"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissention, which in different ages & countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders & miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security & repose in the absolute power of an Individual: and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty." — George Washington, September 19, 1796

The above quote represents such a large reason why it is so undeniably important to understand the United States of America and the different parties. I have seen numerous articles complaining about third parties, and arguing as to why US citizens should not vote third party in the upcoming presidential election.

Now, while I understand the consequences with a Trump presidency, or even a Hillary presidency, people should (and I don't normally quote Ted Cruz, but I will here) "vote with [their] consciousness this election". After all, you only have one vote. Use it wisely.

However, I do want to make an argument here, as any tax-paying United States citizen rightfully should be able to do. My argument is not to reject any third-party options, but instead to embrace the concept of a third-party candidate running for president.

The history of the two-party system has certainly not been one of smooth sailing and perfect elections. In fact, the two-party system that we have has only been around since 1796, when Thomas Jefferson and John Adams ran against one another with the titles of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists (in a way, these two political parties could be compared to the Democratic Party and Republican Party, although really only in regards to their positions on where most of the power in the government should be--the Federalists--believed in a strong centralized government--similar to the Democrats--and the Anti-Federalists believed in each individual state having far more power than the federal government--similar to the Republican Party).

Perhaps the ultimate goal of our Founders was to get away from a country that would involve one king making every single move in regards to the nation's well-being. They refused to have the colonies operate under an oligarchy. At the same time, they did not want the country to be so heavily divided. In theory, this concept would have been perfect, but human nature would prove otherwise.

However, there were changes made to prevent this oligarchy from taking place. While it took forever to actually ratify an amendment in the Constitution that would prevent a president from running for a third term, George Washington did step down after his second term as the first president of the United States. He was optimistic, but stern with his words in his well-known Farewell Address; he warned of military involvement in other countries. He encouraged the citizens of this country to alter or make changes to the Constitution whenever it was needed in the future. He encouraged institutions that would enrich the human mind.

However, he mentioned a point that I personally believe is perhaps his most important point: reject political parties.

Political parties would cause a divide. Political parties would cause corruption. Political parties could even result in an oligarchy, as generation after generation a family could be elected to office (**cough** Clinton **cough cough**). But, most importantly, political parties would limit the power of the people because the people would now only have a certain number of options. An individual would need some sort of affiliation to run for president and successfully win the presidency, which perhaps could even be influenced by their wealth (**cough** Trump and Clinton **cough cough**).

Now, it is true that rejecting the two-party system and voting for third-party could significantly sway an election. After all, look at the 1992 presidential election. The vast amount of support garnered up by indepedent, wealthy businessman Ross Perot allowed the presidential election to be won significantly by Bill Clinton, which probably would not have happened otherwise. Ross Perot was able to boister up over 19 million popular votes, both of which were drawn from both Republican and Democrativc voters.

However, my reasoning for strong third-party support stems from the fact that I do thoroughly believe that there needs to be some sort of revolutionized change in the current political system in this country. To be honest, seeing the corruption of someone like Donald Trump and his unprofessional, emotional tirades and Hillary Clinton's disreputable record in not only her campaign but as Secretary of State of this country, we need to understand that there are other options at hand.