As the month of November inches closer and closer, election day looms for many young Americans that remain unconvinced by this year’s presidential candidates.
Dissatisfaction with the Republican and Democratic nominees has pushed young voters to seek other candidates.The third-party vote sometimes referred to as a protest vote, has become an increasingly popular alternative. Longing for a nominee that better represents their values and vision of society, young people have found a candidate in people like Jill Stein and Gary Johnson.
For some Americans, voting third-party is a source of personal and ethical satisfaction. “Being a first-time voter, I didn't want my first vote to be for someone who I didn't believe in, and I certainly didn't want to settle,” says Frank Gaetani, an undergraduate student at Catholic University of America. “Third-party vote is a reality check from the two-party system that this country has upheld.”
For others, it doesn’t hold the same meaning. Instead, it represents something much darker. “A vote for third-party is a vote for Donald Trump,” stated Christine Yaptangco, a graduate student at St. John’s University and Hillary Clinton supporter. “We don’t live in a fantasy world where every vote counts. This isn’t about our dreams, this is about hard, cold, reality.”
Is it fair to say that a vote for third-party is a vote for Donald Trump? History seems to confirm that notion. In the 2000 election of George W. Bush and Al Gore, Ralph Nader ran as the Green Party nominee. Nader and his followers believed that the Democratic Party had moved too far right. This created a division in the Democratic Party between Gore supporters and Nader supporters. Ultimately, the divide allowed Bush to receive all the electoral votes in swing states because Gore wasn’t receiving votes from Nader followers. Many political analysts credit Gore’s loss to Nader by third-party spoiling.
The 2000 presidential election seems eerily similar to 2016. With third-party candidates like Stein and Johnson appealing to young voters, Clinton finds herself missing a key demographic. Young voters, who have shown a predisposition towards the Democratic party in the past, are splitting the party. Just like with Nader in 2000, these third-party votes may very well tip the swing states in Trump’s favor and hand him the presidency.
All things considered, is “voting your conscience” the right thing to do? If you don’t want to cheat yourself or settle for a candidate you don’t believe in, then yes. Just remember that by voting third-party, you take ownership of what it means for the election outcome. And just like all actions, your vote comes with consequences.
