Third-party Candidates Research Articles

The Role of Online and Geographically Distant Social Networks in Political Decision-Making: Empirical Evidence from the 2016 United States Presidential Election

Social ties play a prominent role in individuals’ political decision-making. They influence partisan defections, political participation, voting decisions, and political information acquisition. Much of the literature focuses on personal social networks or geographically close networks. Yet one’s social network might also include acquaintances or other connections in more distant places that are maintained via online networks. In this study, we exploit Facebook’s Social Connectedness Index, which reflects social connections across the United States, and we investigate the role of social connectedness in political decision-making among individuals who are located across distant geographical regions. Our results suggest that social connectedness between counties has a homogenizing effect on voting for the same presidential candidate, either Democratic or Republican. On the other hand, social connectedness is likely to have a differentiating effect on voting for an independent or a third-party candidate. Moreover, this effect is moderated by the socioeconomic characteristics of the counties, such as education, race, population density, household income, industry, and gender composition.

Give My Child a Label: Strategies of Epistemic Corroboration in Case-Building within Child Mental Health Assessments

Child mental health services are in rising demand, but increasingly overstretched and difficult for families to access. This article examines rhetorical techniques used by parents seeking a mental health diagnosis for their child. Using recordings of consultations from a child mental health clinic (UK) with 28 families, analysis focuses on the use of ‘epistemic corroboration’, a strategy by which third-party candidate diagnoses are reported to support the parents’ case. That is, parents draw upon the expertise of non-present professional persons to strengthen their proposed diagnostic claims. Conversation analysis shows how this epistemic corroboration is reported by parents and received by mental health practitioners. Conclusions illustrate that mental health diagnosis for children is actively pursued by parents as they navigate labelling. This has implications for understanding the dilemmas created for families of possible medicalisation of their child to achieve the levels of support being sought.

Joseph Smith for President: The Prophet, the Assassins, and the Fight for American Religious Freedom

Joseph Smith for President: The Prophet, the Assassins, and the Fight for American Religious Freedom

Krzysztof Bosak’s Nomination Acceptance Speech – Transposing an American Genre into Polish Political Rhetoric

The article combines methods pertaining to Rhetorical Genre Studies and Discourse-Historical Approach in order to provide a comprehensive analysis of Krzysztof Bosak’s nomination acceptance speech which he delivered during the 2020 Confederation presidential primaries. The discussed genre of political speech is rarely realized in European contexts. Given various differences between the American and the Polish political systems, Bosak did not follow every pattern of the standard variant of the genre. Rather his speech appears to be more similar to a nomination acceptance speech of a third-party candidate. Overall, Bosak emerged as the leader of a divided and heterogeneous party, which was not given much attention by mainstream media. The paper investigates how these factors contributed to the structure and content of the speech. Moreover, recent decades have seen a rapid rise in significance of (far) right-wing movements in Europe. As Confederation is a relatively new political formation, there is a gap in research regarding the properties of its discourse. Thus, the present paper compares the discourse of the coalition with practices of politics of fear (Wodak, 2021).

Third-party candidates, newspaper editorials, and political debates

This study examines how newspapers in Virginia and the Washington Post covered the 2013 gubernatorial campaign of Libertarian Robert Sarvis in their editorials. In addition to comparing coverage volume and type, the study analyzes how the newspapers responded to his exclusion from the televised gubernatorial debates. The study found that newspaper editorials treated Sarvis like other third-party candidates, but some supported his inclusion in the political debates.

Ranked-Choice Voting and the Potential for Improved Electoral Performance of Third-Party Candidates in America

Proponents of ranked-choice voting highlight a number of arguments for why such an approach to elections should be adopted. One major argument is that ranked-choice voting will encourage voters to support more third-party or independent candidates and break the electoral stranglehold of the two main parties in America. Considering approximately two-thirds of Americans want a third major party this argument may prove appealing to American voters, but there is currently no empirical evidence to support such claims. In this project, we explore a theory of why ranked-choice voting may increase voter support for third-party or independent candidates and test the argument that ranked-choice voting (RCV) will improve the fortunes of third-party candidates using a survey experiment. We find significant support for the claim that ranked-choice voting increases support for third-party candidates.

Why Donald Trump Should Be a Fervent Advocate of Using Ranked-Choice Voting in 2024

ABSTRACTThis article builds on work by Devine and Kopko (2021) and Lacy and Burden (1999) who estimated a probit model of candidate choice from nationally representative survey data to determine the second choice of third-party voters. Using this model on 2020 election data, we show that the Libertarian candidate Jo Jorgenson probably cost Donald Trump victory in at least two states: Arizona and Georgia. Additionally, the popular-vote margin enjoyed by Joe Biden could have been between 260,000 and 525,000 fewer votes, using conservative estimates. The motivation for this article is to provide contrary evidence for two main misconceptions. First, that third-party candidates are “spoiling” elections for the Democrats. Our evidence clearly shows that third parties have the potential to hurt either of the two main parties; however, in 2020, it was Donald Trump who was hurt the most, although not consequentially. Second, some reformers believe that ranked-choice voting benefits the Democrats; again, we show that—all else being equal—in the 2020 presidential election, it was the Republicans who would have benefited by the change in rules because the majority of third-party votes went to the Libertarian candidate, whose voters prefer Republicans over Democrats 60% to 32%.

Why Donald Trump Should be a Fervent Advocate of Using Rank-Choice Voting in 2024

This article builds off work by Devine and Kopko (2021) and Lacy and Burden (1999) who estimate a probit model of candidate choice from nationally representative survey data to determine the second choice of third-party voters. Using this model on 2020 election data, we show that the Libertarian candidate Jo Jorgenson probably cost Donald Trump victory in at least two state – AZ and GA. Additionally, the popular vote margin enjoyed by Joe Biden could have been between 260,000 and 525,000 votes less, using conservative estimates. The motivation of this paper is to give contrary evidence for two main misconceptions. First, that third-party candidates are “spoiling” elections for the Democrats. Our evidence clearly shows that third-parties have the potential to hurt either of the two main parties, but in 2020, it was Donald Trump who was hurt most; though not consequentially. Second, some reformers believe that Rank Choice Voting benefits the Democrats; again, we show that, all else being equal, in the presidential election of 2020, it was the Republicans that would have benefited by the change in rules, since the majority of third-party votes are going to the Libertarian candidate, and whose voters prefer Republicans over Democrats 60% to 32%.

Federal Political Contribution Characteristics of Radiation Oncologists in the United States from 2003 to 2018

The health care industry has many stakeholders who seek relationships within government to ensure certain interests are considered in the legislative process. This study characterized the federal political contributions of US radiation oncologists (ROs). Public finance data from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) containing self-identified ROs' contributions to a federal candidate or committee were obtained from 2003 to 2018. Contribution recipients were classified as a political action committee (PAC) or a presidential, Senate, or House candidate. Political parties of recipients were based on FEC designations. For PACs, political parties of recipients were based on spending patterns to political parties in each 2-year election cycle or, when unavailable, overall spending patterns of greater than 50% to 1 political party, as detailed by the Center for Responsive Politics. Data were analyzed temporally, and Spearman's rho was used to assess trends. From 2003 to 2018, the FEC reported a total of 31,646,000 federal political contributions. Exactly 4617 federal political contributions were made from 1021 unique self-identified ROs, totaling $3,350,747. The number of ROs making contributions ranged from 56 in 2005 to 600 in 2016 (mean, 289 ± 191.4 ROs yearly), with a mean annual contribution of $209,422. Of all RO dollars, 61.5% went to Democrats, 37.5% to Republicans, and 1.0% to third-party candidates. Most RO dollars (81.0%) went to PACs rather than candidates, with the majority of those PAC dollars (50.2%) directed toward the American Society for Radiation Oncology Political Action Committee. There was a positive annual trend in number of donors by year (ρ = 0.83, P < .0001) as well as RO contributions to the House (ρ = 0.58, P < .02), Senate (ρ = 0.58, P < .02), Democrats (ρ = 0.81, P < .001), Republicans (ρ = 0.66, P < .006), third-parties (ρ = 0.87, P < .001), PACs (ρ = 0.85, P < .0001), and overall (ρ = 0.8, P < .001). There was not a significant trend in contributions to presidential candidates (ρ = 0.71, P = .06). ROs' federal political contributions have significantly increased over the last decade and a half. This growth overwhelmingly represents contributions to specialty-focused PACs and both Democratic and Republican congressional candidates.

Bayesian Trivariate Analysis of an Opinion Poll: With Application to the Kenyan Pollss

There has been a growing interest by political pundits and scholars alike to predict the winner of the presidential elections. Although forecasting has now quite a history, we argue that the closeness of recent Kenyan presidential opinion polls and the wide accessibility of data should change how presidential election forecasting is conducted. We present a Bayesian forecasting model that concentrates on the national wide pre-election polls prior to 2013 general elections and considers finer details such as third-party candidates and self-proclaimed undecided voters. We incorporate our estimators into WinBUGS to determine the probability that a candidate will win an election. The model predicted the outright winner for the 2013 Kenyan election.

Containing the Third-Party Voter in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election

Third-party candidates in the United States routinely see a decline in support in the final weeks of presidential campaigns. While political scientists attribute this partially to Duverger’s Law, many communication scholars have tied this collapse to media coverage that frames third-party candidates as fringe outsiders, longshots, and spoilers. This study extends these explanations of third-party failure by describing the rhetorical containment of third-party voters. Based on a case study of the 2016 presidential election and public debate about supporters of Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, the essay suggests such voters face a form of marginalization that portrays them as intruders in a two-party race, as immature and uninformed, and responsible for eventual victors, while presenting them a false choice of winning by sacrificing their cause.

Awkward Independents: What Are Third-Party Candidates Doing on Twitter?

ABSTRACTPrevious literature on partisan campaign behavior shows that third-party candidates do not have the same presence online as major-party candidates, and these differences have been linked regularly to campaign finance. Twitter, however, has changed the online campaigning game. Because Twitter essentially is free, third-party candidates can even the playing field with major-party candidates who have more financial resources. The question asked in this article is whether this is actually the case. Evans, Cordova, and Sipole (2014) showed that in 2012, third-party candidates were less likely to have accounts on Twitter; however, those who had accounts tweeted more often than major party candidates. This article updates those findings to consider the behavior of third-party candidates during the 2014 and 2016 congressional races. Using a dataset of all candidates for both the US House and the US Senate, we show that the gap has begun to close between major- and minor-party candidates on Twitter. Third-party candidates, however, continue to have a different way of communicating with their followers on Twitter when compared to Democrats and Republicans.

Selling yourself: a preliminary analysis of political candidates as marketers and entrepreneurs

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to view political candidates as products in a market competing over quality via advertising. Consequently, the Austrian argument against restrictions on product advertising can be applied to political markets as well. The foremost conclusion is a disproportionately negative effect of campaign finance restrictions on lesser-known incumbents and third-party candidates. A counterargument is also presented that campaign finance restrictions may solve a prisoner’s dilemma.Design/methodology/approachThe author provides an initial test of these hypotheses with data from US Senate races occurring before and after the passage of the McCain-Feingold Act of 2002.FindingsEmpirical results show a strong incumbency advantage, but no disproportionate harm to lesser-known candidates or third parties from the passage of the act.Originality/valueThe paper provides a new perspective on the role of the political candidate and purpose of campaign advertising. The first pass empirics suggest, however, that only a major revision in campaign advertising rules could significantly alter the predictors of challenger vote shares.

Book Review: The American Political Party System: A Reference Handbook

The American Political Party System: A Reference Handbook brings together readable, informative essays about the formation and influence of and controversies surrounding political parties in the United States; profiles of significant people and organizations; responsibly argued opinion essays from a variety of perspectives; and important primary-source documents and data. Major sections include “Background and History,” “Problems, Controversies, and Solutions,” “Perspectives,” “Profiles,” and “Data and Documents.” Examples of subsections and entries include “The Transformative Election of McKinley and the Progressive Era, 1896–1932,” “Structural Barriers or Impediments to Third-Party Candidates,” “Make America Great Again PAC,” “MoveOn.org,” “David Koch (1935–),” “Harry Reid (1939),” “Jill Stein (1950–),” “Donald Trump’s Proposed Immigration Policies,” “Election Results, 2016 Presidential Vote, by Select Group Categories,” and “Millard Fillmore’s Speech, June 26, 1856, on American Party Principles.”

Does Fusion Undermine American Third Parties? An Analysis of House Elections from 1870 to 2016

Many third-party scholars argue that fusion, or the co-nomination of a single candidate by multiple parties, strengthens American third parties. They argue that a widespread use of fusion in the late nineteenth century fueled third-party support, that the prohibition of fusion by most states around 1900 undermined third parties, and that the continued use of fusion in New York State is a primary reason why third parties remain strong there. In this paper, which is based on a district-level analysis of all elections to the House of Representatives since 1870, I argue the opposite. In recent elections, third-party candidates have fared worse, not better, in fusion states, and the historical evidence shows that a widespread use of fusion has consistently led to the destruction of third parties. The evidence presented here suggests that the primary impact of fusion is that it helps major parties co-opt third parties, and therefore, the more effective strategy for third parties would be to instead challenge the major parties more aggressively. The paper also suggests, on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the Caucus for a New Political Science, how statistically driven research can be better integrated into the Caucus’s mission to make the study of politics more relevant for progressive change.

Remotivating the Black Vote: The Effect of Low-Quality Information on Black Voters in the 2016 Presidential Election and How Librarians Can Intervene

AbstractIn a phenomenon that was surprising to many, given the racially charged nature of the 2016 presidential election, black voter turnout was significantly lower than the previous two elections. Donald Trump’s victory is attributable to many factors, one of which was the lower participation of black voters in several swing states. To a lesser extent, black support for third-party candidates also aided Trump’s victory. The lower black turnout itself is attributable to several factors, but one factor specifically in the LIS realm was the prevalence of low-quality information and rhetoric and a susceptibility that some black voters had to this low-quality information and rhetoric. Librarians have a stake and a role in black voter participation. This article will present two specific tactics and other general methods for how librarians can better inform black voters and help motivate them to participate in the process.

Constrained by Duality: Third-Party Master Narratives in the 2016 Presidential Election

The 2016 presidential election saw the rise and fall of third-party candidates Jill Stein and Gary Johnson. This essay proposes that such third-party candidates are challenged in navigating the dichotomous nature of the myth of the American Dream that serves as the basis of party master narratives. Suggesting that third-party candidates attempt to create alternative narratives through what Rushing and Frentz called dialectical transformation and dialectical synthesis, the essay examines how such strategies were put to use by Stein and Johnson, and how they demonstrate a significant disadvantage for third parties.

Spoilers? Evaluating the Logic Behind Partisan Disaffiliation Requirements for Independent and Third-Party Candidates

Abstract In this article, we evaluate the rationale behind partisan disaffiliation laws, which prevent a candidate from running as an independent or from switching parties if they have not adequately severed their ties to an existing party. One prominent justification for these laws is that they help prevent voter confusion, which may result in the most preferred candidate losing. Utilizing a database of state legislative elections from 1968 to 2014, we categorize independent and third-party candidates into two groups: those who have run in the past as a Democrat or Republican, whom we refer to as former major-party candidates (FMPs), and those who have always run as a non-major party candidate (ANMs). The findings reveal that the latter appear less strategic about where to run, and they are unlikely to run again. In contrast, FMPs are much more likely to have held state legislative office and are more likely to have run multiple times; they are also more strategic, running under conditions that are advan...

Ballot Reform and the Decline of Third Parties in State Legislatures

While it has been suggested that the original Australian ballot reforms of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries may have had a detrimental effect on later third-party success in US elections, others have observed that many ballot laws ‘explain very little of the variance in either the number of minor party candidacies or the vote for them’. While there is much debate about the effects of these laws on electoral outcomes, a limitation of past research is an emphasis on statewide and federal elections, where many third-party candidacies are ‘agenda-setting’ rather than ‘office-seeking’ efforts. This research examines the effects of the original Australian ballot laws on state legislative elections, where office-seeking third-party candidates had a proven record of electoral success. The effects of initial reform adoption, straight ticket provisions, ballot form, prohibitions against ballot fusion, and the inclusion of write-in options on the ballot are tested in time-series Tobit models of the percentage of state house seats won by third-party candidates from 1870 to 1920. The results of the analysis suggest that the specific provisions included in these ballot laws had a statistically significant and substantial effect on later third-party success in state legislative elections.

Third Party and Independent Presidential Candidates: The Need for a Runoff Mechanism

This paper reviews the history of presidential elections, those in the nineteenth as well as the twentieth centuries, make the case that third-party candidates have determined which major-party candidate won the election far more frequently than is usually recognized. It is not just Ralph Nader in 2000, but many other instances, most especially the three-way split between Wilson, Roosevelt, and Taft in 1912. Based on this history, the paper argues that America needs some sort of runoff mechanism for presidential elections, either a second-round system like that employed by France and most other democracies with presidential (rather than parliamentary) governments, or Instant Runoff Voting. The paper then explains why and how, in the absence of a constitutional amendment, it would be feasible for each state to make its own independent determination to use Instant Runoff Voting pursuant to its authority under Article Two of the U.S. Constitution to determine the method of appointing the state's presidential electors.