March 15, 2024 • 49 mins
On this episode of The Middle, we're asking you: is it time for a strong third party in American politics? Jeremy is joined by former Alabama Senator Doug Jones and Dr. Julia Azari, a political scientist at Marquette University. The Middle's house DJ Tolliver joins as well, plus callers from around the country. #election #thirdparty #electoralcollege #rankedchoicevoting #Trump #Biden
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Welcome to the middle.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm Jeremy Hobson here with Tolliver and Taliver. Are you
ready for Trump? Biden too? Lost in New York?
Speaker 3 (00:12):
You know, I'm so ready. But I've got to say,
no sequel is ever better than the original. I don't know, man,
I'm nervous.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Trump Biden two back in the habit. Okay, Well, here
we are. After the Georgia primaries. The two major contenders
for this year's presidential election are set.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
Yet again.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
We're looking at a contest between former President Donald Trump
on the Republican side and President Joe Biden on the
Democratic side. But there is also a somewhat crowded field
of third party options this year. There's Robert F. Kennedy Junior.
There's Cornell West and Jill Stein on the left. On
the right, the Libertarian Party will choose its presidential candidate soon,
(00:50):
and there could be a candidate from the Group No Labels.
But do any of these candidates actually have a shot
at winning the presidency or will they be potential spoilers,
people who might siphon off just enough votes to throw
the election to one of the two major party candidates.
We're going to talk about that this hour. But first,
last week we asked you what your state of the
(01:11):
Union is and a lot of you based your responses
on the state of the economy. Here is what one listener,
just one had to say.
Speaker 4 (01:20):
My name is Jack from Tennessee. And as far as
the economy, I know that it's not super great, but
I mean, let's look at this. I mean, do we
forget that Trump started a trade war and put like,
what was it, twenty five percent tariff on Chinese goods?
Did that not kick off inflation right there? And hasn't
everything since then been kind of reactionary? Or am I
(01:43):
just crazy? Either way? I mean, I understand that the
economy is like a train. You know, it doesn't start
moving very fast. It doesn't stop on a dime. You know,
it's it takes actions in a long time for those
actions to you know, make a change. I feel that
we're doing doing better in a sense, but at the
same time, it's not super great, but it could definitely
(02:06):
be worse.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Well, big thanks to everyone who called in last week.
So now to our question this hour, is it time
for a strong third party candidate in America? Or a
third party candidates nothing more than spoilers, Tolliver, how can
people reach us?
Speaker 3 (02:19):
You can call us at eight four four four Middle
that's eight four four four six four three three five
three or right in at Listen to the Middle dot com.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
So now let's meet our panel.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
Joining us from the WBHM studios in Birmingham, Alabama, former
Alabama Senator Doug Jones.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Doug Jones, Welcome to the Middle.
Speaker 5 (02:34):
Thanks Jarem, it's great to be with you tonight.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
I appreciate And from the WUWM studios in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
Doctor Julia Azari.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
Professoral political science professor at Marquette University.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
Professor Zori welcome to you.
Speaker 6 (02:50):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Well, and before we get to the calls, let me
just ask each of you some questions, Professor. A recent
Reuters IPSOS poll found sixty seven percent of respondent said
they are tired of seeing the same candidates in the
presidential elections and want someone new. Is twenty twenty four,
in your view, the year when a third party candidate
could actually have a shot at the presidency.
Speaker 6 (03:11):
I mean, this is a that's a really tall order
for a third party candidate to have a shot at
the presidency. And you've got to win, of course, a
majority in the electoral college to get to that point.
I don't think that that's I don't think that's very likely.
But it is the case that third parties tend to
be the way that people express their dissatisfaction with their
(03:32):
mainstream options, and that could be a phenomenon in twenty
twenty four.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
And Senator Jones, I mean, you were in the Senate
between twenty eighteen and twenty twenty one when there was
a lot of dysfunction in our two party systems. You
saw it up close and personal. It's arguably worse.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Now.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
Is it reasonable do you think for Americans to want
other options?
Speaker 7 (03:51):
Is it reasonable to want other options? Sure, it's always
reasonable to want other options. The question is is that
option got a snowballs can in hell of winning?
Speaker 5 (04:01):
And they don't.
Speaker 7 (04:02):
A third party has absolutely an independent candidate has absolutely
no chance.
Speaker 5 (04:08):
It's pyeing the sky.
Speaker 7 (04:09):
As a professor said, this is it's a winner take
all kind of thing. When you're talking about the electoral
votes in every state. It's not proportional. It does winter
take all in every state except Maine and Nebraska. And
so with a winner take all for electors in the
electoral college. You've got to get two hundred and seventy
electoral of votes to win, and it can't be done now.
(04:31):
I don't even think these independents and third parties may
not even be on enough ballots in enough states to
combine if they want every state to get to seventy.
But it's just in today's world. And Jeremy and the
professor teaches this, she knows better than I do. Historically
there have been parties that come and go, but for
the last one hundred and fifty years or so, America
(04:52):
has been Democrats and Republicans.
Speaker 5 (04:54):
And it's a two It's.
Speaker 7 (04:55):
Been a two party system for a couple of hundred years.
It's going to remain that way. Our system, to me,
is set up that way and that and that's why nobody,
no one else can win well.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
And Professor Zari, you know, Doug Jones just brought up
the electoral college. There are a lot of things that
just make it very difficult for a third party. The
system is almost stacked against a third party making it happen,
including ballot access.
Speaker 6 (05:20):
Yeah, that's true. I mean there's a couple of components
to this problem. Right on the one hand, we have,
just as a former seditor pointed out, a lot of
winner take all elements to our system that make it
really difficult for multiple parties to kind of sustain themselves.
The other thing I would note though, is, of course
it's really difficult to win the presidency. Of course, the
(05:42):
two parties control ballot access, and in many states it's
difficult to get on the ballot. But the other piece
of that is that the presidency is a tough place
to start. That tends to be that has tended to
historically been the place where third party movements have been
able to recruit th kind of a charismatic or well
(06:02):
known candidate or somebody who's breaking off from one of
the two major parties because of some very specific policy
oriented frustration. And so it makes sense that the presidency
would be sort of a place to launch that protest candidacy.
But if you wanted to really see more, more choice
and more flexibility in the party system, the place to
do it is locally, and that's a place where it
(06:23):
would be possible, i think, for even for multiple parties
potentially to sustain themselves over time. But the presidency it's
a very high stakes contest and it has a lot
of moving parts. You have to run successfully in a
lot of states, gain ballot access in a lot of states.
It's just a very difficult, difficult kind of campaign to
(06:43):
pull off.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
Let's get to the phones, because we've got some calls
coming in Basel Is joining us from Houston, Texas.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Welcome to the middle Go ahead. What do you think.
Speaker 8 (06:54):
I think we desperately need a cert candidate right now.
It's the only way for this country not to end
up like every other great empire falling apart. I've lived
about twenty years of my life in Syria before I
came to the United States. Obviously I left because of
(07:15):
the war and the politics that I'm seeing right now.
This rhetoric, politicized rhetoric, is what I saw in the
Middle East.
Speaker 9 (07:28):
And so.
Speaker 8 (07:30):
The fact that in twenty sixteen, the options were either
Trump or Hillary Clinton, and we already had Bill Clinton
served before his president So where we're seeing this family
type of presidential candidates is what disturbs me.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
And are you worried at all though about the idea
of a third party candidate being a spoiler puzzle?
Speaker 8 (08:02):
Honestly spoiling what because everybody is set up. Nobody wants
Trump versus Biden. Everybody wants somebody new. The fact that
we can get somebody new is what the spoiler is.
We already know that it's going to be Trump versus
Biden because of the way the system is set up,
and whoever wins is going to be a loss for
the country, for the people. Nobody wants to either trumpter Biden.
(08:24):
Why can't we get somebody new? That does it have
to escalate that people have to go I and just
to get what they want?
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Bozzil, thank you so much for that call. Let me
take that to Senator Jones.
Speaker 7 (08:34):
Well, I just I disagree with him on the very
front end, but nobody wants somebody I mean, Joe Biden
had an incredible support among Democrats. You know all of
these polls that people here Jeremy are saying, would you
consider a third party? Would you consider I'm not real
happy with Are you really happy with these folks? Well, okay, I'll.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Give him that.
Speaker 7 (08:55):
Joe Biden is not the young spras self that he
used to be when I first met him forty something
years ago. But the fact of the matter is that
Democrats overwhelmingly put him into where he is. And the
fact is that a lot of people could have had
some choices. They did have choices in the Republican primary,
but they chose Donald Trump. There were any number of
(09:17):
people that they could have come out to vote for
and they didn't.
Speaker 5 (09:20):
So I understand how people feel. I get that.
Speaker 7 (09:25):
But at the end of the day, I think that
people will gravitate back toward their respective positions and maybe
the country does want somebody and new, but that's not
going to be this year.
Speaker 5 (09:39):
And that's the hand where dealt.
Speaker 7 (09:40):
And I don't think any third party, including Basil, was
concerned about the family. We've got a Kennedy in there.
They've just been much. Is anybody well, this is not
going to.
Speaker 5 (09:51):
Be the year?
Speaker 2 (09:52):
What do you think, professor? And by the way, speaking
of the Kennedy and their Robert F. Kennedy, he's polling
in some places, you know, fifteen percent of the polls,
and many people think that's just because of his name recognition.
Speaker 6 (10:05):
That's probably true. I think name recognition is a big
part of it. And that actually speaks to some of
the dynamics that the caller is talking about here about
having political families, about the fact that even if and
I actually agree with with Senator Jones that that Biden
and Trump are both pretty popular among the partisans of
(10:26):
their respective parties. And I know that that's not the
typical narrative that we hear, but I've sort of looked
into these polls and that's that's pretty much the case
that they're doing well.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
They're doing well in their primaries among Democrats for Biden
and Republicans for Trump.
Speaker 6 (10:40):
They are. Yeah, and also if you look at at
their approval and favorability within their parties, So yeah, But
you know, nevertheless, right, why isn't there more Why wasn't
there more contestation? Why isn't it easier to contest an
incumbent president? That really gets at, I think some dynamics
in our system where it takes a really long time time,
a lot of money, a lot of name recognition to win.
(11:03):
And so I do think even though I think it's
not very realistic that a third party candidate is going
to win the presidency this year or anytime soon, I
think that it's important to talk about these dynamics because
it is getting at real aspects of our political system
that do seem kind of the word that academics like
to use is ossified right, difficult to difficult to change.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
You know, Tolliver.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
If you look back over the last one hundred years,
there have been three somewhat successful third party candidates, most
recently back in nineteen ninety two.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
Yeah, and ninety two, Ross Perot ran for the presidency.
He ran again in ninety six as an independent candidate.
And here he is addressing a crowd of supporters doing
his during his ninety six campaign.
Speaker 6 (11:43):
Do you want a government that comes at you from Washington?
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Or do you want a government that comes from you?
Speaker 10 (11:50):
Okay?
Speaker 11 (11:52):
Who do the people in Washington work for?
Speaker 1 (11:56):
Who pays their salaries?
Speaker 3 (12:01):
I couldn't really tell what they were saying.
Speaker 1 (12:02):
It's just like it's hard to hear the response from
the crowd.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
Perok got almost twenty percent of the popular vote in
nineteen ninety two, meaning Bill Clinton was able to win
the presidency with just forty three percent of the popow.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
Wow, and that was in nineteen ninety two. It feels
like it was just yesterday. Six.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
Well, we will be right back with more of the
middle in a moment. This is the middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson.
If you're just tuning in the Middle is a national
call in show. We're focused on elevating voices from the
middle geographically, politically, and philosophically, or maybe you just want
to meet in the middle. This hour, we're asking is
it time for a strong third party option in American politics?
(12:37):
Or are third parties just spoilers?
Speaker 3 (12:39):
You can call us with your thoughts at eight four
four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four
three three five three. You can also write to us
at Listen to the Middle dot com or on social media.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
I'm joined by former Alabama Senator Doug Jones, a Democrat,
and political scientist Julia Azari at Marquette University. And the
phones are lighting up, So let's go to Robert, who
is outside Greensboro, North Carolina. Robert, Welcome to the Middle.
Speaker 12 (13:02):
Go ahead, they there.
Speaker 8 (13:05):
I just wanted to say thank you so much for
this show. When I heard the promo earlier, I got
really psyched and I actually canceled my plans. But I've
been an independent my whole life, and I've wanted a
mainstream third party forever. And all I was going to
say is, I think the things that it's going to
take in my opinion, is media You guys are the
(13:28):
first media pretty much that I've heard, like No Labels
announced they're gonna you know, they made their big decision
they're going to run a candidate, and it barely made
the news. I told my mom, she watches TV all
the time and she's never even heard of No Labels,
you know, which is which is pretty crazy, the lack
of media coverage.
Speaker 5 (13:47):
But they have.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
Yeah, to be clear, they have not found a candidate
for No Labels yet. Somebody will agree to run on
that ticket, right.
Speaker 8 (13:55):
Right, But they did in this that one hundred percent
for sure that there they are going to put fourth
candidates And what I understand I could be wrong, but
within the next two weeks that they're going to announce
both a president and vice president together is the way
I understand it. But just a real quick lastly, I
just wanted to say it's going to take independence. You know,
we outnumber Democrats and Republicans though you know the media
(14:18):
never tells you that, but we have to coalesce around
the candidates. If we have a splinter group that wants
Nicky Haley, spinner group that wants Robert Kennedy, you know,
obviously it's not going to work.
Speaker 9 (14:30):
My question to.
Speaker 8 (14:31):
You guys is how does No Labels or anybody else
at this point make sure that they're on every state
ballot this year because I know they're you know, the
mainstream parties are going to be fighting that.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
Robert, thank you for that call.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
I'm going to take that to the professor because it
gets to the issue of ballot access. I mean, No
Labels I think right now, is on something like thirteen ballots.
Not a lot of swing states in there either, But
how do they get on ballots if they want to
be on ballots and if they actually get a candidate
at some point that's going to be.
Speaker 6 (15:01):
A different answer in fifty different states actually fifty one
with the District of Columbia, and I don't know the
ballot access rules off the top of my head in
all fifty one. So there will be some states where
they are and some where they are and it's pretty
late in the game. So that's if they don't have it.
If they don't have it in the works, I mean,
this is one of the challenges of gaining access as
(15:25):
a minor party is you have to navigate all those
different rules. And it's true that the major parties in
some states will have made that ballot access different difficult,
not everywhere.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
Let's go to Lori in Boulder, Colorado. Louri, welcome to
the middle, Go ahead, thank you.
Speaker 13 (15:44):
So I am against having a third party this coming
year because unfortunately voted for John Anderson back a while
ago and deprived Jimmy Carter of being re elected and
that ushered in the era of Ronald Reagan. So I
(16:06):
really regret my vote back then.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
Wow.
Speaker 13 (16:09):
And so I think that a third party would be
disastrous for half of the country.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
Laurie, thank you. I'll take that to Senator Jones. Senator Jones,
you know this is that's interesting to hear Laurie talk
about her regret about a vote for a third party.
I guess back in nineteen eighty, But what about you know,
do you blame Ralph Nader for George W. Bush winning
in two thousand? Do you blame Jill Stein for I mean.
Speaker 5 (16:40):
Yes, yes, absolutely, both of those. Absolutely.
Speaker 7 (16:43):
You look at the number of votes that were Nator
drew from he drew from al Gore. Al Gore barely
lost the presidency just because of the state of Florida.
And I think Nader got over half a billion votes
here and Gore lost by a handful. The same is
true in twenty sixteen, and I've got those numbers, Jeremy.
(17:03):
I mean, you look at the six swing states in
twenty sixteen, Donald Trump carried all of them by very
small percentages, and the third party vote in those states,
and Jill Stein but also Gary Johnson, if you remember correctly,
was anywhere from three and a half to like five
(17:24):
percent in each of those six states. In twenty twenty,
that vote was down to less than a point and
a half the much fewer third party votes, and Joe
Biden won all of those six states.
Speaker 3 (17:37):
Professor, this is your trusty DJ Tolliver. So we're talking
about enthusiasm a lot this election or lack thereof. Is
there any evidence to show that if voting was compulsory
that a third party candidate will be more likely to
be elected.
Speaker 6 (17:52):
I don't know of any. It's possible if we had
compulsory voting of the parties would look a lot different,
but we still the thing that really drives the two
party system is the winner take all electoral system. So
you know, it's possible that we would have more movement
in the parties that the parties would be really different
from decade to decade, or just they would be more
(18:15):
representative of the concerns of young people or of other
groups of people that don't vote at higher rates. But
it's really that it's to give, you know, the boring
political science answer. It really is the structure that drives
the two party problem. With the two party phenomenon.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
Let's go to Harry in Missouri City, Texas, a place
I have not heard of, but welcome Harry to the
middle and let us know.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
What do you think about a third party?
Speaker 11 (18:41):
Hello, Yeah, I've called the show before. I talked about
Donald Trump being elected to gener and you had a
show on Donald Trump about three weeks ago. But I
think there should be ranked choice. I think there should
be ranked choice voting. I think Congress, I think the
Senate and the House need to some point look at
(19:02):
getting up a strong third party on the ballot so
people have that to choose from. Because you know me,
I'm an independent now I don't. I used to vote Democrats,
but I don't like Joe Biden's handling of Gaza with
Israel and the Judean.
Speaker 14 (19:19):
People, and I don't like I don't like Donald Trump.
Getting back in there. I think he's a criminal.
Speaker 11 (19:26):
As I talked about.
Speaker 14 (19:31):
I'm voting for doctor Cornos. I already voted for him
in the primary because I'm even though with the Missouri
City Texas, I'm still registered in California. So I voted
my asty ballot and wrote in doctor Cornel West And
if he's on the when he is the ballot again
for the general, I'll be voting for him again. But
I just think you should vote your conscious. If you
(19:52):
don't like the Republican or the Democrats politics or policies,
I think people should vote their conscious. They should go
for strongly, will believe, and who can run. Then if
that's the third party person, then they should go ahead
and vote for Harry.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
Harry, We've got it. Let me let me take that
to Doug Jones.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Senator Jones, what do you say to people like Harry
who clearly on the left but want to vote for
a corner West because of something like Gaza.
Speaker 1 (20:22):
There's a lot of them, you know.
Speaker 7 (20:23):
Look, I agree with that, but I think that at
the end of the day, a vote a conscience. You've
got to understand what your vote is actually going to do.
Speaker 5 (20:32):
Is it just going to be a statement.
Speaker 7 (20:33):
Okay, that's fine, and I appreciate that, I absolutely do.
And I think people are have traditionally voted their conscience. Unfortunately,
you know, they voted their conscience when they voted for
George Wallace and strom Thurman in a different way. But
the fact of the matter is that when you vote
that conscience, you also have to consider what are the
consequences of your vote.
Speaker 5 (20:54):
All votes have some consequences.
Speaker 7 (20:56):
And then this election, in this election, a vote from
somebody that we just heard from who is generally more
progressive on the left, if that goes anywhere other than
Joe Biden, that is a vote for Donald Trump because
of the winner take all state elections that we have.
If it's winner take all, you are taking away a
(21:17):
vote and you're essentially giving it to somebody else. And
I think that that's really important for people to understand
and remember. It is great to stand up and stand
and be counted that way, but at the end of
the day, you have to look what is the unintended
consequence of your vote. That's when we get it into
this spoiler a thing that I believe that most of
(21:42):
these third party candidates, if not all of them will
be a spoiler in favor of Donald Trump, especially in
those battlegrounds.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Professor Asari, this is the we've heard about winner take
all a few times. I can't remember those words being
in the Constitution. Where did the winner take all system
come or why do we use that?
Speaker 6 (22:01):
We have we have single member districts that elect our
our congressional districts. I mean, if we want to talk
about the constitution, the Constitution does not use single member
districts or winner take all. It does lay out the
sort of idea about what congressional districts should look like,
and the sort of specifies, you know, how large they
(22:22):
should be and within some parameters, and it sets up
two senators per state, and it sets it does set
up the electoral College. It doesn't say that every state
has to be winner take all, and as the senator
pointed out, not every state is. But those are just
sort of the that's just sort of the way the
system has has evolved over time. We don't have a
(22:45):
system where we have multi member districts. So that's what
I'm getting wonky here. But you ask, so some countries
have a system where you might have a district like
say where I'm at in the state of Wisconsin, You've
got eight congressional seats, and so the party that gets
some percentage of the vote gets sixty percent of the
vote get sixty percent of the seats. That means a
(23:06):
smaller party that can get ten percent of the vote
maybe can get you know, ten percent of the seats,
or can get one seat or whatever. We don't have that.
So if you get ten percent of the vote, you
get zero percent of the seats. Because every district elects
one member, and in the case of the Senate, of course,
you know, it's one member elected at a time. So
(23:27):
that's that's kind of how that works. I hope that's
a good on the fly explanation.
Speaker 2 (23:31):
Thank you for that constitutional explanation. Let's go to Terran,
who's in Salt Lake City, Utah. Hi, Terran, what do
you think should there be a strong third party? I?
Speaker 15 (23:42):
You know, I really believe that a third party candidate
and third party parties are necessary at this point, especially
in local elections, especially in state elections. And I think
those types of groundworks of actual parties that can truly
do work much more so than a presidential candidate can,
(24:06):
being able to direct that information and form proper coalitions
with people is necessary to help us continue to operate
this democracy and continue to thrive and and make sure
that we're happy and healthy. And I think part of
that too is, you know, we need to really update
how our elections run. I believe the electoral college should
(24:29):
be abolished, and I think proportional voting is necessary, especially
for states like Utah where we have a heavy, you know,
conservative Republican demographic, and you also have very liberal cities
that separate themselves, much like with Texas and Austin. It's
(24:51):
it's necessary to make sure that those people's voices are
also heard as well as the people that you know
live in role with call and those people's voices matter
as well.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
All Right, Tarin, thank you so much. We've got it,
and I'm going to go to Jerry, who's in Long Island,
New York. Jerry, what do you think should there be
a third party this year? A strong third party?
Speaker 12 (25:14):
No?
Speaker 10 (25:14):
Absolutely not. Two reasons. First reason, Donald Trump is an
existential threat to the country and also to the planet,
so because he's in the race, no way. But secondarily,
I think they should have to be they should be
forced to win seats in Congress. I don't think any
(25:35):
third party should be allowed on the ballot for a
presidential candidate until they win ten percent of the seats
in the House and ten percent of the seats in
the Senate. I believe in building a third party from
the ground up, not from the top down. So let
them contest races in the Senate and the House of Representatives,
(25:56):
and when they get ten percent in both chambers of Congress,
then let them get on the ballot and a presidential race.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
Interesting, I did you've thought about this, Jerry, thank you
for that call. And Doug Jones, what do you say to.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
People.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
It's clear that there are a lot of listeners calling
in who say I want a third party, and even
if they do want a third party, they might not
want one this year.
Speaker 5 (26:18):
Well, I think that that's an important distinction. Number.
Speaker 7 (26:21):
First of all, the last two callers are absolutely right
about a number of things, and it was consistent with
what the professor said earlier. A third party is welcome
on the state and local level. They need to build up,
they need to work as a real party instead of
just all of a sudden having somebody at the top
of a ticket.
Speaker 5 (26:38):
That's really not a ticket. It's just two candidates.
Speaker 7 (26:41):
And how in the world are they going to even
govern if they were to get elected.
Speaker 5 (26:45):
It's going to be impossible. And so I think building.
Speaker 7 (26:48):
That up is really, I think, very strong, and that's
what I would basically argue. I just don't think that
right now, and I think the last caller said it best.
And again I am unabashedly biased here, but I agree
with the caller about this year.
Speaker 5 (27:06):
This is not the time to take a chance on that.
This is not the time.
Speaker 7 (27:11):
When democracy has more at stake on this election than
it has been since the Civil War.
Speaker 5 (27:17):
This is the time to.
Speaker 7 (27:19):
Stick with where you are and who is best to
carry forward the democratic ideals, the democracy that we've enjoyed
in this country for so long. And I think that
I agree with I certainly agree with the last caller
about former President Trump being an existential threat to democracy.
Speaker 5 (27:39):
In this country.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Tolliver, some messages are coming in online.
Speaker 3 (27:42):
Absolutely, Cody writes, it has always been time for a
strong third party. The lesser of two evils mentality has
been hurting us politically since we first closed ranks behind
just two parties.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
So, professor, what about that?
Speaker 2 (27:53):
It's sort of the if not now, when, And we
just heard a caller say that they wanted, you know,
to the third party to be built up first. But
when is that going to happen.
Speaker 6 (28:03):
I don't know when that's going to happen. I think
one of the colors a few minutes ago made an
excellent point, which is that there needs to be some
coalescing happening, and I think that's been kind of the
challenge with these third party movements. People kind of say, well,
I want more choices, I want more choices. But ultimately,
the active voting isn't just about having a choice. It's
also about once you've expressed that choice, that the people
(28:26):
you voted for being able to do something for you.
And that's always going to involve a coalition. So if
it's not the lesser of two evils, it's going to
be the lesser of three or four evils, in the
sense that you're always going to have to make some
kind of compromise. I mean that being said, I think
there are movements on the ground. The Tea Party movement
in the last decade was such a movement to move
(28:49):
the Republican Party. It in fact it has and there
are movements, similar movements on the left. It's just those
movements tend to get co opted into one of the
two major parties.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
Senator Jones, by the way, it seems like the Democrats
have more to lose from a third party candidate this
year than the Republicans.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Do you think that's right?
Speaker 5 (29:07):
Oh?
Speaker 7 (29:07):
For sure, Yeah, I don't think there's if you look
at the candidates that are out there, and by the way,
none of these people are third parties. We keep talking
about third parties, but Robert F. Kennedy is an independent,
Cornell West is an independent. They don't have a party.
They're just out there on their own with their own
egos out there running. So I think that people have
(29:28):
to remember that even though Labels is not a party
at this well.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
In fact, Cornell West, I think, has represented four parties
since the start of this campaign year.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
Tolliver, you know, he only got two point.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Seven percent of the popular vote in two thousand, but
a lot of people, as we've talked about, think the
candidacy of Ralph Nader made the difference in that incredibly
tight election between Gore and bush yep.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
The margin in the decisive state of Florida was five
hundred and thirty seven votes. Nator got almost one hundred
thousand votes in Florida. Here he is railing against America's
two party system in two thousand.
Speaker 16 (29:59):
Well, they're going to get politics as usual unless they
stop staying at home or stopped voting for the least
of the worst or lesser of two evils, ensuring that
every four years both parties get worse and you still
got evil. The important thing for people to understand is
that if they don't want more power to address their grievances,
(30:21):
to achieve justice and to help shape the future of
our country for their children and grandchildren, they can go
vote for Al Gore or George W. Buch.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
Wow, it seems different listening to it now in hindsight.
We will be right back in a minute with more
of the middle.
Speaker 1 (30:38):
This is the middle.
Speaker 2 (30:39):
I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just joining us, we are
asking you if it is time for a strong, viable
third party option in American politics. You can call us
at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four
four six four three three five three. You can also
reach out to us at listen to themiddle dot com.
Our guests are former Alabama Senator Doug Jones and political
scientist Julia Azari at Marquette University. And let's go to
(31:01):
the phones and Noah who is in Las Vegas, Nevada.
And Noah, what do you think about a third party
this year?
Speaker 17 (31:09):
Hey, Jeremy, you know, I'm inclined to agree with a
lot of the people are saying it's time, because it is.
You know, we do need some additional choices. However, our
current choices are, you know, according to my beliefs, somehow
I see them someone who, if elected, will do the
(31:34):
best they can, listen to the constituents and try and
find a middle ground. And the other option is someone
who were not entirely sure if they will even give
up the seat when that second term ends. So when
it comes to trying to find a third party option,
(31:55):
I'm of the mind let's do it when we are
sure democracy is in a safe position.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
Okay, now, well, thank you very much for that, Colin.
I'm going to go next to John who's in Boston. John,
what do you think should there be a strong third
party this year?
Speaker 9 (32:15):
Thank you, Jeremy, thank you. So here's my take on this.
I think and I hope either Doug Jones can answer
this or the other guests the professor, but I think, professor,
pardon me, but what I would say is that it
(32:35):
is time to get rid of the electoral college. It's
the only way you could have true democracy. This is
the only civilized nation that we know that you can
win the most popular vote and you still can't be
the president. It just doesn't make sense. And if anyone
votes just to get back at Joe Biden because of
(32:58):
the war, it's it's a win for Donald Trump. It's
a vote for Donald Trump. And if you're talking about
not getting somebody back into the White House, who if
any one of us will charge with one of or
even alleged to have done one of the things he's done,
we wouldn't be able to run front office. So why
(33:20):
it is we want to put someone back in the
office in that position? So I think the true democracy
is it is time to get rid of the electoral college.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
John, Thank you, Professor rozzari.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
I didn't you know I have said before that we
are going to do a show about the electoral college.
I didn't think it would be this one, but it's
definitely coming up a lot.
Speaker 6 (33:42):
Yeah, I mean it's definitely an obstacle to a third
party system, although if you look around the world at
other presidential systems that have multiple parties, that has its
own instability. Even when you don't have that intermediary step
of the electoral college, you're then looking at presidents who
may have been elected with thirty percent of the vote,
So you're looking at a president who doesn't command an
(34:05):
electoral majority, and that can make it challenging for any
number of reasons. I think, you know, I think it's
an additional impediment. I think there are some strong arguments
against the electoral college, but I think there's like there's
kind of an overlap between the two, but they're not
exactly the same thing. I could go on more with
the electoral college, but a lot of the people talk for.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
The electoral college.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
Show let's go to a man. Let's go to Jen,
who's in Saint Louis. Jen, go ahead, what do you think?
Speaker 18 (34:35):
Hi, guys, thank you. I'd like to agree it's way
past time for a third party with a lot of folks.
But again, I am going to say, not all votes
are created equal. We need to do that first. We
need to send the electoral college by the way of
late savings time. I mean, if we can add the
word riz to the dictionary, we can certainly make changes
(34:56):
that are going to be for the planet. But for
as far as a third party, everybody's saying like we
need a third party, it's not a new thing. Yes,
we have needed some length something else right to choose from,
but it's not going to be a third party like
the ones I've been seen cropping up that are all
about sunshine and rainbows on their platform, but no specific
(35:18):
plans for doing those things. So that's for starters. And
second of all, would please no one who does not
want Trump elected vote in a third party fashion or
a not blue fashion in battleground states or questionable states,
because that's going to turn things. If we want to
show support on a nationwide level for a viable third
(35:42):
party and a great platform that people can meet in
the middle lawn, it is going to have to start locally,
and it's definitely not going to be in the battleground states.
It could happen in a red state. All the people
that won the third party could vote that way. You
can write sure in any state you want you as
long as you live there and owned property or whatever.
(36:04):
I mean, let's show that they're support for one electing
third party candidates locally. I mean, what designated survivor.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
Jim, thank you, thank you for that call, Senator Jones
your thoughts.
Speaker 5 (36:15):
No, she's absolutely correct.
Speaker 7 (36:17):
I mean, look, I don't think anybody should disfavor third
parties or even independence across the board when it comes
to state and local politics. You know, I think that
that kind of encourages things. But even if you were
to do away with the electoral college, third parties and
independent candidates could still be spoilers unless you have a runoff,
(36:40):
and I'm not sure we want to run off for that.
I want to go back real quick. Jeremy y'all mentioned
and talked about Ross Barreau. I think Ross Bureau is
a great example where people seem so frustrated with candidates
now and folks forget In nineteen ninety two in the summer,
in the summer, not March where we are now. Ross
Perot actually led in the polling against an incumbent president
(37:04):
George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton, who was the
Democratic nominee. He had like thirty six thirty seven percent of.
Speaker 5 (37:10):
The vote, led all polling.
Speaker 17 (37:13):
He ends up.
Speaker 7 (37:13):
Getting less than twenty percent of the vote and no
electoral votes. That is his That's just the basic facts
of history, and it's why the two party system has
evolved from the electoral college. I really believe it was
that chicken in the egg that the two parties evolved
from the electoral colleges much as anything.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
Well, Professor Azzari, I assume it wasn't just Admiral Stockdale's
performance in the debate that led to that.
Speaker 1 (37:40):
So like, why do you think.
Speaker 2 (37:42):
Paro was doing so well in the polls and then
couldn't make it happen.
Speaker 6 (37:48):
I think there's two basic reasons for that. One is
something that many of our colors have laid out again
and again, which is that when the campaign kicks up
and push comes to shove, most people who are going
to turn out to vote prefer one of the two
major party candidates over the other, and that's why they
end up casting their ballot that way. The other is
that Perot realized he was going to win, and surprise,
(38:10):
Perot himself had a preference for one of the two
the two major party candidates over the other and briefly
dropped out of the race because he was worried he
was going to hand it to Bush. So I think
campaign effects. Campaigns are real, and I think that's part
of it. But I think the other piece of this,
if I can say one more thing, is going back
to the electoral college. Building a kind of broad base
(38:32):
of national support for twenty percent is not going to
win you any electoral college votes. Those votes go to
regional type candidates like the Senator brought up George Wallace
and before that strom Thurman, Southern candidates running on pro
segregation tickets, and those were the most recent third party
(38:53):
candidates to win electoral college votes.
Speaker 2 (38:55):
Let's go to Robert, who's in Burlington, Vermont. Robert, what
do you think should there be a strong third party
candidate this year?
Speaker 19 (39:03):
Well, there should not this year because of the existential
threat that Trump is. But I just want to tell
you something. I live in the town and in the
state that has the most successful third party in the
United States, the Vermont Progressive Party. The mayor elect of
Burlington is a progressive, the lieutenant governor of the state
is a progressive.
Speaker 4 (39:23):
And third parties.
Speaker 19 (39:24):
Can work sometimes I don't like it when get elected,
but we have it and it's a good thing. The
other thing I want to say about range choice voting,
it's it's necessary because of what's called Doverger's law. People
are afraid to vote for their third party candidate in
first past the post voting systems. They're afraid to vote
(39:46):
for third party candidate because they're afraid that they're going
to aid the candidate, the major party candidate that they
hate the most, to win. But the range choice voting
that is promoted by Fair Votes and other organizations is
odd in that there have been two elections where they
were spoiled where the ranked choice voting method actually caused
(40:07):
a spoiled election. One was in Burlington, Vermont, in two
thousand and nine, and the other was more recent in
Alaska in August of twenty twenty two, when Mary Teltola
was first elected. In fact, in Alaska, eighty seven thousand
Alaskans voted that Nick Bagage was preferred over Mary Peltola.
Seventy nine thousand voted that Mary Peltola was preferred over
(40:28):
Nick Bagage. But who got elected? And let's Washington.
Speaker 2 (40:32):
Robert, thank you for that. Doug Jones, Let's let me
ask you about ranked choice voting. I wonder you know,
would rank choice voting do you think be a good idea?
And do you think that it would make it so
that the third party candidate wouldn't be a spoiler because
if they didn't win, their votes would go to the
person's second choice.
Speaker 7 (40:48):
There, Jeremy, we go back. You still got the electoral college.
You know, I don't know how a ranked choice vote
would work when you're electing a slate of electric Uh.
It's that's that's good in local elections, and I think
it can work in local elections. I think it can
even work in state wide elections, although that's not a
(41:11):
perfect system at all. So you know, look, the fact
of the matter is, guys, I think we can have
a lot of debates about reforming our electoral system for
the election of the president. I think, you know, quite frankly,
I wanted the Congress to pass some electoral reform to
have some more consistency across the fifty states, as opposed
(41:33):
to this hodge podge of the way we elect both
the president and as well as statewide offices.
Speaker 5 (41:40):
I think we need that or congressional office. But that's
a different story.
Speaker 7 (41:43):
And where we are, where we are this year and
this year I think is not the year to experiment
or to stand on a on a principle that will
end up aiding someone else that you really don't want
to see president of the United States.
Speaker 1 (41:58):
Let's go to a swing state.
Speaker 2 (42:00):
I we've heard from a number of swing states this hour,
but let's go to Nile. Who is in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Nile,
what do you think?
Speaker 12 (42:10):
I think it's a good year for a third party.
We've had a number of poor candidates now offered to
us by the two parties, and everyone always suggests, well,
this isn't the right year. Well, of course everyone will
keeps saying that and it won't change, and certainly anyone
that has a tie to the Republican or Democratic Party
(42:31):
is going to offer that up. But we have a
history of being offered poor candidates and it's time to
change it. I think it's also the right year to
change it, because we do have a candidate that would
be horrible if he won Trump. But there's also a
lot of Republicans that don't want Trump, but they're not
(42:52):
interested at all in voting for Biden or the Democrats.
And I think this is one year when you could
finally say Okay, folks, if this party could there's no labels,
or someone could get organized enough, find the two proper
people to go on it, don't be just loaded with
(43:12):
current or former senators, Governor's House of Representatives people. So
it looks like just another group of the Washington folks
like to tell us what to do.
Speaker 2 (43:23):
But are you are you going to are you going
to be voting now for a third party this year?
Speaker 12 (43:29):
Yeah, so I tell you I did that. Then not
a third party. You just have to pick your own person.
For example, in twenty sixteen, I did not like either
candidate and wrote in a name. When I asked my
brother what he was doing, he wrote.
Speaker 1 (43:41):
In a name.
Speaker 12 (43:41):
I'm saying, there's a lot of that potential again this year,
and I think this is a great year for a
third party to grab a probably thirty five percent of
the vote, and that's all you're going to need, because
Trump and Biden will reach carry about their thirty putent
the chance to finally open up this system that has
(44:03):
not served as well.
Speaker 2 (44:04):
Okay, Nile, thank you for that, Professor Azaria. I'll take
that to you and let me just ask you as well.
If a third party, let's say one of these candidates,
you know, Robert F. Kennedy or no labels candidate or whatever.
If they were to start to get up higher in
the polls, wouldn't they have to start really taking positions
on all the issues that are dividing everybody else in
(44:25):
the country Ukraine and abortion and everything else. That wouldn't
they fall into the same sort of trap as the
other parties in terms of they're liked by one side
not by the other.
Speaker 6 (44:35):
I mean that seems likely, right, you don't have to
do anything. They could keep running and dodging those issues
if they wanted to. But that tends to kind of
be the problem when people want to avoid kind of
take like a no label strategy and avoid affiliation with
either side, is that people actually do. It turns out
one to hear candidate's positions on issues, and that I
think is a concern I'd like to tell my students
(44:56):
politics is about how and describes I think a fair
kind of assessment of the situation that there's some widespread
frustration with the candidate options. But why would a third
party be able to be able to transcend that? Why
are they going to be able to magically find better candidates,
and maybe they can and maybe they can't, but I
(45:18):
think a lot of people would want to see a
pretty clear blueprint of how those candidates will be selected
that will be better before they're going to be willing
to take that risk, especially when many people, as you know,
as many of our callers have pointed out, have a
strong preference one way or the other for the outcome
of this election.
Speaker 7 (45:35):
Jeremy, let me say two, If the caller does the
same thing this year that he did in twenty sixteen,
he may see the same dang result that he saw
in twenty sixteen. Okay, of who will get elected president
of the United States. And I want folks to remember too,
we keep talking about parties. None of these folks are
really parties. Even no Labels is not a party. You
(45:58):
don't know who is funding them, they don't have to
report anything. You're not giving their donors, they're not telling
anybody anything.
Speaker 5 (46:05):
It is not a party. And in fact they started.
Speaker 7 (46:09):
They kicked a guy off of the ballot in Arizona
who wanted to run under No Labels on a down
ballot race, and they kicked him off. They went to court.
So this is not really a party. And that goes
back to what the professor and others were saying. You
got to start and really build a party from the
ground up, not the top down.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
By the way, Professor, just to be clear, Senator Jones
is right that No Labels has not really told us
who their donors are at all.
Speaker 1 (46:34):
They don't have to, That's right.
Speaker 6 (46:37):
Yeah, And I think that that gets to kind of
a much more crucial kind of question here, which is
about what what parties do and all the with all
the problems that political parties have, they're built, they have
to follow some rules, they have some transparency. You may
not like exactly who the Democrats and Republicans coalesce with
and stand for, but at least we have have a sense.
Speaker 1 (47:00):
Right we know, Tolliver.
Speaker 2 (47:03):
I think we have time for a quiz for our guests.
Speaker 3 (47:05):
Quiz time already, Yes.
Speaker 5 (47:06):
Okay, nobody told me there was going to be a
quick Well, here we go.
Speaker 1 (47:10):
It's a pop quiz.
Speaker 3 (47:12):
You've studied for this, You're good. Who's the most successful
third party candidate aka got the most popular vote, most percentage?
George Wallace ross Boro, Teddy Roosevelt or William Jennings Bryan
Feel free to jump in when you're ready.
Speaker 5 (47:26):
Teddy Roosevelt got the most electoral I know that.
Speaker 1 (47:29):
They both said Teddy rosey both got it.
Speaker 2 (47:31):
I thought this one that was in that was inteen year,
nineteen twelve. Yes, it's the Bull Moose Party, right right, Okay, Well,
great job, guests, and I want to thank my guest,
former Alabama Senator Doug Jones.
Speaker 1 (47:44):
Thank you so much, senator for joining us.
Speaker 5 (47:46):
Thank you, Jeremy, great and great to have you.
Speaker 2 (47:49):
And Julia Azori, Professor political science at Marquette University. Professor Azari,
thanks to you as well.
Speaker 1 (47:55):
Thank you, and Tolliver.
Speaker 2 (47:57):
Next week we are live in Denver, Colorado at col'
out of Public Radio for a special on the road episode.
Speaker 3 (48:02):
Yeah, we'll be talking about guns, gun violence, and gun
control efforts live in Colorado as we approach the twenty
fifth anniversary of the Columbine shooting.
Speaker 2 (48:10):
We'll be asking what you think could be done to
reduce gun violence in America. You can call us at
eight four four four Middle to reach out that it's
eight four four four six four three three five three,
or you can go to listen to the Middle dot com.
And while you are there, of course, sign up for
our weekly newsletter. The Middle is brought to you by
Long Nook Media, distributed by Illinois Public Media in Urbana, Illinois,
(48:32):
and produced by Joe Aann Jennings, Harrison Patino, John Barth,
and Danny Alexander. Our technical director is Jason Croft. Special
thanks this hour to Daryl mccallaugh at WBHM in Birmingham
and Jason Reeve at wu WM in Milwaukee. Our theme
music was composed by Andrew Haig. We want to thank
Nashville Public Radio, iHeartMedia, and the more than four hundred
(48:54):
public radio stations that are making it possible for people
across the country to listen to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson.
Talk to you next week.
Welcome to the middle.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm Jeremy Hobson here with Tolliver and Taliver. Are you
ready for Trump? Biden too? Lost in New York?
Speaker 3 (00:12):
You know, I'm so ready. But I've got to say,
no sequel is ever better than the original. I don't know, man,
I'm nervous.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Trump Biden two back in the habit. Okay, Well, here
we are. After the Georgia primaries. The two major contenders
for this year's presidential election are set.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
Yet again.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
We're looking at a contest between former President Donald Trump
on the Republican side and President Joe Biden on the
Democratic side. But there is also a somewhat crowded field
of third party options this year. There's Robert F. Kennedy Junior.
There's Cornell West and Jill Stein on the left. On
the right, the Libertarian Party will choose its presidential candidate soon,
(00:50):
and there could be a candidate from the Group No Labels.
But do any of these candidates actually have a shot
at winning the presidency or will they be potential spoilers,
people who might siphon off just enough votes to throw
the election to one of the two major party candidates.
We're going to talk about that this hour. But first,
last week we asked you what your state of the
(01:11):
Union is and a lot of you based your responses
on the state of the economy. Here is what one listener,
just one had to say.
Speaker 4 (01:20):
My name is Jack from Tennessee. And as far as
the economy, I know that it's not super great, but
I mean, let's look at this. I mean, do we
forget that Trump started a trade war and put like,
what was it, twenty five percent tariff on Chinese goods?
Did that not kick off inflation right there? And hasn't
everything since then been kind of reactionary? Or am I
(01:43):
just crazy? Either way? I mean, I understand that the
economy is like a train. You know, it doesn't start
moving very fast. It doesn't stop on a dime. You know,
it's it takes actions in a long time for those
actions to you know, make a change. I feel that
we're doing doing better in a sense, but at the
same time, it's not super great, but it could definitely
(02:06):
be worse.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Well, big thanks to everyone who called in last week.
So now to our question this hour, is it time
for a strong third party candidate in America? Or a
third party candidates nothing more than spoilers, Tolliver, how can
people reach us?
Speaker 3 (02:19):
You can call us at eight four four four Middle
that's eight four four four six four three three five
three or right in at Listen to the Middle dot com.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
So now let's meet our panel.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
Joining us from the WBHM studios in Birmingham, Alabama, former
Alabama Senator Doug Jones.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Doug Jones, Welcome to the Middle.
Speaker 5 (02:34):
Thanks Jarem, it's great to be with you tonight.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
I appreciate And from the WUWM studios in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
Doctor Julia Azari.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
Professoral political science professor at Marquette University.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
Professor Zori welcome to you.
Speaker 6 (02:50):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Well, and before we get to the calls, let me
just ask each of you some questions, Professor. A recent
Reuters IPSOS poll found sixty seven percent of respondent said
they are tired of seeing the same candidates in the
presidential elections and want someone new. Is twenty twenty four,
in your view, the year when a third party candidate
could actually have a shot at the presidency.
Speaker 6 (03:11):
I mean, this is a that's a really tall order
for a third party candidate to have a shot at
the presidency. And you've got to win, of course, a
majority in the electoral college to get to that point.
I don't think that that's I don't think that's very likely.
But it is the case that third parties tend to
be the way that people express their dissatisfaction with their
(03:32):
mainstream options, and that could be a phenomenon in twenty
twenty four.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
And Senator Jones, I mean, you were in the Senate
between twenty eighteen and twenty twenty one when there was
a lot of dysfunction in our two party systems. You
saw it up close and personal. It's arguably worse.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Now.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
Is it reasonable do you think for Americans to want
other options?
Speaker 7 (03:51):
Is it reasonable to want other options? Sure, it's always
reasonable to want other options. The question is is that
option got a snowballs can in hell of winning?
Speaker 5 (04:01):
And they don't.
Speaker 7 (04:02):
A third party has absolutely an independent candidate has absolutely
no chance.
Speaker 5 (04:08):
It's pyeing the sky.
Speaker 7 (04:09):
As a professor said, this is it's a winner take
all kind of thing. When you're talking about the electoral
votes in every state. It's not proportional. It does winter
take all in every state except Maine and Nebraska. And
so with a winner take all for electors in the
electoral college. You've got to get two hundred and seventy
electoral of votes to win, and it can't be done now.
(04:31):
I don't even think these independents and third parties may
not even be on enough ballots in enough states to
combine if they want every state to get to seventy.
But it's just in today's world. And Jeremy and the
professor teaches this, she knows better than I do. Historically
there have been parties that come and go, but for
the last one hundred and fifty years or so, America
(04:52):
has been Democrats and Republicans.
Speaker 5 (04:54):
And it's a two It's.
Speaker 7 (04:55):
Been a two party system for a couple of hundred years.
It's going to remain that way. Our system, to me,
is set up that way and that and that's why nobody,
no one else can win well.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
And Professor Zari, you know, Doug Jones just brought up
the electoral college. There are a lot of things that
just make it very difficult for a third party. The
system is almost stacked against a third party making it happen,
including ballot access.
Speaker 6 (05:20):
Yeah, that's true. I mean there's a couple of components
to this problem. Right on the one hand, we have,
just as a former seditor pointed out, a lot of
winner take all elements to our system that make it
really difficult for multiple parties to kind of sustain themselves.
The other thing I would note though, is, of course
it's really difficult to win the presidency. Of course, the
(05:42):
two parties control ballot access, and in many states it's
difficult to get on the ballot. But the other piece
of that is that the presidency is a tough place
to start. That tends to be that has tended to
historically been the place where third party movements have been
able to recruit th kind of a charismatic or well
(06:02):
known candidate or somebody who's breaking off from one of
the two major parties because of some very specific policy
oriented frustration. And so it makes sense that the presidency
would be sort of a place to launch that protest candidacy.
But if you wanted to really see more, more choice
and more flexibility in the party system, the place to
do it is locally, and that's a place where it
(06:23):
would be possible, i think, for even for multiple parties
potentially to sustain themselves over time. But the presidency it's
a very high stakes contest and it has a lot
of moving parts. You have to run successfully in a
lot of states, gain ballot access in a lot of states.
It's just a very difficult, difficult kind of campaign to
(06:43):
pull off.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
Let's get to the phones, because we've got some calls
coming in Basel Is joining us from Houston, Texas.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Welcome to the middle Go ahead. What do you think.
Speaker 8 (06:54):
I think we desperately need a cert candidate right now.
It's the only way for this country not to end
up like every other great empire falling apart. I've lived
about twenty years of my life in Syria before I
came to the United States. Obviously I left because of
(07:15):
the war and the politics that I'm seeing right now.
This rhetoric, politicized rhetoric, is what I saw in the
Middle East.
Speaker 9 (07:28):
And so.
Speaker 8 (07:30):
The fact that in twenty sixteen, the options were either
Trump or Hillary Clinton, and we already had Bill Clinton
served before his president So where we're seeing this family
type of presidential candidates is what disturbs me.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
And are you worried at all though about the idea
of a third party candidate being a spoiler puzzle?
Speaker 8 (08:02):
Honestly spoiling what because everybody is set up. Nobody wants
Trump versus Biden. Everybody wants somebody new. The fact that
we can get somebody new is what the spoiler is.
We already know that it's going to be Trump versus
Biden because of the way the system is set up,
and whoever wins is going to be a loss for
the country, for the people. Nobody wants to either trumpter Biden.
(08:24):
Why can't we get somebody new? That does it have
to escalate that people have to go I and just
to get what they want?
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Bozzil, thank you so much for that call. Let me
take that to Senator Jones.
Speaker 7 (08:34):
Well, I just I disagree with him on the very
front end, but nobody wants somebody I mean, Joe Biden
had an incredible support among Democrats. You know all of
these polls that people here Jeremy are saying, would you
consider a third party? Would you consider I'm not real
happy with Are you really happy with these folks? Well, okay, I'll.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Give him that.
Speaker 7 (08:55):
Joe Biden is not the young spras self that he
used to be when I first met him forty something
years ago. But the fact of the matter is that
Democrats overwhelmingly put him into where he is. And the
fact is that a lot of people could have had
some choices. They did have choices in the Republican primary,
but they chose Donald Trump. There were any number of
(09:17):
people that they could have come out to vote for
and they didn't.
Speaker 5 (09:20):
So I understand how people feel. I get that.
Speaker 7 (09:25):
But at the end of the day, I think that
people will gravitate back toward their respective positions and maybe
the country does want somebody and new, but that's not
going to be this year.
Speaker 5 (09:39):
And that's the hand where dealt.
Speaker 7 (09:40):
And I don't think any third party, including Basil, was
concerned about the family. We've got a Kennedy in there.
They've just been much. Is anybody well, this is not
going to.
Speaker 5 (09:51):
Be the year?
Speaker 2 (09:52):
What do you think, professor? And by the way, speaking
of the Kennedy and their Robert F. Kennedy, he's polling
in some places, you know, fifteen percent of the polls,
and many people think that's just because of his name recognition.
Speaker 6 (10:05):
That's probably true. I think name recognition is a big
part of it. And that actually speaks to some of
the dynamics that the caller is talking about here about
having political families, about the fact that even if and
I actually agree with with Senator Jones that that Biden
and Trump are both pretty popular among the partisans of
(10:26):
their respective parties. And I know that that's not the
typical narrative that we hear, but I've sort of looked
into these polls and that's that's pretty much the case
that they're doing well.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
They're doing well in their primaries among Democrats for Biden
and Republicans for Trump.
Speaker 6 (10:40):
They are. Yeah, and also if you look at at
their approval and favorability within their parties, So yeah, But
you know, nevertheless, right, why isn't there more Why wasn't
there more contestation? Why isn't it easier to contest an
incumbent president? That really gets at, I think some dynamics
in our system where it takes a really long time time,
a lot of money, a lot of name recognition to win.
(11:03):
And so I do think even though I think it's
not very realistic that a third party candidate is going
to win the presidency this year or anytime soon, I
think that it's important to talk about these dynamics because
it is getting at real aspects of our political system
that do seem kind of the word that academics like
to use is ossified right, difficult to difficult to change.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
You know, Tolliver.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
If you look back over the last one hundred years,
there have been three somewhat successful third party candidates, most
recently back in nineteen ninety two.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
Yeah, and ninety two, Ross Perot ran for the presidency.
He ran again in ninety six as an independent candidate.
And here he is addressing a crowd of supporters doing
his during his ninety six campaign.
Speaker 6 (11:43):
Do you want a government that comes at you from Washington?
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Or do you want a government that comes from you?
Speaker 10 (11:50):
Okay?
Speaker 11 (11:52):
Who do the people in Washington work for?
Speaker 1 (11:56):
Who pays their salaries?
Speaker 3 (12:01):
I couldn't really tell what they were saying.
Speaker 1 (12:02):
It's just like it's hard to hear the response from
the crowd.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
Perok got almost twenty percent of the popular vote in
nineteen ninety two, meaning Bill Clinton was able to win
the presidency with just forty three percent of the popow.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
Wow, and that was in nineteen ninety two. It feels
like it was just yesterday. Six.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
Well, we will be right back with more of the
middle in a moment. This is the middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson.
If you're just tuning in the Middle is a national
call in show. We're focused on elevating voices from the
middle geographically, politically, and philosophically, or maybe you just want
to meet in the middle. This hour, we're asking is
it time for a strong third party option in American politics?
(12:37):
Or are third parties just spoilers?
Speaker 3 (12:39):
You can call us with your thoughts at eight four
four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four
three three five three. You can also write to us
at Listen to the Middle dot com or on social media.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
I'm joined by former Alabama Senator Doug Jones, a Democrat,
and political scientist Julia Azari at Marquette University. And the
phones are lighting up, So let's go to Robert, who
is outside Greensboro, North Carolina. Robert, Welcome to the Middle.
Speaker 12 (13:02):
Go ahead, they there.
Speaker 8 (13:05):
I just wanted to say thank you so much for
this show. When I heard the promo earlier, I got
really psyched and I actually canceled my plans. But I've
been an independent my whole life, and I've wanted a
mainstream third party forever. And all I was going to
say is, I think the things that it's going to
take in my opinion, is media You guys are the
(13:28):
first media pretty much that I've heard, like No Labels
announced they're gonna you know, they made their big decision
they're going to run a candidate, and it barely made
the news. I told my mom, she watches TV all
the time and she's never even heard of No Labels,
you know, which is which is pretty crazy, the lack
of media coverage.
Speaker 5 (13:47):
But they have.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
Yeah, to be clear, they have not found a candidate
for No Labels yet. Somebody will agree to run on
that ticket, right.
Speaker 8 (13:55):
Right, But they did in this that one hundred percent
for sure that there they are going to put fourth
candidates And what I understand I could be wrong, but
within the next two weeks that they're going to announce
both a president and vice president together is the way
I understand it. But just a real quick lastly, I
just wanted to say it's going to take independence. You know,
we outnumber Democrats and Republicans though you know the media
(14:18):
never tells you that, but we have to coalesce around
the candidates. If we have a splinter group that wants
Nicky Haley, spinner group that wants Robert Kennedy, you know,
obviously it's not going to work.
Speaker 9 (14:30):
My question to.
Speaker 8 (14:31):
You guys is how does No Labels or anybody else
at this point make sure that they're on every state
ballot this year because I know they're you know, the
mainstream parties are going to be fighting that.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
Robert, thank you for that call.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
I'm going to take that to the professor because it
gets to the issue of ballot access. I mean, No
Labels I think right now, is on something like thirteen ballots.
Not a lot of swing states in there either, But
how do they get on ballots if they want to
be on ballots and if they actually get a candidate
at some point that's going to be.
Speaker 6 (15:01):
A different answer in fifty different states actually fifty one
with the District of Columbia, and I don't know the
ballot access rules off the top of my head in
all fifty one. So there will be some states where
they are and some where they are and it's pretty
late in the game. So that's if they don't have it.
If they don't have it in the works, I mean,
this is one of the challenges of gaining access as
(15:25):
a minor party is you have to navigate all those
different rules. And it's true that the major parties in
some states will have made that ballot access different difficult,
not everywhere.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
Let's go to Lori in Boulder, Colorado. Louri, welcome to
the middle, Go ahead, thank you.
Speaker 13 (15:44):
So I am against having a third party this coming
year because unfortunately voted for John Anderson back a while
ago and deprived Jimmy Carter of being re elected and
that ushered in the era of Ronald Reagan. So I
(16:06):
really regret my vote back then.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
Wow.
Speaker 13 (16:09):
And so I think that a third party would be
disastrous for half of the country.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
Laurie, thank you. I'll take that to Senator Jones. Senator Jones,
you know this is that's interesting to hear Laurie talk
about her regret about a vote for a third party.
I guess back in nineteen eighty, But what about you know,
do you blame Ralph Nader for George W. Bush winning
in two thousand? Do you blame Jill Stein for I mean.
Speaker 5 (16:40):
Yes, yes, absolutely, both of those. Absolutely.
Speaker 7 (16:43):
You look at the number of votes that were Nator
drew from he drew from al Gore. Al Gore barely
lost the presidency just because of the state of Florida.
And I think Nader got over half a billion votes
here and Gore lost by a handful. The same is
true in twenty sixteen, and I've got those numbers, Jeremy.
(17:03):
I mean, you look at the six swing states in
twenty sixteen, Donald Trump carried all of them by very
small percentages, and the third party vote in those states,
and Jill Stein but also Gary Johnson, if you remember correctly,
was anywhere from three and a half to like five
(17:24):
percent in each of those six states. In twenty twenty,
that vote was down to less than a point and
a half the much fewer third party votes, and Joe
Biden won all of those six states.
Speaker 3 (17:37):
Professor, this is your trusty DJ Tolliver. So we're talking
about enthusiasm a lot this election or lack thereof. Is
there any evidence to show that if voting was compulsory
that a third party candidate will be more likely to
be elected.
Speaker 6 (17:52):
I don't know of any. It's possible if we had
compulsory voting of the parties would look a lot different,
but we still the thing that really drives the two
party system is the winner take all electoral system. So
you know, it's possible that we would have more movement
in the parties that the parties would be really different
from decade to decade, or just they would be more
(18:15):
representative of the concerns of young people or of other
groups of people that don't vote at higher rates. But
it's really that it's to give, you know, the boring
political science answer. It really is the structure that drives
the two party problem. With the two party phenomenon.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
Let's go to Harry in Missouri City, Texas, a place
I have not heard of, but welcome Harry to the
middle and let us know.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
What do you think about a third party?
Speaker 11 (18:41):
Hello, Yeah, I've called the show before. I talked about
Donald Trump being elected to gener and you had a
show on Donald Trump about three weeks ago. But I
think there should be ranked choice. I think there should
be ranked choice voting. I think Congress, I think the
Senate and the House need to some point look at
(19:02):
getting up a strong third party on the ballot so
people have that to choose from. Because you know me,
I'm an independent now I don't. I used to vote Democrats,
but I don't like Joe Biden's handling of Gaza with
Israel and the Judean.
Speaker 14 (19:19):
People, and I don't like I don't like Donald Trump.
Getting back in there. I think he's a criminal.
Speaker 11 (19:26):
As I talked about.
Speaker 14 (19:31):
I'm voting for doctor Cornos. I already voted for him
in the primary because I'm even though with the Missouri
City Texas, I'm still registered in California. So I voted
my asty ballot and wrote in doctor Cornel West And
if he's on the when he is the ballot again
for the general, I'll be voting for him again. But
I just think you should vote your conscious. If you
(19:52):
don't like the Republican or the Democrats politics or policies,
I think people should vote their conscious. They should go
for strongly, will believe, and who can run. Then if
that's the third party person, then they should go ahead
and vote for Harry.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
Harry, We've got it. Let me let me take that
to Doug Jones.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Senator Jones, what do you say to people like Harry
who clearly on the left but want to vote for
a corner West because of something like Gaza.
Speaker 1 (20:22):
There's a lot of them, you know.
Speaker 7 (20:23):
Look, I agree with that, but I think that at
the end of the day, a vote a conscience. You've
got to understand what your vote is actually going to do.
Speaker 5 (20:32):
Is it just going to be a statement.
Speaker 7 (20:33):
Okay, that's fine, and I appreciate that, I absolutely do.
And I think people are have traditionally voted their conscience. Unfortunately,
you know, they voted their conscience when they voted for
George Wallace and strom Thurman in a different way. But
the fact of the matter is that when you vote
that conscience, you also have to consider what are the
consequences of your vote.
Speaker 5 (20:54):
All votes have some consequences.
Speaker 7 (20:56):
And then this election, in this election, a vote from
somebody that we just heard from who is generally more
progressive on the left, if that goes anywhere other than
Joe Biden, that is a vote for Donald Trump because
of the winner take all state elections that we have.
If it's winner take all, you are taking away a
(21:17):
vote and you're essentially giving it to somebody else. And
I think that that's really important for people to understand
and remember. It is great to stand up and stand
and be counted that way, but at the end of
the day, you have to look what is the unintended
consequence of your vote. That's when we get it into
this spoiler a thing that I believe that most of
(21:42):
these third party candidates, if not all of them will
be a spoiler in favor of Donald Trump, especially in
those battlegrounds.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Professor Asari, this is the we've heard about winner take
all a few times. I can't remember those words being
in the Constitution. Where did the winner take all system
come or why do we use that?
Speaker 6 (22:01):
We have we have single member districts that elect our
our congressional districts. I mean, if we want to talk
about the constitution, the Constitution does not use single member
districts or winner take all. It does lay out the
sort of idea about what congressional districts should look like,
and the sort of specifies, you know, how large they
(22:22):
should be and within some parameters, and it sets up
two senators per state, and it sets it does set
up the electoral College. It doesn't say that every state
has to be winner take all, and as the senator
pointed out, not every state is. But those are just
sort of the that's just sort of the way the
system has has evolved over time. We don't have a
(22:45):
system where we have multi member districts. So that's what
I'm getting wonky here. But you ask, so some countries
have a system where you might have a district like
say where I'm at in the state of Wisconsin, You've
got eight congressional seats, and so the party that gets
some percentage of the vote gets sixty percent of the
vote get sixty percent of the seats. That means a
(23:06):
smaller party that can get ten percent of the vote
maybe can get you know, ten percent of the seats,
or can get one seat or whatever. We don't have that.
So if you get ten percent of the vote, you
get zero percent of the seats. Because every district elects
one member, and in the case of the Senate, of course,
you know, it's one member elected at a time. So
(23:27):
that's that's kind of how that works. I hope that's
a good on the fly explanation.
Speaker 2 (23:31):
Thank you for that constitutional explanation. Let's go to Terran,
who's in Salt Lake City, Utah. Hi, Terran, what do
you think should there be a strong third party? I?
Speaker 15 (23:42):
You know, I really believe that a third party candidate
and third party parties are necessary at this point, especially
in local elections, especially in state elections. And I think
those types of groundworks of actual parties that can truly
do work much more so than a presidential candidate can,
(24:06):
being able to direct that information and form proper coalitions
with people is necessary to help us continue to operate
this democracy and continue to thrive and and make sure
that we're happy and healthy. And I think part of
that too is, you know, we need to really update
how our elections run. I believe the electoral college should
(24:29):
be abolished, and I think proportional voting is necessary, especially
for states like Utah where we have a heavy, you know,
conservative Republican demographic, and you also have very liberal cities
that separate themselves, much like with Texas and Austin. It's
(24:51):
it's necessary to make sure that those people's voices are
also heard as well as the people that you know
live in role with call and those people's voices matter
as well.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
All Right, Tarin, thank you so much. We've got it,
and I'm going to go to Jerry, who's in Long Island,
New York. Jerry, what do you think should there be
a third party this year? A strong third party?
Speaker 12 (25:14):
No?
Speaker 10 (25:14):
Absolutely not. Two reasons. First reason, Donald Trump is an
existential threat to the country and also to the planet,
so because he's in the race, no way. But secondarily,
I think they should have to be they should be
forced to win seats in Congress. I don't think any
(25:35):
third party should be allowed on the ballot for a
presidential candidate until they win ten percent of the seats
in the House and ten percent of the seats in
the Senate. I believe in building a third party from
the ground up, not from the top down. So let
them contest races in the Senate and the House of Representatives,
(25:56):
and when they get ten percent in both chambers of Congress,
then let them get on the ballot and a presidential race.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
Interesting, I did you've thought about this, Jerry, thank you
for that call. And Doug Jones, what do you say to.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
People.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
It's clear that there are a lot of listeners calling
in who say I want a third party, and even
if they do want a third party, they might not
want one this year.
Speaker 5 (26:18):
Well, I think that that's an important distinction. Number.
Speaker 7 (26:21):
First of all, the last two callers are absolutely right
about a number of things, and it was consistent with
what the professor said earlier. A third party is welcome
on the state and local level. They need to build up,
they need to work as a real party instead of
just all of a sudden having somebody at the top
of a ticket.
Speaker 5 (26:38):
That's really not a ticket. It's just two candidates.
Speaker 7 (26:41):
And how in the world are they going to even
govern if they were to get elected.
Speaker 5 (26:45):
It's going to be impossible. And so I think building.
Speaker 7 (26:48):
That up is really, I think, very strong, and that's
what I would basically argue. I just don't think that
right now, and I think the last caller said it best.
And again I am unabashedly biased here, but I agree
with the caller about this year.
Speaker 5 (27:06):
This is not the time to take a chance on that.
This is not the time.
Speaker 7 (27:11):
When democracy has more at stake on this election than
it has been since the Civil War.
Speaker 5 (27:17):
This is the time to.
Speaker 7 (27:19):
Stick with where you are and who is best to
carry forward the democratic ideals, the democracy that we've enjoyed
in this country for so long. And I think that
I agree with I certainly agree with the last caller
about former President Trump being an existential threat to democracy.
Speaker 5 (27:39):
In this country.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Tolliver, some messages are coming in online.
Speaker 3 (27:42):
Absolutely, Cody writes, it has always been time for a
strong third party. The lesser of two evils mentality has
been hurting us politically since we first closed ranks behind
just two parties.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
So, professor, what about that?
Speaker 2 (27:53):
It's sort of the if not now, when, And we
just heard a caller say that they wanted, you know,
to the third party to be built up first. But
when is that going to happen.
Speaker 6 (28:03):
I don't know when that's going to happen. I think
one of the colors a few minutes ago made an
excellent point, which is that there needs to be some
coalescing happening, and I think that's been kind of the
challenge with these third party movements. People kind of say, well,
I want more choices, I want more choices. But ultimately,
the active voting isn't just about having a choice. It's
also about once you've expressed that choice, that the people
(28:26):
you voted for being able to do something for you.
And that's always going to involve a coalition. So if
it's not the lesser of two evils, it's going to
be the lesser of three or four evils, in the
sense that you're always going to have to make some
kind of compromise. I mean that being said, I think
there are movements on the ground. The Tea Party movement
in the last decade was such a movement to move
(28:49):
the Republican Party. It in fact it has and there
are movements, similar movements on the left. It's just those
movements tend to get co opted into one of the
two major parties.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
Senator Jones, by the way, it seems like the Democrats
have more to lose from a third party candidate this
year than the Republicans.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Do you think that's right?
Speaker 5 (29:07):
Oh?
Speaker 7 (29:07):
For sure, Yeah, I don't think there's if you look
at the candidates that are out there, and by the way,
none of these people are third parties. We keep talking
about third parties, but Robert F. Kennedy is an independent,
Cornell West is an independent. They don't have a party.
They're just out there on their own with their own
egos out there running. So I think that people have
(29:28):
to remember that even though Labels is not a party
at this well.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
In fact, Cornell West, I think, has represented four parties
since the start of this campaign year.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
Tolliver, you know, he only got two point.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Seven percent of the popular vote in two thousand, but
a lot of people, as we've talked about, think the
candidacy of Ralph Nader made the difference in that incredibly
tight election between Gore and bush yep.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
The margin in the decisive state of Florida was five
hundred and thirty seven votes. Nator got almost one hundred
thousand votes in Florida. Here he is railing against America's
two party system in two thousand.
Speaker 16 (29:59):
Well, they're going to get politics as usual unless they
stop staying at home or stopped voting for the least
of the worst or lesser of two evils, ensuring that
every four years both parties get worse and you still
got evil. The important thing for people to understand is
that if they don't want more power to address their grievances,
(30:21):
to achieve justice and to help shape the future of
our country for their children and grandchildren, they can go
vote for Al Gore or George W. Buch.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
Wow, it seems different listening to it now in hindsight.
We will be right back in a minute with more
of the middle.
Speaker 1 (30:38):
This is the middle.
Speaker 2 (30:39):
I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just joining us, we are
asking you if it is time for a strong, viable
third party option in American politics. You can call us
at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four
four six four three three five three. You can also
reach out to us at listen to themiddle dot com.
Our guests are former Alabama Senator Doug Jones and political
scientist Julia Azari at Marquette University. And let's go to
(31:01):
the phones and Noah who is in Las Vegas, Nevada.
And Noah, what do you think about a third party
this year?
Speaker 17 (31:09):
Hey, Jeremy, you know, I'm inclined to agree with a
lot of the people are saying it's time, because it is.
You know, we do need some additional choices. However, our
current choices are, you know, according to my beliefs, somehow
I see them someone who, if elected, will do the
(31:34):
best they can, listen to the constituents and try and
find a middle ground. And the other option is someone
who were not entirely sure if they will even give
up the seat when that second term ends. So when
it comes to trying to find a third party option,
(31:55):
I'm of the mind let's do it when we are
sure democracy is in a safe position.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
Okay, now, well, thank you very much for that, Colin.
I'm going to go next to John who's in Boston. John,
what do you think should there be a strong third
party this year?
Speaker 9 (32:15):
Thank you, Jeremy, thank you. So here's my take on this.
I think and I hope either Doug Jones can answer
this or the other guests the professor, but I think, professor,
pardon me, but what I would say is that it
(32:35):
is time to get rid of the electoral college. It's
the only way you could have true democracy. This is
the only civilized nation that we know that you can
win the most popular vote and you still can't be
the president. It just doesn't make sense. And if anyone
votes just to get back at Joe Biden because of
(32:58):
the war, it's it's a win for Donald Trump. It's
a vote for Donald Trump. And if you're talking about
not getting somebody back into the White House, who if
any one of us will charge with one of or
even alleged to have done one of the things he's done,
we wouldn't be able to run front office. So why
(33:20):
it is we want to put someone back in the
office in that position? So I think the true democracy
is it is time to get rid of the electoral college.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
John, Thank you, Professor rozzari.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
I didn't you know I have said before that we
are going to do a show about the electoral college.
I didn't think it would be this one, but it's
definitely coming up a lot.
Speaker 6 (33:42):
Yeah, I mean it's definitely an obstacle to a third
party system, although if you look around the world at
other presidential systems that have multiple parties, that has its
own instability. Even when you don't have that intermediary step
of the electoral college, you're then looking at presidents who
may have been elected with thirty percent of the vote,
So you're looking at a president who doesn't command an
(34:05):
electoral majority, and that can make it challenging for any
number of reasons. I think, you know, I think it's
an additional impediment. I think there are some strong arguments
against the electoral college, but I think there's like there's
kind of an overlap between the two, but they're not
exactly the same thing. I could go on more with
the electoral college, but a lot of the people talk for.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
The electoral college.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
Show let's go to a man. Let's go to Jen,
who's in Saint Louis. Jen, go ahead, what do you think?
Speaker 18 (34:35):
Hi, guys, thank you. I'd like to agree it's way
past time for a third party with a lot of folks.
But again, I am going to say, not all votes
are created equal. We need to do that first. We
need to send the electoral college by the way of
late savings time. I mean, if we can add the
word riz to the dictionary, we can certainly make changes
(34:56):
that are going to be for the planet. But for
as far as a third party, everybody's saying like we
need a third party, it's not a new thing. Yes,
we have needed some length something else right to choose from,
but it's not going to be a third party like
the ones I've been seen cropping up that are all
about sunshine and rainbows on their platform, but no specific
(35:18):
plans for doing those things. So that's for starters. And
second of all, would please no one who does not
want Trump elected vote in a third party fashion or
a not blue fashion in battleground states or questionable states,
because that's going to turn things. If we want to
show support on a nationwide level for a viable third
(35:42):
party and a great platform that people can meet in
the middle lawn, it is going to have to start locally,
and it's definitely not going to be in the battleground states.
It could happen in a red state. All the people
that won the third party could vote that way. You
can write sure in any state you want you as
long as you live there and owned property or whatever.
(36:04):
I mean, let's show that they're support for one electing
third party candidates locally. I mean, what designated survivor.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
Jim, thank you, thank you for that call, Senator Jones
your thoughts.
Speaker 5 (36:15):
No, she's absolutely correct.
Speaker 7 (36:17):
I mean, look, I don't think anybody should disfavor third
parties or even independence across the board when it comes
to state and local politics. You know, I think that
that kind of encourages things. But even if you were
to do away with the electoral college, third parties and
independent candidates could still be spoilers unless you have a runoff,
(36:40):
and I'm not sure we want to run off for that.
I want to go back real quick. Jeremy y'all mentioned
and talked about Ross Barreau. I think Ross Bureau is
a great example where people seem so frustrated with candidates
now and folks forget In nineteen ninety two in the summer,
in the summer, not March where we are now. Ross
Perot actually led in the polling against an incumbent president
(37:04):
George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton, who was the
Democratic nominee. He had like thirty six thirty seven percent of.
Speaker 5 (37:10):
The vote, led all polling.
Speaker 17 (37:13):
He ends up.
Speaker 7 (37:13):
Getting less than twenty percent of the vote and no
electoral votes. That is his That's just the basic facts
of history, and it's why the two party system has
evolved from the electoral college. I really believe it was
that chicken in the egg that the two parties evolved
from the electoral colleges much as anything.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
Well, Professor Azzari, I assume it wasn't just Admiral Stockdale's
performance in the debate that led to that.
Speaker 1 (37:40):
So like, why do you think.
Speaker 2 (37:42):
Paro was doing so well in the polls and then
couldn't make it happen.
Speaker 6 (37:48):
I think there's two basic reasons for that. One is
something that many of our colors have laid out again
and again, which is that when the campaign kicks up
and push comes to shove, most people who are going
to turn out to vote prefer one of the two
major party candidates over the other, and that's why they
end up casting their ballot that way. The other is
that Perot realized he was going to win, and surprise,
(38:10):
Perot himself had a preference for one of the two
the two major party candidates over the other and briefly
dropped out of the race because he was worried he
was going to hand it to Bush. So I think
campaign effects. Campaigns are real, and I think that's part
of it. But I think the other piece of this,
if I can say one more thing, is going back
to the electoral college. Building a kind of broad base
(38:32):
of national support for twenty percent is not going to
win you any electoral college votes. Those votes go to
regional type candidates like the Senator brought up George Wallace
and before that strom Thurman, Southern candidates running on pro
segregation tickets, and those were the most recent third party
(38:53):
candidates to win electoral college votes.
Speaker 2 (38:55):
Let's go to Robert, who's in Burlington, Vermont. Robert, what
do you think should there be a strong third party
candidate this year?
Speaker 19 (39:03):
Well, there should not this year because of the existential
threat that Trump is. But I just want to tell
you something. I live in the town and in the
state that has the most successful third party in the
United States, the Vermont Progressive Party. The mayor elect of
Burlington is a progressive, the lieutenant governor of the state
is a progressive.
Speaker 4 (39:23):
And third parties.
Speaker 19 (39:24):
Can work sometimes I don't like it when get elected,
but we have it and it's a good thing. The
other thing I want to say about range choice voting,
it's it's necessary because of what's called Doverger's law. People
are afraid to vote for their third party candidate in
first past the post voting systems. They're afraid to vote
(39:46):
for third party candidate because they're afraid that they're going
to aid the candidate, the major party candidate that they
hate the most, to win. But the range choice voting
that is promoted by Fair Votes and other organizations is
odd in that there have been two elections where they
were spoiled where the ranked choice voting method actually caused
(40:07):
a spoiled election. One was in Burlington, Vermont, in two
thousand and nine, and the other was more recent in
Alaska in August of twenty twenty two, when Mary Teltola
was first elected. In fact, in Alaska, eighty seven thousand
Alaskans voted that Nick Bagage was preferred over Mary Peltola.
Seventy nine thousand voted that Mary Peltola was preferred over
(40:28):
Nick Bagage. But who got elected? And let's Washington.
Speaker 2 (40:32):
Robert, thank you for that. Doug Jones, Let's let me
ask you about ranked choice voting. I wonder you know,
would rank choice voting do you think be a good idea?
And do you think that it would make it so
that the third party candidate wouldn't be a spoiler because
if they didn't win, their votes would go to the
person's second choice.
Speaker 7 (40:48):
There, Jeremy, we go back. You still got the electoral college.
You know, I don't know how a ranked choice vote
would work when you're electing a slate of electric Uh.
It's that's that's good in local elections, and I think
it can work in local elections. I think it can
even work in state wide elections, although that's not a
(41:11):
perfect system at all. So you know, look, the fact
of the matter is, guys, I think we can have
a lot of debates about reforming our electoral system for
the election of the president. I think, you know, quite frankly,
I wanted the Congress to pass some electoral reform to
have some more consistency across the fifty states, as opposed
(41:33):
to this hodge podge of the way we elect both
the president and as well as statewide offices.
Speaker 5 (41:40):
I think we need that or congressional office. But that's
a different story.
Speaker 7 (41:43):
And where we are, where we are this year and
this year I think is not the year to experiment
or to stand on a on a principle that will
end up aiding someone else that you really don't want
to see president of the United States.
Speaker 1 (41:58):
Let's go to a swing state.
Speaker 2 (42:00):
I we've heard from a number of swing states this hour,
but let's go to Nile. Who is in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Nile,
what do you think?
Speaker 12 (42:10):
I think it's a good year for a third party.
We've had a number of poor candidates now offered to
us by the two parties, and everyone always suggests, well,
this isn't the right year. Well, of course everyone will
keeps saying that and it won't change, and certainly anyone
that has a tie to the Republican or Democratic Party
(42:31):
is going to offer that up. But we have a
history of being offered poor candidates and it's time to
change it. I think it's also the right year to
change it, because we do have a candidate that would
be horrible if he won Trump. But there's also a
lot of Republicans that don't want Trump, but they're not
(42:52):
interested at all in voting for Biden or the Democrats.
And I think this is one year when you could
finally say Okay, folks, if this party could there's no labels,
or someone could get organized enough, find the two proper
people to go on it, don't be just loaded with
(43:12):
current or former senators, Governor's House of Representatives people. So
it looks like just another group of the Washington folks
like to tell us what to do.
Speaker 2 (43:23):
But are you are you going to are you going
to be voting now for a third party this year?
Speaker 12 (43:29):
Yeah, so I tell you I did that. Then not
a third party. You just have to pick your own person.
For example, in twenty sixteen, I did not like either
candidate and wrote in a name. When I asked my
brother what he was doing, he wrote.
Speaker 1 (43:41):
In a name.
Speaker 12 (43:41):
I'm saying, there's a lot of that potential again this year,
and I think this is a great year for a
third party to grab a probably thirty five percent of
the vote, and that's all you're going to need, because
Trump and Biden will reach carry about their thirty putent
the chance to finally open up this system that has
(44:03):
not served as well.
Speaker 2 (44:04):
Okay, Nile, thank you for that, Professor Azaria. I'll take
that to you and let me just ask you as well.
If a third party, let's say one of these candidates,
you know, Robert F. Kennedy or no labels candidate or whatever.
If they were to start to get up higher in
the polls, wouldn't they have to start really taking positions
on all the issues that are dividing everybody else in
(44:25):
the country Ukraine and abortion and everything else. That wouldn't
they fall into the same sort of trap as the
other parties in terms of they're liked by one side
not by the other.
Speaker 6 (44:35):
I mean that seems likely, right, you don't have to
do anything. They could keep running and dodging those issues
if they wanted to. But that tends to kind of
be the problem when people want to avoid kind of
take like a no label strategy and avoid affiliation with
either side, is that people actually do. It turns out
one to hear candidate's positions on issues, and that I
think is a concern I'd like to tell my students
(44:56):
politics is about how and describes I think a fair
kind of assessment of the situation that there's some widespread
frustration with the candidate options. But why would a third
party be able to be able to transcend that? Why
are they going to be able to magically find better candidates,
and maybe they can and maybe they can't, but I
(45:18):
think a lot of people would want to see a
pretty clear blueprint of how those candidates will be selected
that will be better before they're going to be willing
to take that risk, especially when many people, as you know,
as many of our callers have pointed out, have a
strong preference one way or the other for the outcome
of this election.
Speaker 7 (45:35):
Jeremy, let me say two, If the caller does the
same thing this year that he did in twenty sixteen,
he may see the same dang result that he saw
in twenty sixteen. Okay, of who will get elected president
of the United States. And I want folks to remember too,
we keep talking about parties. None of these folks are
really parties. Even no Labels is not a party. You
(45:58):
don't know who is funding them, they don't have to
report anything. You're not giving their donors, they're not telling
anybody anything.
Speaker 5 (46:05):
It is not a party. And in fact they started.
Speaker 7 (46:09):
They kicked a guy off of the ballot in Arizona
who wanted to run under No Labels on a down
ballot race, and they kicked him off. They went to court.
So this is not really a party. And that goes
back to what the professor and others were saying. You
got to start and really build a party from the
ground up, not the top down.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
By the way, Professor, just to be clear, Senator Jones
is right that No Labels has not really told us
who their donors are at all.
Speaker 1 (46:34):
They don't have to, That's right.
Speaker 6 (46:37):
Yeah, And I think that that gets to kind of
a much more crucial kind of question here, which is
about what what parties do and all the with all
the problems that political parties have, they're built, they have
to follow some rules, they have some transparency. You may
not like exactly who the Democrats and Republicans coalesce with
and stand for, but at least we have have a sense.
Speaker 1 (47:00):
Right we know, Tolliver.
Speaker 2 (47:03):
I think we have time for a quiz for our guests.
Speaker 3 (47:05):
Quiz time already, Yes.
Speaker 5 (47:06):
Okay, nobody told me there was going to be a
quick Well, here we go.
Speaker 1 (47:10):
It's a pop quiz.
Speaker 3 (47:12):
You've studied for this, You're good. Who's the most successful
third party candidate aka got the most popular vote, most percentage?
George Wallace ross Boro, Teddy Roosevelt or William Jennings Bryan
Feel free to jump in when you're ready.
Speaker 5 (47:26):
Teddy Roosevelt got the most electoral I know that.
Speaker 1 (47:29):
They both said Teddy rosey both got it.
Speaker 2 (47:31):
I thought this one that was in that was inteen year,
nineteen twelve. Yes, it's the Bull Moose Party, right right, Okay, Well,
great job, guests, and I want to thank my guest,
former Alabama Senator Doug Jones.
Speaker 1 (47:44):
Thank you so much, senator for joining us.
Speaker 5 (47:46):
Thank you, Jeremy, great and great to have you.
Speaker 2 (47:49):
And Julia Azori, Professor political science at Marquette University. Professor Azari,
thanks to you as well.
Speaker 1 (47:55):
Thank you, and Tolliver.
Speaker 2 (47:57):
Next week we are live in Denver, Colorado at col'
out of Public Radio for a special on the road episode.
Speaker 3 (48:02):
Yeah, we'll be talking about guns, gun violence, and gun
control efforts live in Colorado as we approach the twenty
fifth anniversary of the Columbine shooting.
Speaker 2 (48:10):
We'll be asking what you think could be done to
reduce gun violence in America. You can call us at
eight four four four Middle to reach out that it's
eight four four four six four three three five three,
or you can go to listen to the Middle dot com.
And while you are there, of course, sign up for
our weekly newsletter. The Middle is brought to you by
Long Nook Media, distributed by Illinois Public Media in Urbana, Illinois,
(48:32):
and produced by Joe Aann Jennings, Harrison Patino, John Barth,
and Danny Alexander. Our technical director is Jason Croft. Special
thanks this hour to Daryl mccallaugh at WBHM in Birmingham
and Jason Reeve at wu WM in Milwaukee. Our theme
music was composed by Andrew Haig. We want to thank
Nashville Public Radio, iHeartMedia, and the more than four hundred
(48:54):
public radio stations that are making it possible for people
across the country to listen to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson.
Talk to you next week.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.