Americans are sick to death of both parties.

[specious_reasons]

Found on Naked Capitalism, originally on Alternet:

Walter Dean Burnham and Thomas Ferguson: Americans Are Sick to Death of Both Parties: Why Our Politics Is in Worse Shape Than We Thought | naked capitalism

2014 was fundamentally a democratic debacle. It likely heralds a new stage in the disintegration of the American political order.

Though Republicans jubilate now, the trend is probably as threatening to them as it is to the Democrats. The reason is stark: Increasing numbers of average Americans can no longer stomach voting for parties that only pretend to represent their interests.

So they stayed home, in quite extraordinary numbers. A full accounting of all votes cast in 2014 is still weeks, perhaps months away; it takes that long for all the returns to come in, especially in races in which incumbents faced no challenger or a recount was required. Some high stakes state elections also attract a few more voters than House contests held at the same time, which makes working off unofficial tabulations of a state’s “total vote” even trickier. But our cautious guess is that turnout in this year’s Congressional races will finally weigh in at around 36 percent of the potential electorate that had legal rights to cast a ballot.

Resonates with me as I'm still currently unemployed and a bit moody about it this week, but I've felt more and more like this since 2008.

[Dingfod]

Americans just won't vote for a third party in any significant numbers. The majority of Americans may be for a third party, but a majority of Americans eligible to vote don't.

[AynMisesLibertarian]

Both two parties rapresent left-wing corrupt state capitalism

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by Dingfod

Americans just won't vote for a third party in any significant numbers. The majority of Americans may be for a third party, but a majority of Americans eligible to vote don't.

When I was in Illinois, I voted Green Party for Governor in the previous 2 elections, even though I'm nominally a Democrat. Were I still in IL, I wouldn't have done it a 3rd time, since the Green Party had 8 years to do something with it's "major party" status gained in 2006.

One of the problems is the most viable 3rd party are the Libertarians, and the only distinction is that the Libertarians are completely honest about their pandering to the wealthy interests.

[chunksmediocrites]

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

One of the problems is the most viable 3rd party are the Libertarians

I guess it depends on what you mean by viable. If you mean capable of winning a governorship or seat in Congress, then Libertarians are not viable. In fact the closest they have come is Libertarian Steve Osborn in 2006 in Indiana, with 12.6% of the vote, coming in second in a two candidate race. Independence Party, Green Party, and Reform Party candidates have all run more successfully and garnered higher percentages; and individuals running as independents have outshone all four parties listed above and actually won some elections. The now outdated Reform Party was the second most successful, with Jesse Ventura's governorship win.

If you look at a list of third-party candidates who actually won governorships or Congressional seats in relatively recent history, you get Wally Hickel in Alaska, whose politics were considered left-centrist in the US spectrum; Lowell Weicker in Connecticut, whose politics were centrist, Angus King in Maine whose politics were centrist, Jesse Ventura in Minnesota, whose politics were centrist; Lincoln Chafee in Rhode Island whose politics are centrist; Bill Walker in Alaska whose politics are centrist, Joe Lieberman in Connecticut whose politics are right-centrist; and Bernie Sanders in Vermont whose politics are left.

None of them were or are associated with the libertarian platform.

Data culled primarily from here.

[chunksmediocrites]

Originally Posted by AynMisesLibertarian

Both two parties rapresent left-wing corrupt state capitalism

State capitalists? The US model is not Norway, China, or Singapore, my dimwitted non-friend.
If you had said crony capitalists, then I would have agreed.

Also no TEXATION WITHOUT RAPRESENTATION
$25,000 Grand Prize Winner "It's just a breeze G" by cpulfer - YouTube

[Dingfod]

I believe the disenfranchised voters in the US actually want something more akin to a populist progressive. Neither major party has any that could get past the Primary process.

[lpetrich]

Originally Posted by Dingfod

Americans just won't vote for a third party in any significant numbers. The majority of Americans may be for a third party, but a majority of Americans eligible to vote don't.

French sociologist Maurice Duverger worked out a good part of what is wrong: Duverger's law - Wikipedia

Duverger: The Electoral System

To these socio-economic and historical factors a technical factor must be added: the electoral system. I expressed its effects in 1946 in the formulation of three sociological laws: (1) a majority vote on one ballot is conducive to a two-party system; (2) proportional representation is conducive to a multiparty system; (3) a majority vote on two ballots is conducive to a multiparty system, inclined toward forming coalitions.

(1) is first past the post
(3) is top-two runoff

The brutal finality of a majority vote on a single ballot forces parties with similar tendencies to regroup their forces at the risk of being overwhelmingly defeated.

The spoiler effect.

In a system of proportional representation, the situation is quite different. The very principle of proportional representation explains the multiplicity of parties it produces. Since every minority, no matter how weak it may be, is assured of representation in the legislature, nothing prevents the formation of splinter parties, often separated only by mere shades of opinion.

and

In a system in which elections arc decided by a majority vote on the second of two ballots, political parties are numerous because the existence of a second ballot permits each party to test its chances on the first one without risking irrevocable defeat through the splintering of parties holding similar views; the regrouping occurs on the second ballot through the game of "withdrawals."

So why can't we Americans have something sensible, like proportional representation?