The Third Party

The Struggles of a
Two-Party Systems Outsiders

Photo: Clment Bardot

Johnson &
Steins Decline
Mallery Rockwell

Third-party
candidates often
decline as Election Day approaches,
and Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are no
exceptions. Even though many critics cant
stomach the major candidates for the 2017
election as leading runners, third-party
candidates still seem to fall behind.
According to a New York Times
article, an ABC News/Washington Post
poll showed that Johnson fell to 5 percent
nationally in September. John Harwood
said that most of the support Johnson lost
came from Republicans and Republicanleaning independents.
Jeffrey Stonecash is a distinguished
professor of political science at Syracuse
University. He said that third party
candidates usually lose support closer to
the election, especially if the race is close.
With popularity of the major candidates
continuing to rise, the public may view
these candidates as the only plausible
options.
Tim Chambless is an
associate professor and lecturer
for the Political Science
Department at the University
of Utah. He gave some valuable
insight into Stein and Johnson
in regards to the 2017 election,
specifically for Utah.
He said that Utah voters
initially considered Stein and
Johnson as valid runners in the election.
Utah voters, unhappy with the
presidential nominees of the two major
parties chosen at the party conventions
in July, did consider the Libertarian and
Green Party presidential candidates during
August and September as alternatives, he
said.
He said that the primary factor
for Stein and Johnsons downfall in the
election is due to their lack of money,

Photo: Marc Nozell

grassroots organization and media

exposure. Without the amount of money
the major candidates have, its not as easy
for third-party candidates to gain as much

those who were attracted to that partys

argument for limited government, he said.
He said that Johnson and Bill Weld
spoke to a small amount of attendees at the
University of Utah campus on
August 7th.
Johnson and Weld were
articulate when speaking to a
standing-room only audience
of 2,000-2,500, he said.
Chambless also pointed
out that Dr. Jill Stein never
visited the state of Utah.
Because of the powerful
influence personal interactions
have, her lack of presence could
be a reason for loss of admiration. He said
that during the summer she was polling
around 4-5%, and now is around 1.2%.
While there arent quick solutions for
third-party candidates to gain momentum,
media coverage and face-to-face
interaction are two important pieces of
campaigning. If these candidates can find
a way to make their voices louder, then
maybe they will stand a fighting chance.

Johnson and Weld were

articulate when speaking
to a standing-room only
audience of 2,000-2,500.

exposure in the media and voice their

importance.
He said that Johnsons campaign
presence never influenced most Utah
voters to fully support his side.
Although Johnsons campaign
headquarters is in Salt Lake City, his
campaign presence never caught on
with most Utah voters who regarded the
Libertarian Partys socially liberal stances
to be too much of a political stretch for

Will Uhl

The Scandal Double Standard

The 2016 presidential election has

been defined by the candidates ceaseless
shame and scandal. Both Trump and
Clinton have weathered several blows
that would instantly end a candidacy in
previous years. And while the main thirdparty candidates, Stein and Johnson, have
not had spotless campaigns, theyve been
far cleaner than the two frontrunners.
Despite this, Trump and Clinton still hold
a massive lead over Stein and Johnson.
This is for a host of reasons, but the double
standard of scandal plays an important
part.
For candidates inside the twoparty system (i.e. either Democratic
or Republican candidates,) shame and
scandal is clearly a greater-than/lesser-than
equation: the mere presence of scandal
isnt enough to disqualify a candidate,
but a disproportionate amount is. This
explains why incidents like Mitt Romneys
infamous 47% comment proved
disastrous for his candidacy - Obama
didnt have anything nearly as damaging
out at the time. Meanwhile, between
Trumps history of racist/sexist/ignorant
remarks and Clintons email issues, scandal
is so prevalent, which is worse is up to the
voter to decide.
However, candidates outside the two-

party system (e.g. Libertarian or Green

party candidates) have no such luxury.
Voters already feel uncomfortable voting
for third parties due to stigmas (Youre
throwing your vote away!) and past
irrelevance. For a third party candidate
to feel worth voting for, they dont just
need to be less scandalous than the main
candidates - they need to be spotless.
Without the advertising budget,
they cannot afford to drown out
embarrassments like Gary Johnsons
ignorance about Aleppo, or Jill Steins
ties to anti-vaccination groups. Without
participation at debates, they cannot
control their own narrative or substantially
attack any other candidate. Without a
sizable, dependable voter base, they cannot
afford to lose anyone. Because of this,
anything short of a messianic image is
insufficient.
Because of this, Evan McMullins
late entrance may have been a boon in
disguise. Little is known about him beyond
his core tenets, which appeal to a wide
demographic of moderate-right voters
who feel spurned by Trumps rhetoric. Few
if any have had time to dig up anything
substantial to tank his chances - and
frankly, its questionable whether it would
be worth the time.
Pending an unprecedented move

Photo: Paul Stein

from Americas first-past-the-post voting

system, electable third-party candidate
might as well be an oxymoron. The double
standard is so stacked against candidates
outside the two-party system, even two
vastly unpopular inside candidates arent
enough to tear enough voters to third
parties - this election is proof enough.

Steins Fall as a Candidate, Rise as a Meme

Nick Fustor

Green Party presidential candidate

Jill Stein garnered a significant amount
of support in the wake of Democratic
presidential candidate Bernie Sanders loss
to Hillary Clinton in the primary. With
similar policies to Sanders and her symbol
as an anti-establishment candidate, Stein
looked poised to take some support away
from Clinton.
While she did gain as much as 4.8
percent support in June, according to
RealClear Politics, her status has slipped
since then mainly due to questionable
policies and her status on social media.
Specifically, Stein has become one of
the more popular memes of the 2016
presidential election.
Stein has marketed herself as Dr.
Jill Stein throughout the election cycle,
and while she is a registered physician,
many have claimed that shes actually a

chiropractor for no apparent reason,

other than to poke fun at her policies.
Stein actually graduated from Harvard
University with a medical degree, but the
chiropractor claim has seen lots of interest
across Twitter and media outlets. While
its hard to believe Stein would lie about
her position in the medical field, the
memes widespread popularity has made it
difficult for some users to find the truth.
Shortly after the chiropractor story
gained momentum, it was found that
Stein released a folk album in the 1990s
which, unsurprisingly, wasnt received well.
That wasnt the end of Steins foibles this
summer. After it became clear that Stein
had a mixed opinion about whether or not
vaccines lead to autism, she claimed wi-fi
in schools might be harmful to children.
As expected, Steins already low
support has slipped to two percent. While
her drop in support is partially due to

her exclusion from the three presidential

debates and lack of serious media attention
its a sign of what social media can do
to a candidate. Young voters were Steins
main source of support early in the
summer, but once her humorous actions
were revealed, she lost all credibility as a
candidate.
Stein has become the quintessential
internet politician one that Donald
Trump and the Republican Party would
love to have somehow overtaken Clinton.
Just imagine Stein debating with Trump
about the environment, and then seeing
him walk out at a rally to one of her songs.
The reality of the election between Clinton
and Trump has been entertaining enough
but imagine the potential of a matchup
between Stein and Trump. Itll likely never
surpassed.

The Presidential Candidate Tempting Utah

Nick Fustor

Its not common for third-party

presidential candidates to garner much
support throughout an election cycle, let
alone one that enters the race in August.
But, quite surprisingly, thats what Evan
McMullin, an independent candidate from
Utah, did in the midst of the strangest
election of the past decade.
With Democratic nominee Hillary
Clinton nearly locked in to defeat
Republican nominee Donald Trump,
McMullins
surprise
candidacy came
as a shock to
everyone. A
former CIA
operations
officer, McMullin is a staunch conservative
with Mormon values a starkly different
candidate from the outlandish Trump.
With many Republicans denouncing
Trump and others looking for options
outside of Libertarian candidate Gary
Johnson, McMullin entered the race at the
perfect time.
A native of Utah, McMullin looks
poised to win the state as a growing
number of its citizens look to keep Trump
out of office. Whereas Trump is brash
and often times offensive, McMullin is the
opposite a mild-mannered, composed
40-year-old. McMullin entered the
election with an impressive resume under

his belt over 10 years in the CIA, a year

as the chief policy director of the House
Republican Conference and a seat on the
Council on Foreign Relations.
McMullin said to MSNBC that he
declared his candidacy after it became
clear to him that both Clinton and Trump
were not forward thinkers. As such, he
resigned from his position with the House
Republican Conference and set out to take
as much support away from Trump as
possible. And thats just what hes doing,

Brigham Young University, Mormons,

served church missions, and share
suspicions that Donald Trump is not really
a political conservative and are offended
by many of Trumps statements as well as
his language and manner.
Jeffrey Stonecash, distinguished
professor emeritus at the Maxwell School
at Syracuse University, said McMullin has
quickly gained support in Utah due to
Clinton and Trumps inability to connect
with Mormon voters.
Utah has
Mormons and
they tend to
be moralistic,
Stonecash said.
Both of these
candidates are
alienating the public. Each is seen as
immoral or corrupt in some way.
Freeman Stevenson of Al Jazeera
spoke to several Mormon voters in Utah,
and found that McMullins campaign
has nearly perfectly captured the culture
of voters in Utah many of whom find
Trumps brashness unsuitable for a
government official.
Some conservatives in Utah are
concerned that McMullin is splitting
the conservative vote in Utah, which
could lead to a victory for Clinton but
Stevenson found that many voters simply
wouldnt vote for Trump even if McMullin
wasnt running.

We should perceive him to be a

Mitt Romney stand-in.

although his support is mainly confined to

Utah.
FiveThirtyEights election forecast
currently projects McMullin to win 28
percent of the vote in Utah, with Trump
leading at 38 percent and Hillary at 27
percent. Tim Chambless, an assistant
professor at The University of Utah, said
McMullin gained support in Utah due to
his similarities to Mitt Romney,
To understand the sudden
emergence and rise of Evan McMullin, we
should perceive him to be a Mitt Romney
stand-in, Chambless said. That is, Mitt
Romney is very popular in Utah. Both
Romney and McMullin are graduates of

Gary Johnsons Shallow Twitter Presence

Mallery Rockwell

Gov. Gary Johnson has 380.1

k followers on Twitter-but what are
his followers seeing? Twitter can be a
risky platform to use because users are
restricted to a 140-character limit. The
way information is portrayed can be
limited, although Twitter has become a big
platform for social media. Lets take a look
at Johnsons Twitter presence.
One way Johnson has made a mark
on social media is by the continual use of
#JohnsonWeld. By repeatedly ending his
tweets with their last names combined, he
is solidifying their image as a team.
People often check twitter to see what
others are thinking during the presidential
debates. One advantageous strategy for
Johnson is live tweeting during these
debates. By doing this he can still voice his
opinions, even without being present at
the debate.
One of his tweets reads, Bill Weld
and I promise to submit a balanced
budget to Congress in the first 100 days
in office #debate and A balanced budget
demonstrates our commitment to young
people. Politicians debt is unfairly a
burden on younger generations #debate.
In addition to hearing what Clinton
and Trump have to say about the debt,
Johnsons followers can also see what he is
passionate about.

On one hand, tweets have allowed for

his information to be easy-to-read without
users having to read several paragraphs.
On October 19th Johnson tweeted,
I would sign #TPP because free trade on
net leads to more US #jobs. Higher tariffs
(taxes) means more poverty and fewer
jobs.
This tweet simplifies his explanation
for signing the TPP, making it a little
more understandable for those who are
unfamiliar with the partnership and his
stance.
On the other hand, his tweets have
shown ambiguity that requires more
explanation. For example, Johnson also
had a series of tweets that day listing eight
reasons Bill Weld and I are the alternative
you can be proud of. Among these tweets
included statements such as 2/ Fiscally

conservative and 3/ Socially inclusive.

Although these tweets may be true,
they hold no evidential grounds. This is
disadvantageous for those who dont do
much research into his campaign. One
solution to this would be to add links
to supporting evidence, showing how
Johnson is fiscally conservative and how
he is socially inclusive. Another solution
would be to simply add a fact or two as to
how this holds true.
Twitter is a valuable platform
where presidential candidates can speak
their mind. Johnson has added his own
voice to Twitter world, but should be
cautious of how he relays his information.
Nonetheless, his amount of followers
reflects the attention hes grabbed for his
campaign.

Millennials and the Third Party Candidates

Nicole Mance

Third-party candidates have been

a threat in this presidential election
particularly towards the Democratic
nominee, Hillary Clinton. However, a
study from GenForward September 2016
conducted a survey that shows she is
doing find in the group of major concern:
millennials.
While many millennials are backing
third-party candidates in record numbers,
suspected as a protest vote against Hillary
being the nominee over Bernie Sanders,
Hillary is doing alright in the subset of this
group. Nonwhite young adults are backing
Hillary while their white peers are flocking
to third-party candidates.
The survey is conducted by the
Black Youth Project at the University of
Chicago and the Associated Press-NORC

Center for Public Affairs Research. These

centers focus on minority opinions;
African American, Asian American,
and Hispanics. These non-white poll
participants in the survey showed that
their percentage of support for thirdparty candidates rests in the single digits
while the white millennials have support
reaching 15 percent.
Despite Clintons struggles with
young adults relative to her predecessor,
we do not find strong support for the
argument that third-party candidates
are winning the hearts and minds of
Millennials, the researchers note. Our
data suggests that recent reports about
Millennials support for third-party
candidates has been overstated, and that
the bulk of support for these candidates
that does exist is limited to young whites.

The race between the two major party

candidates is a much closer race between
white young adults while the Clinton
performs exponentially better among
nonwhite young adults who say they are
likely to vote in this election. 74 percent
of African American voters in that group,
71 percent of Asian Americans, and 64
percent of Latinos say they will vote for the
Democrat.
Clintons support from young
nonwhite young voters is still lower than
President Barack Obama but her numbers
among voters who actually show up to
cote may be better than the polling or
likely voters suggests. Yet Clintons biggest
challenge will come from young nonwhite
voters who sit out Election Day entirely,
not those voting for third parties.

Third-Party Votes Impact on Election Night

Guillaume Gentil

Watching the votes roll in on the

night of the election I am looking at the
top dogs. The major players who have been
running neck-and-neck this whole time,
and as Im writing this, are holding people
in the greatest of suspense. But there, on
the bottom of the page, is the face of Jill
Stein and Gary Johnson.
Close to the end of the election,
as the Democratic party in the Clinton
headquarters is filling out and the Trump
headquarters is gearing up for a massive
party I look at those little faces beneath
them. Gary Johnson has 3% of the popular
vote, taking away 3,759,975 votes away
from the two primary candidates. Jill Stein
has 1% of the popular vote, taking away
1,072,155 votes away. Other candidates are
racking in 0.7% of the votes, with 720,374
votes. In terms of the popular vote this
has been an upsetting change. At 2 A.M.
on Nov. 9, Donald Trump is only leading
Hillary Clinton by 1,183,020, only a couple
thousand votes above what candidate Jill
Stein has amassed.
How will analysts look at this date
when the count is finished? I predict that
third-party candidates will be harshly
criticized for swinging, at least the popular
vote, in favor of Donald Trump. This
speculation is dangerous because of the
intricacies involved in what the actual
identity of the voters really is. The battle
for the presidency is close and while the
primary candidates are separated by only a
couple thousand votes in the popular vote
and by a significant margin in the electoral
college the third-party candidates have
definitely affected this election.
Around 11:00 P.M. on Nov. 8, Gary
Johnson had 2% of the popular vote and

Jill Stein had 0.7%. Their number grew

in a significant way in the popular vote
which directly affects the results of the
primary candidates. Clearly the thirdparty candidates did not win a single
electoral college vote which continues a
streak that was last broken in 1968. The
electoral college system has come under
much criticism in recent years, particularly
during the hotly contested Bush v. Gore
election. It is a system that has many faults
but it is still a system that is in use and as
it is it provides no opening for third-party
candidates to thrive. The popular vote is
the most likely way for a candidate in this
diminutive field to have an impact but it is
not enough. As we roll into the late hours
of the night we know that not only has
the third-party vote failed again but it has
paralleled a significant loss of votes that
could have decisively decided this election

well before midnight.

The crowds leave the Hillary
celebration headquarters while on
the other hand the Trump celebration
headquarters is bursting with chants,
songs, and cheers. This article has rolled
over to 2:33 A.M., Nov. 9, 2016 and the
Google livestream has declared Donald
Trump the President of the United States
with 276 electoral votes and 56,891,560
popular votes. Sliding in with 48% of the
popular vote and a majority of the electoral
vote. Johnson and Stein have only gained
a couple of thousand votes at the end of
the election. The margin between Trump
and Clinton is nearly 16,000 votes, a small
margin that was not bridged by thirdparty votes. That is the impact of a thirdparty vote in the modern United States of
America.
Nov. 9, 2016 12:30 P.M. The final
numbers in the popular vote put Hillary
Clinton ahead by 238,987. Once again U.S.
political history has been affected by the
discrepancy between the electoral college
system and the popular vote. In the final
count third-party candidates pulled a total
of 6,043,378 votes, nearly 5% of the votes.
The margins for many of the major swing
states vary between 200,000 votes and
only a couple thousand. It can confidently
be said that the third party candidates
affected the 2016 election in a major way.