Millions of Americans chant to the words "Make America Great Again" and support Donald Trump, and millions of others are in support of Hillary Clinton and her democratic ideals. However, there is a third group of people, the moderates. These Independents are assigned to neither of the two major political parties, and remain in between. In a presidential election as tense as the current one, many people feel as either side of the election doesn't appeal to them, and might be encouraged to find a third party that they feel fits their ideals. Many wonder how this happened. What created this divide of American politics? Why should they vote for a third party candidate.
There is no clear answer for this situation. Politics are such a complicated matter that you could spend months arguing over it and nothing would get done, much like our current congress. With a recent Gallop poll claiming that 43% of Americans now identify as an independent, it seems strange that American politics only seem to become more extreme. The reason for this isn't because of parties being polarized, but a flux of voter bases from moderate, to a more "extreme" stance. According to Professor Gaddies of the University of Oklahoma, political parties where once focused on fighting over control of the "median voter" (The group of voters who remain moderate on political elections). However, research done by people such as professor Keith Poole of the University of Georgia and men at voteviewblog.com examined all congressional role call votes since america's founding and have come up with a groundbreaking reason for this split of ideology.
The Median Voter has turned from a purely moderate group, to two groups on either side of the political process. Parties once had to fight to gain control of moderates, but now seek to remain control of their own "Median". They must also appeal to those more extreme, for there is more to be gained from voters who support their ideologies more, than people in the middle still undecided.
What does this mean for those stuck in the middle? Are they doomed to pick between two candidates who don't appeal to them, or could a third party candidate win a presidency? That answer isn't simple either. Voting for what you truly believe in is a very appealing choice and in a perfect world, It would be what everyone did. However, the risk of third party candidates is that they would take away votes from the major party candidate you would support, and give an advantage to their opposition. Think of the election as a High school "Class President" election. There are three people running, Jeremy who is the star football player and the most popular guy in school despite many people seeing him as a selfish jerk, Nancy who is the leader of the debate team and has countless hours of volunteer work behind her and is favored to win, and Taylor the unpopular band president, who despite being disliked by many has a strong group of friends in band. The votes are counted, and everyone is shocked by the results. Jeremy is now class president. The counts are released, and Jeremy has only won by 15 points, while Taylor has a low total of 20. By voting for their choice, those 20 students allowed the unpopular candidate, Jeremy, to win b taking away votes from Nancy. This isn't some hypothetical situation as well, it has happened as recently as 2000 in Florida. 97,488 people voted for Ralph Nader and the green party, which in turn took away votes from Al Gore and guaranteed President Bush a victory in the race.
Voicing our opinions is a blessing we have been given as Americans, and its a dangerous one as well. Though I may not agree with Senator Ted Cruz often, I believe that he is right when he said we should vote with our conscious. Is support over an unfavorable party worth the risk of having four years of a president you didn't want?
