A third party candidate could monkey wrench the election, but not how you think

For the first time, in a long time, people are burbling about a looming third-party candidacy for the U.S. Presidency, one that might have a chance of succeeding.

People are burbling because polls are showing some 70% of Americans do not want a Joe Biden/Donald J. Trump rematch, which is speeding down the track like the Acela.

People say they want something else, and may be willing to turn to an alternative with a name not followed by a D or an R.

If they do, it would be the first time a third party succeeded, although we have had one independent, non affiliated president: George Washington. That worked out pretty well.

Aside from him, the most successful third-party candidate was Theodore Roosevelt, who in 1912 ran as the Bull Moose Party candidate and got 27.4% of the vote, more than Republican Howard Taft, who got only 23.2%. They both lost to Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who won with 41.8%. 

The second highest percentage was claimed by Millard Fillmore, who got 22% in 1856.

Third place? Ross Perot with 18.9% in 1992, probably resulting in George W. Bush losing to Bill Clinton.

Running as an independent today is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who is getting around 15% in national polls, even before most Americans know he is running. I could see him easily in the mid-20s, or more.

Waiting in the wings is the No Labels group that is dedicated to beating Trump and has said it will fold if it feels it is stealing so many Democratic votes as to elect Trump. No Labels does not have a candidate yet, but a couple of names have been floated: West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin, and 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Andrew Yang. Former Republican Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan has been dropping hints, yet hemming and hawing. 

Of course, there are many other parties that rarely achieve success — Green, Libertarian, Democratic Socialist, Constitution, Natural Law.

No matter how well a third-party candidate does in the popular vote, it doesn’t matter.

The only thing that matters is how many electoral votes the candidate gets. 

In 1992, Perot got 19.7 million votes and zero electoral college votes. None. Zilch. His candidacy pulled votes from Bush, and allowed Clinton to win some states’ electoral votes he might not have otherwise had. Clinton was elected with less than half of the popular vote. In 2016, Hilary Clinton was not elected with more than half of the popular vote, which is why it is politically meaningless.

But let’s say this year some candidate — Kennedy, Manchin, Cornel West — actually manages to grab a few electoral college votes.

Those most likely would come from Maine and Nebraska, the only two states that are not winner take all. They award their electoral college votes  — Maine has 4, Nebraska has 5 — proportionately to the percent of the popular vote each candidate receives.

Granted, this is a long shot, but in a very tight election, such as 2024 is expected to be, a third-party candidate might siphon off enough electoral votes to prevent either Biden or Trump from reaching the 270 needed for victory.

What happens then? Glad you asked.

The House of Representatives selects a President from among the top three finishers.

And since the House has a (slight) Republican majority, you would expect them to elect Trump.

Unless Democrats could bribe sweet talk a few Republicans into voting for Biden.

Possible? Yes. But Republicans would also try to buy off a few Democrats. This process would put a Baghdad bazaar to shame.

Most likely outcome? The House selects Trump.

But this scenario is more fun to think about than to plan for.

It is very unlikely.