Explain the factors that limit the electoral impact of minor parties (US Politics)

America operates a two party system of Government. This means that potential representatives not from the Democratic or Republican party struggle to get elected. The use of first past the post is certainly partly responsible for the marginalising of smaller parties. By electing only one representative per district, voters are unlikely to vote for someone who is not one of the two front runners. This phenomena was evident in the 2016 House of Representative elections. In these elections, less than 3% of the vote went to candidates not from the two major parties. The public ignoring the minor parties is also a vicious cycle. The fewer people vote for minor parties, the more irrelevant the minor party votes appear. This is likely to further dissuade the population from voting for minority party candidates at the next election as the voters believe that the minority candidate has no chance of being elected.

Due to this perceived irrelevance, minority party candidates receive much less media exposure compared to their competitors from the two established parties. This results in them struggling to project their views and as such, struggling to garner support. As many of voters know little about, and are not interested in learning about, minor parties, they receive little TV and newspaper exposure. An obvious example of major party candidates receiving free coverage compared to their minor party candidates is the Presidential debates. Every year the republican and democrat candidates are invited to the Presidential debates which are watched by millions (86 million watched Clinton vs Trump). However, minor party candidates are not invited (last minor party candidate at a Presidential debate was Ross Perot in 1992), which has led to minor party candidates calling the debate unfair (Jill Stein did in both 2012 and 2016). Perot’s strong performance in 1992 (he received 19% of the vote) suggest that this exposure benefitted his campaign immensely. As such the lack of mainstream media coverage dedicated to minor party candidates looks likely to have a negative impact on their performance in elections.

The minor candidates also need this free media coverage more than their main party competitors. Major party candidates can raise enough money to ‘pump out’ adverts in order to spread their message. However, minority party candidates often struggle to raise comparable funds. In 2016, Hillary raised $1.2 bn, Trump raised $750 mn whereas Gary Johnson (the best funded minority candidate) had campaign funds totalling just $12 million. As such major party candidates can dominate the airwaves and TV screens, leaving little room for the minority candidates to gain a foothold.