For nearly the entirety of its history, the United States has been dominated by a two-party political system, with voters overwhelmingly supporting one of the two major parties. Yet, polling leading up to the 2024 election revealed growing discontent: 63% of voters said that the Republican and Democratic parties do “such a poor job” representing the American people that “a third major party is needed.”  Major publications like The Guardian and The New York Times published articles highlighting how the polls indicated that the election could be decided by third-party voters. 

However, when election day came, the results told a different story. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump got 312 electoral votes and a majority of the popular vote. Jill Stein and Chase Oliver, the only third-party candidates on enough ballots to potentially win the election, only received 0.5% and 0.4% of votes respectively. 

So the question becomes, how was the outcome so different from what was predicted?

Benjamin Thorn, a Middle School and Upper School Latin and History Teacher, offered his thoughts: “I think that in a largely two-party system, people are strategic in their voting, and they realize that voting for a third-party candidate will take away from their the votes from one of The two major party candidates.” 

He went on to say, “In 2000 during the Bush versus Gore election, George Bush won Florida in in part, because a number of very, I would say left-wing voters voted for Ralph Nader and the Green Party. Those votes would have otherwise probably gone to Al Gore, and he might have won Florida and then the election. So I think some people, at least of my generation, do keep that in mind when thinking about voting for a third-party candidate.”

While many voters express a desire to support third-party candidates, history and the structure of the electoral system have taught them otherwise. Faced with the reality that third-party candidates are unlikely to win, voters have learned to compromise and vote for the major party they find more acceptable. In the end, the persistence of the two-party system lies in this strategic calculus – a choice shaped more by pragmatism than idealism.