4 of 14

Write now Article Tools

1912. 1924. 1948. 1968. These years all have one thing in common: a "third party" candidate won electoral votes. In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive party grabbed votes. In 1924,Taft (A republican) came in 3rd. In 1948, J. Strom Thurmond (Remember him? Longest serving member of the Senate, died at over 100 years of age.) proved that a third party candidate could take electoral votes. And in 1968, George Wallace took 46 Electoral votes, and 9,000,000 plus votes which could have turned the tide on Nixon. In the 40 years since, there have been 3rd party candidates. (general information from the Information Please Almanac website) But not one of them has been able to eke out an electoral vote. But 2008 is showing signs of reviving a third party which could really throw the nation into chaos. This is a matter not so much of "what if", but "when."

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are locked in a battle for delegates. The "Super delegates" are bound to decide who becomes the nominee of the Democratic Party. If either one wins and the other doesn't join the ticket, the potential is there for a third party-one with enough clout and enough votes to grab the presidency.

Let's assume, for a moment, that Hillary does not take the nomination. And that she has made it clear that her goal is not the office of V.P., but the top office. She immediately forms a third party, one with enough power to get her on the ballot in every state. There are enough "die-hard" Hillary supports to join her and keep the votes from Obama. McCain is likely to show well, even with his position on Iraq. The proper V.P. running mate will make it tough for the Democrats, but if Obama has to battle both Clinton and McCain, his effort is likely to go for naught.

It takes only the top 11 most populous states to win an election. Florida, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, California, Texas, Illinois, Georgia, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Ohio are ten of those states. Their total: 281 electoral votes, 11 more than what is needed. (www.FEC.gov for Electoral vote quantities)

Let's say Hillary wins Arkansas and New York. Florida and Arizona we'll give to McCain. Obama takes Illinois and Georgia. Its a dead heat, 37 for McCain, 37 for Clinton, 36 for Obama. California is likely to go to the DFL this year, the question is Clinton, or Obama? I consider how the candidates did, I give it to Clinton. This puts her in at 92 electoral votes. McCain has 37. Obama has 36. Since this is 165 Electoral votes, it leaves only 373 to go, and SOMEONE has to get to 270. While it is mathematically feasible to do so, it's unlikely. And if the split is too "even" between Clinton and Obama, McCain could gather California to his camp. A candidate really needs to win 6 of the big states to secure a victory. The best bets are Illinois, Texas, New York, California, Pennsylvania, and Florida. But if those have been divided-and a third party is in the game-the situation changes.

If Hillary remains in the race as a third party candidate, and if she is able to gather at least 25% of the popular vote with wins in New York and Arkansas-it's a horse race. The same picture applies if Obama is shrugged off and decides to join the race as a third party candidate.

This could be the first time in over 100 years that the House of Representatives decides. And this means it would be decided by one vote per state.

What a mess. And yet, typically, no third party can get enough electoral votes because the people will think their votes "wasted" if they vote for a third party. But people can buck the trends, confound traditions, and just generally flummox things up.

Don't look back, folks. Something is gaining on us.

Learn more about this author, C. Buckett.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Third-party politics in America: History and future?
We want to hear your view. Write now!