Can a third party finally break through in America?
A couple of weeks ago, three political entities, the Forward Party, Serve America Movement and Renew America Movement, announced they would be merging, under the common name of the Forward Party.
The effort is being spearheaded by former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, former Republican New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman and former Republican Congressman David Jolly.
Their goal is to create a vehicle for voters and candidates who are seeking solutions to our country's challenges, rather than advancing an orthodox adherence to the commands of the Democratic or Republican party chieftains. The leaders of this new party recognize that Americans are dissatisfied with the increasingly venomous relationship between the two major parties.
Coupled with the dangerous polarization of our cable news outlets, the leadership of our two major parties have seldom found anything good to say about the other, nor found anything on which they could collaborate. We know that there is much that can be accomplished even on the most contentious issues if we are willing to see some good in another person's view. The Democratic and Republican party spokespeople, however, increasingly view an achievement for which the other party can claim credit as containing no good at all. That has led to a collapse of the middle, with the most leftward elements of the Democratic Party, and the faction of the Republican Party most loyal to former President Trump, dominating.
The Forward Party seeks to provide that middle.
Third parties have not fared well in national American politics. Ross Perot came closest to having an impact with 19% of the popular vote in 1992, but he did not carry a single state in his run for president, and his party dissipated.
Hence, the announcement of the new Forward Party faced some skepticism. This is despite national polling indicating 60% of American voters want a third party that avoids the rancor of the two major parties. The Public Policy Institute of California reported the same result within California six years ago, with 56% of California Democrats, 53% of California Republicans and 75% of California independents saying a third party was needed.
The skeptics' response to the Forward Party has been that, despite what voters tell pollsters, electing a candidate of a third party is hugely difficult. That is true for any electoral system where the plurality winner is elected, even if short of a majority. Presidential electors are chosen that way in 48 states. In Maine and Nebraska, electors are chosen by congressional district. For races other than president, however, four other states, including California, make the November election a run-off between the top two primary vote-getters, whatever their party. In that system, a third-party candidate has a real chance to win. The first round often includes multiple candidates from the same party.
If those candidates split the vote, and a single candidate of the Forward Party runs, the Forward Party candidate might well make it to the final contest, the top-two race in November. At that point, the Forward Party candidate would be running only against one opponent: likely a Democrat or a Republican. That situation favors the Forward Party candidate, who can realistically expect to pick up votes from the supporters of the major party whose candidates did not make it to the final two.
The emergence of the Forward Party can thus have real electoral consequences in California. For the last two years, the Common Sense Party has been registering thousands of voters in California. The Forward Party could build on that base by encouraging its supporters to register in the Common Sense Party, accelerating the official recognition of a new California party and saving duplication of effort.