to Trump’s, focusing on the economy and the ill effects of free trade. He was even the front-runner for a time, until a series of bizarre missteps drove him from the race in July.
For a few months, anyway. Perot re-entered the contest in October and ended up winning just under 19 percent of the popular vote — nowhere near enough to win, obviously, but enough to deny Republican President George H.W. Bush a second term.
What makes a third party more appealing than appalling this time is the dismal popularity of the parties’ presumptive nominees. More than half of voters say they dislike Clinton and Trump — and “dislike” is putting it charitably. Many voters hate them in the worst way. That’s unprecedented.
Yet, once again, most of those same voters appear unenthusiastic or simply uninterested in the meager alternatives on offer. The Libertarian ticket might break 10 percent this year.
A new Quinnipiac University poll found that Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump among registered voters, 45 percent to 41 percent. When third-party candidates are added to the mix, however, Clinton’s lead contracts to 40 percent over Trump’s 38 percent. Big whoop.
But as useful as history can be, it really hasn’t been much of a guide this year, has it? Trump’s campaign was never supposed to survive 2015. He was never supposed to win the Republican nomination. And he has no chance whatsoever of beating Clinton in November. Right?
Right?!
Ben Boychuk is associate editor of the Manhattan Institute's City Journal. Joel Mathis is associate editor for Philadelphia Magazine
bboychuk@city-journal.org
joelmmathis@gmail.com