Third-Party Politics Chapter Notes | AP U.S Government and Politics - Grade 12 PDF Download

Introduction

The U.S. primarily uses a winner-take-all electoral system, where the candidate with the most votes in a state or district wins all representation, making it difficult for third parties to succeed. Unlike proportional voting systems that reflect the percentage of votes received, winner-take-all favors the two major parties and discourages third-party participation. Even with significant popular support, third-party candidates often fail to gain electoral votes. Additionally, major parties often absorb third-party ideas, further limiting their growth. Despite this, third parties continue to influence national debates and shape policy agendas.

Winner-Take-All vs. Proportional Voting

The United States predominantly employs a winner-take-all electoral system for most elections, which greatly advantages the two major political parties. In this system, the candidate who secures the highest number of votes, even without a majority, gains all the representation for that district or state. This contrasts with proportional representation systems, where seats are allocated according to the percentage of votes a party receives.

Effects of the winner-take-all system:

• A party can secure full representation with less than half of the vote share.
• Third-party candidates are deterred from running, as they rarely achieve the plurality required to win.
• Voters are reluctant to support third parties, fearing their vote will be "wasted."
• This system is used in congressional elections and most Electoral College processes.

Only Maine and Nebraska diverge from this approach in presidential elections by adopting the district method. Instead of awarding all electoral votes to the statewide winner, these states allocate votes based on the winner of each congressional district.

This limited use of proportional allocation provides a modest opportunity for parties or candidates to gain electoral votes in specific districts, even if they cannot win statewide. However, such systems are exceptions. The dominance of the winner-take-all system makes it extremely difficult for third-party candidates to translate national support into electoral success.

Example of Winner-Take-All in the 2020 General Election

The winner-take-all system renders it nearly impossible for third-party candidates to secure electoral votes, even if they garner a substantial portion of the popular vote.

Historical examples:

• In 1992, independent candidate Ross Perot earned 18.9% of the national vote but received no electoral votes.
• In 1996, Perot, running under the Reform Party, secured 8.4% of the vote but again received no electoral votes.
• The last third-party candidate to win electoral votes was George Wallace of the American Independent Party in 1968, securing 46 electoral votes, though Richard Nixon won the presidency decisively.

Note: The winner-take-all system reinforces the dominance of the two-party system, ensuring that third parties, despite significant voter support, rarely achieve meaningful representation. Proportional systems, though uncommon in the U.S., provide a more equitable reflection of voter preferences.

Incorporation of Third-Party Agendas

Another significant barrier for third parties is strategic rather than structural: major parties often adopt popular third-party issues to maintain their dominance. This approach allows Democrats and Republicans to absorb public demands without ceding ground to third parties.

When a major party incorporates a third-party stance:

• It attracts potential supporters away from the third party.
• It diminishes the third party’s distinctiveness and appeal.
• It allows the major party to appeal to independent voters more effectively.

Despite these challenges, third parties significantly influence national discussions. Even without winning elections, their advocacy can prompt policy changes. Major parties recognize that ignoring popular third-party issues risks losing voter support or creating opportunities for disruption in future elections.

Note: The incorporation of third-party ideas can limit their growth but demonstrates their role as critical vehicles for introducing new issues into mainstream political discourse.

Key Terms

• American Independent Party: The American Independent Party, established in 1967, emerged as a reaction to liberal policies within the major parties. It gained prominence in the 1968 presidential election with George Wallace’s campaign, which focused on states’ rights and segregationist policies, illustrating the impact of third parties and the challenges they face in a two-party-dominated system.
• Democratic Party: The Democratic Party, one of the two major U.S. political parties, was founded in the early 19th century and advocates for social equality, environmental protection, and government intervention in the economy. Its evolution reflects responses to social movements and shifting political ideologies, influencing its positions on issues like healthcare, education, and civil rights.
• Electoral College: The Electoral College, established by the U.S. Constitution, is a system for electing the President and Vice President, comprising 538 electors representing the states. It balances the influence of populous and less populous states, reflecting the federal structure of U.S. governance.
• 1968 Electoral Vote: The 1968 electoral vote refers to the results of the presidential election on November 5, 1968, where Richard Nixon (Republican) defeated Hubert Humphrey (Democratic) and George Wallace (American Independent Party). This election highlighted political fragmentation, with Wallace’s strong Southern performance underscoring third-party influence and voter discontent with traditional party politics.
• George Wallace: George Wallace, a former Alabama Governor, was a key figure in third-party politics during the 1960s and 1970s. Known for his pro-segregation stance, his 1968 presidential campaign mobilized voters dissatisfied with the major parties, highlighting the challenges faced by the two-party system.
• Incorporation of Third-Party Agendas: This term describes the practice where major parties adopt policies or ideas from third parties to broaden their voter appeal. This often occurs when third-party issues gain significant public support, prompting major parties to integrate these themes to remain competitive.
• Independent Candidate: An independent candidate runs for office without affiliation to any established political party, offering an alternative to major party nominees. These candidates can influence elections by drawing votes from major parties and shaping policy discussions.
• Plurality: Plurality refers to an electoral system where the candidate with the most votes wins, even without a majority (over 50%). Common in single-member district elections, this system impacts third-party candidates’ success and raises questions about electoral fairness.
• 1996 Presidential Elections: The 1996 presidential elections saw President Bill Clinton re-elected against Republican Bob Dole, with third-party candidate Ross Perot influencing the race. Perot’s Reform Party campaign highlighted the role of third parties in shaping voter behavior and electoral dynamics.
• 2020 Presidential Elections: The 2020 presidential elections resulted in Joe Biden’s victory over incumbent Donald Trump, marked by high voter turnout and significant mail-in voting due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Third-party candidates, while not securing electoral votes, influenced political discourse and voter behavior.
• Proportional Voting: Proportional voting is an electoral system where seats are allocated based on the percentage of votes a party receives. Unlike winner-take-all systems, it allows smaller parties to gain representation, offering a fairer reflection of voter preferences.
• Reform Party: Founded in 1995, the Reform Party focuses on reducing special interest influence, advocating for government reform, and promoting fiscal responsibility. It emerged as an alternative to the two major parties, addressing issues like campaign finance reform and immigration control.
• Republican Party: The Republican Party, founded in 1854 to oppose slavery’s expansion, is one of the two major U.S. parties. It advocates for limited government, free markets, individual liberties, and a strong national defense, with its evolution shaped by historical events and third-party dynamics.
• Ross Perot: Ross Perot, a businessman and politician, ran as a third-party candidate in the 1992 and 1996 presidential elections. His campaigns, emphasizing fiscal responsibility and government reform, demonstrated the influence of third parties on national political discourse.
• Single-Member District: A single-member district is an electoral area that elects one representative to a legislative body. Widely used in U.S. congressional elections, this system favors the two-party structure, making it challenging for third parties to win seats.
• Third Parties: Third parties are political organizations operating alongside the dominant two parties, representing alternative ideologies and interests. They shape political discourse, influence major party platforms, and enhance voter choice, despite challenges in winning elections.
• Two-Party Political System: A two-party system is a political structure where two major parties dominate elections and governance. This system limits third-party success, shaping campaign strategies and voter behavior while prompting discussions about democratic representation.
• Winner-Take-All System: The winner-take-all system awards all electoral votes or representation to the candidate with the most votes in a state or district. Used in U.S. presidential and congressional elections, it reinforces the two-party system and hinders third-party success.