Various "extraneous" parties have been president in American History: the Anti-Masonic party, the Know-Nothing Party, the Green Party, and much more. This week we are learning about Theodore Roosevelt and his formation of the Bull-Moose Party during the 1912 election.
The Bull-Moose Party essentially lasted for one election cycle was derived from Roosevelt and his supporter's anger at the political machine present in the Republican party. The Bull-Moose platform was extremely progressive and rallied for various social causes ranging from women's suffrage to labor laws. Moreover, the importance of the Bull-Moose Party is not rooted in their victories (or lack there of) but the fact that a minor party was not only able to beat a major party, but also split it. The Republican Party heavily suffered because of the Bull-Moose Party.
And thus, at least so far in American history, third party candidate's success lies not in victory but in the successive path to victory. For instance, the fact that Gary Johnson could poll higher than 5% in certain states was met with media frenzy because he was a third-party candidate. We also see that many Americans feared that if a "third-party" candidate such as Michael Bloomberg ran, he would not necessarily win, but just work to split up the Democratic Party much like Roosevelt did in 1812. Thus, we clearly see that as of now, we should watch third-party candidates with a weary eye, as 5% polling in Nevada for a third-party candidate means 5% fewer votes for a major party candidate.
I appreciate your connection of third parties in the past to third parties today. While third parties do not often win elections, high polling reflects the popularity of their ideas. For example with the Bull Moose party, the large share of progressive votes showed a general progressive trend in American political leanings. Furthermore, I find it interesting how the electoral system affects third parties. The fact that electors are given by state and not divided further means that third parties have zero influence on the election until they win an elector on the state level.
ReplyDeleteNicely done! This really does explain how third party could have an effect on elections even today. I liked how you connected the in the last sentence you brought up an important point how "5% polling in Nevada for a third-party candidate means 5% fewer votes for a major party candidate," even though it might not sound as much it is really surprising how significant that could be with a third party and how impacting it could feel to loss that many vote with the other 2 parties. It is really quite interesting how a third party can create a totally new branch in the ideas of a party and split it to different parts. Third party's have there own way of winning not exactly with winning the election but with winning the attention the recognition of the power and effects a third party can leave in its legacy. Lastly how the Bull Moose party being successful and all as the third party and becoming more known for its "Square deal" which divided the republican party overall strengthen Wilson and made him out stand from the other which helped him with the election. And I agree with ^^ it must of been really hard for the third parties to even have a chance in winning elections because of the way votes were counted and how they need the majority of states not just individual votes but the state as a whole as well
ReplyDelete