Minor (Third)-party Presidential Candidates
Despite the institutional obstacles to their candidate’s success, minor parties still make important contributions to the US political System.
Task 1: Choose THREE of the institutional obstacles below to research. Describe how/why they pose problems for Third/Minor parties to find success in Presidential elections.
- Limited Ballot Access
- Campaign Financing Rules
- Proportional delegate selection process for the Parties National Convention
- Presidential Debate selection process
- Gerrymandering
Task 2: Read the bio’s on the Top 10 Minor Party Candidates in American History.
- For each candidate identify which of the following “contribution (s)” they made to the US political Party System. Additional Research might be required
- New or Different ideas or issues (describe the “new ideas/issues”)
- Voice for the fringe (define)
- Safety valve for the discontent (define)
- Pushed major parties to include underrepresented concerns or groups (describe/examples)
- Read the definitions of the 4 Types of Minor Parties (page 175) to identify which “type” of Minor Party each of the 10 candidates represented.
- Rank them from 1-10 in terms of contribution (s) made to the political system and lasting impact on America.
- Put your TOP 5 into a chart or graphic organizer
Top 10 Most Successful Third-party Presidential Candidates
byCristen Conger
Image Gallery: Protest Pictures
In 2011, a majority of Americans supported the entrance of a political third party to help govern. See moreprotesting pictures. Bill Pugliano/Getty Images
Top 10 Most Successful Third-party Presidential Candidates
EveryU.S. presidentelected to office since 1852 has belonged to one of twopolitical parties: Republicans and Democrats. But polling data suggest that many people aren't satisfied with that either-or scenario in the voting booth. In August 2011, a Gallup survey found that 58 percent of Americans didn't think Republicans and Democrats were doing an adequate job governing the country and supported the idea of a third party to come to the rescue [source:Jones]. Nevertheless, the odds of that happening are slim, judging by third parties' collective legacy as flashes in the pan that glimmer every four years or so and quickly fade out.
Perhaps one of the best-known quotes about political third parties comes from deceased Columbia University professor and popular historian Richard Hofstadter: "Third parties are like bees. Once they have stung, they die" [source:Douthat]. Often functioning to highlight hot-button issues that major parties might not care to approach, third parties have successfully steered political discourse and lawmaking, yet largely haven't stuck around long enough to get their own candidates into office, particularly in the case of presidential elections. Nevertheless, a number of those who have attempted to reach the White House on third party tickets have persisted in public memory because, though ultimately unsuccessful, they attracted noteworthy proportions of popular votes. Not only that, the most successful third-party candidate in U.S. history is also largely responsible for the long-time reign of America's two-party political structure.
In 2008 and again in 2012, Texas Congressman Ron Paul made back-to-back runs for president.
T.J. Kirkpatrick/Getty Images
Ron Paul
Election Year: 2008
Percent of the Popular Vote: 0.03
In the 2008 presidential election, Republican Congressman Ron Paul only won 0.03 percent of the popular vote, plopping him in ninth place [source:Federal Election Commission]. Despite the slim returns, the Texas legislator has been credited with sparking the Tea Party, a widely publicized conservative third party that emerged in 2009 [source: Reeve]. Paul's vocal stance on minimizing the role of government to the point of dissolving the Federal Reserve and returning to the gold standard, as well as withdrawing military forces in foreign outposts, also re-energized the Libertarian Party, the oldest third party in the U.S. [source:Sanneh].
Hoping to score the Republican nomination for president in 2012, Paul hit the campaign trail again and spread his shrink-the-government message to larger crowds. But in May 2012, with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in an insurmountable delegate lead, Paul threw in the towel, having won noprimaries or caucuses. Now it is up to his son, Rand Paul, to continue the legacy in 2016.
Strom Thurmond couldn't muscle a win for the Dixiecrats in 1948.
George Thames/Getty Images
Strom Thurmond
Election Year: 1948
Percent of Popular Vote: 2.4
Though he left behind one of the most reviled political legacies in U.S. history, former South Carolina governor Strom Thurmond managed to win 2.4 percent of the popular vote when he ran for president in 1948. Running on a pro-segregation platform, Thurmond was the leader of the third-party States' Rights Democratic Party, better known as the Dixiecrats, which splintered from the Democratic Party when the latter endorsed racial desegregation of the military at its 1948national convention[source:New Encyclopedia of Georgia]. Appealing to states in the Deep South, Thurmond and the Dixiecrats won Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and Louisiana [source:Woolley and Peters].
Clearer political and ideological lines began to be drawn between the Democrat and Republican parties as moderates and liberals converted from Republican to Democrat. Conservatives in the Democratic Party began to move to the increasingly conservative Republican Party.
The party platform represented the openly racist views of most white southerners of the time. It opposed abolition of the poll tax while endorsing segregation and the "racial integrity" of each race. In the November election, Thurmond carried the states of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina. Although Thurmond did not win the election, he received well over a million popular votes and 39 electoral votes.
By 1952, southern Democrats had concluded that they could exercise more influence through the Democratic Party and therefore returned to the fold. They remained in the Democratic fold, restive, until the candidacy of Republican conservative Barry Goldwater liberated them in 1964 by refreshing some of the Dixiecrat ideologies and therefore accelerated the transition from a solid South for the Democrats to one for the Republicans. Strom Thurmond switched to the Republican Party that year and remained there until his death in December 2003.
Some Democrats blamed Green Party candidate Ralph Nader for Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign loss.
Matthew Cavanaugh/Getty Images
Ralph Nader
Election Year: 1996 and 2000
Percent of the Popular Vote: 0.71% & 2.74%
Ralph Nader is an American political activist who has focused in the areas of consumer protection, humanitarianism, and environmentalism. Nader came to prominence in 1965 with the publication of his book Unsafe at Any Speed, a critique of the safety record of American automobile manufacturers in general, and most famously the Chevrolet Corvair. In 1999, a New York University panel of journalists ranked Unsafe at Any Speed 38th among the top 100 pieces of journalism of the 20th century.
Nader was drafted as a candidate for President of the United States on the Green Party ticket during the 1996 presidential election. He was not formally nominated by the Green Party USA, which was, at the time, the largest national Green group; instead he was nominated independently by various state Green parties (in some states, he appeared on the ballot as an independent). However, many activists in the Green Party USA worked actively to campaign for Nader that year. Nader qualified for ballot status in 22 states garnering 685,297 votes or 0.71% of the popular vote (fourth place overall).
In the 2006 documentary An Unreasonable Man, Nader describes how he was unable to get the views of his public interest groups heard in Washington, even by the Clinton Administration. Nader cites this as one of the primary reasons that he decided to actively run in the 2000 election as candidate of the Green Party, which had been formed in the wake of his 1996 campaign.
In the 2000 presidential election in Florida, George W. Bush defeated Al Gore by 537 votes. Nader received 97,421 votes, which led to claims that he was responsible for Gore's defeat. Nader, both in his book Crashing the Party and on his website, states: "In the year 2000, exit polls reported that 25% of my voters would have voted for Bush, 38% would have voted for Gore and the rest would not have voted at all." (which would net a 13%, 12,665 votes, advantage for Gore over Bush.) When asked about claims of being a spoiler, Nader typically points to the controversial Supreme Court ruling that halted a Florida recount, Gore's loss in his home state of Tennessee, and the "quarter million Democrats who voted for Bush in Florida."
Former Alabama governor George Wallace campaigned against desegregation in 1968.
Photoshot/Getty Images
George Wallace
Election Year: 1968
Percent of the Popular Vote: 13.5
The year 1968 was a raucous enough, even without apresidential election.Race riotserupted in major U.S. cities, including Detroit, Baltimore and Chicago, and Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated in April and June, respectively. During that time, Alabama Governor George Wallace's wife also died from cancer in the midst of his campaign for the White House [source:PBS].
Having famously declared "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever," Wallace was running forpresidenton the American Independent Party ticket, which staunchly opposed desegregation and withdrawal from the Vietnam War [source:Pearson]. Harping on racist fears of integration, Wallace performed well below the Mason-Dixon line and triumphed in five Southern states, capturing a sizeable 13.5 percent of the nationwide popular vote [source:Woolley and Peters]. But as Civil Rights tensions gradually eased, Wallace's anti-minority rhetoric lost its appeal in his successive presidential attempts in 1972 and 1976 [source:Pearson].
Progressive reformer Robert "Fighting Bob" La Follette had no patience for political corruption.
FPG/Getty Images
Robert La Follette
Election Year: 1924
Percent of the Popular Vote: 16.6
While serving as a Wisconsin district attorney in 1890, Robert "Fighting Bob" La Follette was offered a bribe by a Republican state leader in exchange for La Follette stopping a court case from indicting a group of fellow legislators [source:Wisconsin Historical Society]. Outraged by the display of political corruption, La Follette began a public career of speaking out againstcorporate and political dishonestyand leapfrogged from the governorship of Wisconsin in 1900 to the U.S. Senate six years later, a post he would hold for the rest of his life. Having earned a national reputation as a reform leader and an outspoken opponent of American involvement in World War I, La Follette ran forpresidentin 1924 on the Progressive Party ticket. With 16.6 percent of the popular vote, La Follette nevertheless came in third to Democrat John W. Davis and the winning Republican Calvin Coolidge, who brought in 54 percent of the votes. La Follette died the next year.
In 1992, Ross Perot made an impressive showing at the polls for a third party candidate.
Fotosearch/Getty Images
Ross Perot
Election Year: 1992
Percent of the Popular Vote: 18.6
Independentpresidential candidateand billionaire Ross Perot suspended his 1992 campaign for three months from July to October, restarting it barely one month before Americans headed to the polls to pick among him, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton [source:Holmes]. The popular voting results indicated that the break from stump speeches and baby-kissing wasn't all that detrimental either.Having bankrolled his own bid for the White House, the wealthy Texan courted voters with promises of a balanced federal budget and a halt to deficit spending. In return, Perot wooed 18.6 percent of the vote. Stunned pundits noted that the conservative-leaning Perot had become one of the most successful third party candidates to date, but his second presidential audition in 1996 on the Reform Party ticket wasn't so rosy. Up against Bill Clinton once again, Perot ended up with only 8 percent of the votes [source:Woolley and Peters].
For many observers, Perot's campaigns confirmed much of the conventional wisdom about minor party or independent candidacies. Like previous political insurgencies, Perot's campaign was grounded in the major parties' failures to address large public concerns, and, as in the past, the major parties responded by adopting some of Perot's methods and positions in order to siphon off his supporters. Immediately after the 1992 election, both the Republicans and the Democrats made a play for Perot voters—but the Republicans seem to have been more successful. In fact, many believe that the Republican victories in the 1994 Congressional elections were rooted in a successful appeal to Perot supporters. The Republicans' "Contract with America" effectively aimed at Perot supporters who demanded greater accountability from government officials. And the Republican decision to de-emphasize social issues, such as abortion and prayer in schools, was made in hopes of appeasing Perot supporters who had been particularly irritated by what they perceived as distracting side issues. But other analysts have argued that Perot's campaign taught the major political parties another, more unsettling lesson. He demonstrated that a candidate could run an effective campaign without a political party. He managed to climb to the top of the polls by the summer of 1992 without the assistance of the elaborate party machinery formerly believed essential to political success.
After succeeding Zachary Taylor following that president's death in office, former Vice President Millard Fillmore attempted to reach the executive office again in 1856 under the American Party banner.
PhotoQuest/Getty Images
Millard Fillmore
Election Year: 1856
Percent of the Popular Vote: 21.6
Just as race relations compelled anti-desegregation politicians Strom Thurmond (1948) and George Wallace (1968) to run forpresidenton third-party tickets, the rights of black citizens was also the pivotal issue a century prior in the 1856 election. At the same time, the political landscape was undergoing a major transition. The formerly dominant Whig Party had begun dissolving, and a new, pro-abolition group called the Republican Party was on the rise to challenge the established Democratic Party, which preferred to leave slavery up to states to decide [source:Ernst and Sabato]. With that topsy-turvy political backdrop, the middle-ground American Party nominated former President Millard Fillmore, who graduated fromvice presidentto the executive seat after Zachary Taylor died in office in 1850, to campaign on its anti-immigration platform. Fillmore and his nicknamed "Know Nothings" -- a moniker that referred to the secret way in which the party was organized -- didn't hold much appeal to slave-holding Southerners but diverted enough electoral votes away from the Republicans to deliver the presidency to Democrat James Buchanan [source:Heidler, Heidler and Coles]. Maryland was the only state that sided with Fillmore and the Know Nothings.
William Jennings Bryan ran for President in 1896 on three different party tickets.
Blank Archives/Getty Images
William Jennings Bryan
Election Year: 1896
Percent of the Popular Vote: 45.8
In 1896, former Nebraska Congressman William Jennings Bryan received nominations to run forpresidentfrom not one, but three, parties: Democrats, Populists and Free Silver [source:Encyclopædia Britannica]. Having traveled around speaking publicly on progressive issues for the previous two years, Bryan wowed the audience at the 1896 Democratic National Convention with his famous speech, "Cross of Gold," which argued for broadening U.S. currency beyondgold. By stumping for inflated silver coinage, which would have been a financial boon to debt-strapped farmers, the nicknamed "Boy Orator" held the most appeal for rural and agrarian voters, while the Republicans' William McKinley drew in the urban electorate [source:USHistory.org].
In the end, the support of three political parties, including the Democrats, wasn't enough to whip the Republicans. Bryan gave McKinley a decent run for his money and went on to run as the Democratic nominee for president two more times, serve as Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of State and prosecute John Thomas Scopes for teaching evolution in the landmark Scopes Monkey Trial. Meanwhile, the 1896 loss also signaled the disbanding of the Populist Party.
A 1912 campaign button for Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party.
Blank Archives/Getty Images
Theodore Roosevelt
Election Year: 1912
Percent of the Popular Vote: 29
When Rough Rider Teddy Roosevelt first galloped into the White House as William McKinley'svice presidentin 1900, he did so as a Republican. But when he ran for office for the third time in 1912, the splintered Republicans sided with Roosevelt's 1908 presidential successor, William Howard Taft. Incensed, Roosevelt and his band of allies quickly formed a third party, the National Progressives, better known as the Bull Moose Party [source:Garber].
Up against progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson, Roosevelt campaigned aggressively until a few weeks before the election, when he narrowly survived an assassination attempt. Roosevelt was shot in the chest outside a Milwaukee hotel by a local saloon owner, and the ex-president's metaleyeglasscase in his breast pocket and 50-page speech he clutched against himself stopped the bullet from making fatal contact [source:Garber]. In true Rough Rider style, Roosevelt delivered his speech as planned that afternoon with the bullet still in his body [source:Glass]. That brand of bravado couldn't make up for the rift within the Republican Party that split votes between Roosevelt and Taft, thus surrendering the electoral advantage -- and the presidency -- to Woodrow Wilson.