Despite an active political presence, only two parties – the Democrats and the Republicans – dominate the modern American political process, fielding every candidate who has become president since the mid-1800s. Why, in a democracy, do only two parties dominate? ? What about the other 52 parties, many of which contributed ideas and policies that have become pillars of American political life and law? The answer, according to historians and scholars, is the political process that has relegated third parties to the sidelines and the nature of the parties themselves. The Green Party, the Reform Party, the Libertarians, the Constitution Party, and the Natural Law Party represent the most active third parties currently in the United States. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay All of these parties have fielded presidential candidates in the last election. Ralph Nader, an independent candidate in the 2004 presidential race, made his name as a consumer advocate and as a two-time Green Party presidential candidate. As the Green Party's candidate in 2000, he won more than 2 million votes, finishing third behind Al Gore and George W. Bush. But the controversy marred the Green Party's gains. Democrats accused Nader of causing Gore's defeat by stealing votes simply by his presence in the race. The Green Party's platform focuses largely on the environment, while the Libertarians, who make up the country's third-largest political party and the oldest of the third parties, believe in a reduced role for government. They argue that government should only serve as a form of protection for citizens. Although no Libertarian Party candidate has ever become president, many of its members hold elected offices in state and local government. The American Taxpayers Party, which changed its name to the Constitution Party in 2000, advocates for a strict interpretation of the Constitution and more power for the party. states and localities. Its most popular candidate, Howard Phillips, ran for office in 1992 but received less than 1 percent of the vote. Success and Influence of Third Parties The most successful third party in each election was the Reform Party, which in 1992 nominated Texas billionaire Ross Perot for president. his presidential candidate. Perot ran on a platform that supported reducing the federal budget deficit, an issue previously ignored in the election but which would become a major part of nearly every presidential campaign since. Perot received 19% of the vote. “He was the first candidate to launch in a big way the idea that deficits were a bad thing,” historian Michael Beschloss said. “When Bill Clinton was elected that fall, if he didn't do something about the deficit he was going to be in big trouble and that was largely thanks to Ross Perot.” Third parties have had a great influence on American politics and political debate despite their smaller presence in Congress: currently only one US senator and one member of the House of Representatives are independent. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, socialists popularized the women's suffrage movement. They supported child labor laws in 1904 and, together with the Populist Party, introduced the concept of a 40-hour work week, which led to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. said Sean Wilentz, director of the American Studies program at the Princeton University. “There will be an issue that will be overlooked or willfully excluded from the national debate because neither party wants to face the criticismpolicies that this would bring. A classic example was slavery." “It's kind of bitter sweet,” he added. “[Third parties] are the ones who raise the issues that no one wants to raise and in doing so change the political debate and even politics, but they themselves, as a political force, disappear. Voters often fear that a vote for a third-party candidate is "wasted" since they are unlikely to win. Furthermore, according to Beschloss, third parties often organize themselves around a single personality or a single issue, which can lead to lower popularity among voters. voters. Perhaps the most significant obstacle facing third-party candidates is the winner-takes-all system. In most states, the presidential candidate with the highest percentage of the vote gets all of the state's electoral votes. "There is no reward for second place," said John F. Bibby, a University of Wisconsin professor and co-author of the book, "Two Parties — Or Another? The American Party System." if you want a chance to win in states, which are all awarded on a winner-takes-all basis, you once again have no chance. The incentive is to form broad-based parties that have a chance of winning in the constituency. In his book, Bibby and co-author L. Sandy Maisel reference Ross Perot in 1992, who had widespread appeal but not enough to win a state completely. Third-party candidates are also disadvantaged because of federal laws on campaign finance, the rules governing who can participate in presidential debates and the lack of media attention “It's very difficult for third parties to get media coverage,” Bibby said. "In Nader's last run, the questions asked, 'Why are you running?' (came) all the time, not about the substance of his campaign. "Moreover, a significant amount of paperwork is required to become a viable candidate. When Ralph Nader announced in February 2004 that he would seek the presidential nomination, he was required to collect 1.5 million signatures in every state to appear on the ballot. Deadlines for these signatures begin as early as May 2004. Campaign finance rules say that a political party can get government funding to run a race only if it has received a certain percentage of votes from the previous election. This often leaves third-party candidates to finance their own campaigns. With less media coverage, candidates must find other means of exposure to raise the millions of dollars needed to run a successful campaign. Political analyst and comedian Bill Maher expressed disbelief that Americans would willingly accept only two choices for the presidency. “It is silly,” he said, “that a country that prides itself on choice allows only two.” Others argue that the two-party system is one that promotes stability by avoiding a more divided government. “The United States Constitution was written long before parties were born. The framers distrusted parties,” said Sean Wilentz. “But once parties emerged, the system the framers set up tended to encourage clashing coalitions and those coalitions tended to be two in number.” Democrats and Republicans, according to Wilentz, have over the decades come to represent two fundamental and conflicting ideas about how politics should be run conservative and the Democrats are a decidedly liberal party, and I think they endure because they have increasingly come to represent those two points