For the last 162 years, Republicans and Democrats have held a lock on the presidency. Meaning that if a candidate does not fit the typical binary of a parties platform, then they have very little chance of a nomination (Exception: Teflon Donald), let alone the presidency. Third parties are viewed as if they don’t have a chance, however, a lot of this perception comes from a media portrayal of third parties. In fact, most national polls don’t even bother providing voters a third or fourth option, meaning voters are asked their decision between an election solely featuring Trump and Clinton. This has led to this cyclical fallacy that says 1) Third parties can never win and 2) Learning about / supporting one is a waste of time and effort. This has had some devastating effects on America starting with a disillusioned and uninformed electorate. Voter turnout in presidential elections is frequently below 50 percent, and in midterm elections frequently below 40 percent. There are plenty of reasons for low voter turnout, but a few key ones include responses such as, “I don’t like either candidate,” “My vote doesn’t matter,” and “I’m fed up with politics.” Legitimate third party candidates would at least serve as an opportunity to answer some of these statements and offer the opportunity to raise voter turnout, as it’s done in other westernized nations like Iceland. Iceland has four major parties, and nine parties with members in parliament.

The only way a third party candidate will ever be legitimate and a threat in a general election is if the public knows of them, if their following and profile is large enough to land them a spot to debate with the other candidates, and strike a nerve with the American public. Their media coverage goes further than “other” at the bottom of national horse-race polls. This can only be done if polls begin to include these candidates rather than the two front runners. It’s a little-known fact that there is a group that organizes and moderates each and every presidential debate. That group is known as the “Commission on Presidential Debates;” in the year 2000 they passed a resolution that stipulated “for a party to be included in the national debates it must garner at least 15 percent support across five national polls.” This poses a problem when polls don’t even offer the opportunity at a third party. When included results can be surprising considering that when included in Fox News’ May poll, Libertarian Gary Johnson polled 10 percent against Clinton and Trump. A three-way competitive race would bring more drama and therefore more eyeballs to T.V. sets, something that should be appealing to large media conglomerates.

Now most people haven’t heard of the socially liberal, fiscally conservative Gary Johnson, but with ballot access in all fifty states if given the exposure, Johnson and his running mate William Weld are poised to have at least some kind of impact on an election that features two of the most disliked candidates in history. Gary Johnson is a former Republican governor of New Mexico, while Weld was formerly a Republican governor in Massachusetts (making the Libertarian party the only group to nominate two Republican elected officials). Their profile, experience, and current momentum gives them a chance to capture enough votes to tip the election one way or the other. Don’t believe me? In the year 2000, most people are aware that George W. Bush beat out Al Gore in a very tight election. An election so tight that despite Gore’s win of the popular vote, he lost the election. That election came down to Florida, where third party candidate Ralph Nader captured less than 2% of the vote, siphoning just enough candidates from Gore to ensure a Bush win. Third parties have an effect, even if they don’t always pose a serious challenge.

However 2016 does not resemble 2000, and Gary Johnson is not Ralph Nader. The 2000 election offered two popular candidates, and a not so experienced third party Ralph Nader, this one offers the opposite in two popular governors, at least when it comes to the libertarian party. The argument isn’t that Gary Johnson is the right choice for president, or that this is the year a third party breaks out. The argument is that that third parties as a construct are generally good for America as they increase voter turnout, political involvement, and give the people another voice. Media groups, include Johnson and other significant third parties in your polls, and the rest of you, listen, internalize and make an informed decision.

Bonus: Below are profiles of the two most significant third party candidates.

Libertarian (Socially liberal, fiscally conservative) – Gary Johnson and William Weld

Green Party (Not just about the trees, left leaning democrats) – Jill Stein