,
8 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
From me: "Brewing trouble | Why third-party presidential candidates fail"
economist.com/democracy-in-a…
economist.com/democracy-in-a…
There are a few main reasons why Independents fail to win presidential contests:
1. No base
2. No platform/ideological polarization
3. No ranked-choice voting
4. Rules that favor the two-party system
1. No base
2. No platform/ideological polarization
3. No ranked-choice voting
4. Rules that favor the two-party system
1. According to the ANES, Pew, and Gallup, the number of Americans who (a) identify as Independents and (b) don't lean toward one party is about 10%. The rest are committed partisans.
2. These Indies aren't really centrist, & contrary to what Schultz believes, there are very few "economically conservative and socially liberal" voters. It's the other way around. According to @leedrutman's analysis of the VOTER survey, 3% of Americans fit this archetype. 
@leedrutman 3a. Because America has plurality, first-past-the-post elections, voting for a uncompetitive third-party candidate is basically throwing away your vote. Voters don't want to throw away their votes. So, by nature, third parties can't emerge successfully.
@leedrutman 3b. If the US had ranked-choice voting — whereby your votes to Indies get redistributed to your 2nd/3rd/ect-choice candidate, they'd probably have more success. In Maine this year, RCV largely worked; there were more Indies running, and the elected Dem seems pretty moderate.
4. Lastly, Independent candidates have to fight for things like ballot access and debate appearances that come automatically for the major parties.
