The US doesn’t have third parties with any political power. This is not because of lack of support or interest in third parties and it’s not about media coverage of third parties. It is because of the structural institutions of the US. It doesn’t not matter if third parties have support, because the way the US legislature is set up means that third parties cannot have any real power. It doesn’t have to be this way, it’s not like this in other countries, but this is because other countries are *structurally different* and this cannot change in the US without *institutional reform.* I’m saying this because a lot of people seen to think that if only people would get excited for and vote for third parties in the US we wouldn’t have only two options, but that’s not true. That wouldn’t work, because of how legislative districts in the US are set up.
Explanations below the cut.
The US as single member, winner take all legislative districts. This means that US legislative districts have only one representative who is determined by the getting plurality of the votes. I said plurality and not majority, because it doesn’t matter if they get the majority of votes or not. As long as they get the *most votes* out of *all the candidates running* they get *all of the power as representative*. There is one seat and it is taken by the person who gets the most votes. This means that if there are 25% Green Party votes, 35% Democratic votes, and 40% Republican vote the Republican candidate wins and gets all the power. It doesn’t matter that 60% of people had more progressive beliefs that they voted on, the most conservative candidate won and will now get all of the power. In a different system with 5 seats that are proportionally represented the Green Party might get 1 seat and the Democratic and republican parties two seats and then the Green and Democratic parties both have more influence. That does not happen in the US. It is not how our system functions on a structural level.
That is why voting Green is useless. If voting third party is what gets you out and voting in local elections that’s good, but yeah, your third party vote for president means nothing. That’s why Democrats don’t like the green party. In any close race, if the Green Party takes voters who would otherwise be voting democratic, but think they have a third option, then it enables a Republican more conservative than the Democrat to win. this is why Republicans who sometimes work to enabled the Green Party, because they know that (aside from on a local level) all they can do is hurt democrats. The idea that you have a third option in the presidency is *an illusion* that is just structurally untrue.
I’ve seen some people saying vote blue on the presidency, but support and organize for the Green Party on a local level if that’s what you believe in. This is a much better idea because on a local level there’s more flexibility and the Green Party can get more support. However, the idea that you’ll work up the green Party on a local level to be powerful enough to be a major party is probably not true in the current system. If you really want more than two options you need to advocate for structural reform. That’s the actual third option. Currently there aren’t any large-scale movements for this that I know of, but that’s the movement you want to build up that could actually get somewhere in allowing for third parties. Choosing a third party and supporting it will not change the US legislative institutions.
This system is also why the republican and Democratic parties end up so similar in rhetoric. When you just have to get the plurality and there are only two real options it makes the most sense to go to the center. Imagine two points on a sliding scale from left to right. The point to the left gets everything to the left of it and the point to the right gets everything to the right of it. In order to get the most possible that on that scale both points benefit from going to the center. It’s more complicated in real life with who actually votes and who has protected voting rights, the difference between rhetoric and policy, the influence of lobbying, etc. but that’s how it basically works.
Now, I don’t hold that the two parties are the same because the differences that some people wave away as insignificant is actually incredibly important to my life. the Trump administration has tried to legalize healthcare discrimination against transgender patients and the Biden administration will probably not make huge headway on trans legal rights, so some people consider that the same. I, a transgender person living in a red state during a pandemic, consider it the difference between life or death for me. I voted Blue early and think you should, too, to be completely honest with you, because I enjoy living. But I will say that there are two similar parities in America and many different parties in other countries and often the two parties don’t give the option of voting your full values. This is true and it sucks. But it’s true because of institutional, structural reasons that need to change, not because the media or other voters have decided it should be.
Three Seats, Limited Competition: The Hidden Math Behind Maryland’s Delegate Primaries
By MDBayNews Staff
At first glance, Maryland’s 2026 candidate filings suggest healthy participation in House of Delegates races. Across the state’s 47 legislative districts, dozens of candidates have entered contests for one of the 141 delegate seats.
But Maryland’s delegate system is not a typical one-seat-per-district structure.
Each legislative district elects three delegates — either…
MARYLAND’S LEGISLATIVE MAPS: NOT THE WORST GERRYMANDER — BUT DESIGNED TO LOCK IN POWER
By MDBayNews Staff
Maryland’s state legislative districts are often lumped into the same category as the state’s infamous congressional maps — aggressive, partisan, and engineered to squeeze out competition. The reality is more nuanced.
The current maps for Maryland’s 47-seat Senate and 141-member House of Delegates are moderately gerrymandered in favor of Democrats, but they stop short of the…
The Psychological Explanation of the Wisconsin Legislature's Reversal on Gerrymandering
The Wisconsin GOP is now supporting democracy? Will give up gerrymandering a permanent super-majority? How is that EVEN possible? Psychology has the answer, even if it is likely a trap!
SUMMARY: The blog post discusses the recent shift in the Wisconsin Republican Party’s stance on gerrymandering and their endorsement of a non-partisan commission to draw legislative districts. It explores the reasons behind this change, highlighting the risk aversion principle in behavioral economics. The post analyzes the electoral history in Wisconsin, showing the growing support for Democratic…
Virginia voters said everyday people should help draw legislative districts. So far applicants are much whiter, older and wealthier than the state’s population.
Arnold Schwarzenegger and Barack Obama don’t agree on much—but they’ve both turned redistricting reform into their main political cause for the years ahead.
There’s momentum this year for redistricting reform. But it needs popular support, not just encouraging words from prominent current and former office holders.
The most important long-lasting political action you can take this year is to help reduce the influence which members of state legislatures have over drawing maps of Congressional districts and of their own legislative districts. No legislator should have the power to draw his or her own district; legislators can have input but not total control over the process of drawing electoral boundaries.
