ird Party Voting in the United StatesPolitical Homelessness: T

Politics Page 32 and how companies will continue to deal with the pandemic remains uncertain. Will the vestiges of an austerity Government come back to haunt us? Te coming months will ineluctably result in – to borrow from Judge Barrett’s 2016 Director of Corporate Enforcement v Walsh decision – “a fnancial maelstrom.”

Political Homelessness: Third Party Voting in the

United States Dylan Krug JS Biological and Biomedical Sciences

In the upcoming 2020 American presidential election, it is important to remember that a vote for Joe Biden is a vote for Donald Trump. Joe Biden is stealing votes from the rising presidential candidate Kanye West, thereby spoiling the election by splitting the results in Trump’s favor. Now, this case is not a genuine one to be made, notwithstanding the fact that it contains obvious falsehoods. Te assumption that all Biden votes would be cast for West if Biden were absent from the race is conjecture: the premise that a vote for one candidate is, in reality, a vote for another candidate, is false. Democrats and Republicans are not ofen targets of this attack, but it has grown common in recent American political discourse: namely, this argument has been used against third party candidates, such as 2016 Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein. Tere appears to be a preoccupation with the idea of the entire political race boiling down to just two candidates, a clear choice - when in reality, the idea that a country with over 240 million eligible voters could be cleanly and totally represented by only two candidates is ridiculous. Te American public encompasses an extremely broad political spectrum that cannot be fully realized in a two-party system, yet third party candidates are ofen treated as “spoilers”– candidates who “take away” votes from candidates with similar ideologies. Tis is best understood through the case study analysis of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Te language used to talk about spoiler candidates is detrimental to voter integrity as it assigns ownership of the votes to the candidates, rather than the voters. For example, popular American news sources published arguments resembling those such as “by voting third-party you are taking votes away from Hillary Clinton” - which was a false allegation potential third-par- The concept of possession is essential to used to convince ty voters to vote Democrat. Te concept sential to deconstruct- deconstructing this argument - of possession is esing this argument - Clinton does not have Clinton does not have any votes; rather, any votes; rather, votes are cast for her by voters. It is the responsibility of a can- votes are cast for her by voters. didate to promote their platform: it is the then decide which plat- It is the responsibility of a duty of the voter to form best represents his or her belief, desires, plication that Clinton is candidate to promote their platform: and needs. Te imentitled to a vote, and that any other casting of it is the duty of the voter to then said vote is equivalent to robbing Clinton, is backwards.

Te foundation of decide which platform best represents the American political system is rooted in senting their constitu- his or her belief, desires, and needs. a candidate repreents. If a candidate

wants votes, they have ample opportunity to earn them. Afer the Democrats lost in 2016, they were quick to claim that Stein “took votes away from Clinton.” However, a CBS News exit poll in Michigan afrmed that the majority of those who opted for the Green Party would not have voted for Clinton. When Green voters were asked how they would have voted in a strictly two-person race, 61 per cent would not have voted, 25 per cent would have voted for Clinton, and 14 per cent would have voted for Trump. Tis is evidence against the claim that all or even most third-party votes would go to the most ideologically aligned major party. It is not accurate to say that Stein cost Clinton the election; if Clinton could not appeal to Stein’s voters, then should that not be noted as a failure of the Clinton campaign? Generally, a two-party political structure has some advantages: less ideologies, factions, and agendas to appease. Yet, this political structure ofen reduces U.S. political discourse to the “lesser of two evils.” Under this framework, politicians do not have to represent citizens’ interests; rather they must simply be the “lesser evil.” Tat is not democracy; that is a hostage situation. For instance, if a progressive individual “votes blue no matter who,” Democrats feel no pressure to progress the party or to listen to their constituents. Instead, Democrats need only appear to be better than the Republican alternative to count on a large base of unenthusiastic progressive voters. Tird parties may better represent these voters - yet, even as their needs go unaddressed, many will still continue to vote Democrat. Swing voters, especially moderates, are pandered to by both parties at every election cycle, as they actually threaten to withhold votes if they are not sufciently appeased. In order to hold political parties to a higher standard than the “lesser evil,” some political strategists recommend holding votes hostage by voting third-party, independent, or not at all. Sometimes this will result in the success of a party you oppose, but if you are not willing to sacrifce an election to prove your importance to a party’s power, then to petition them to The fundamental issue facing the you have no leverage change. Your vote is your most powerful Te 2020 presidential third-party voter is they do not want to weapon. election may not be the time to make this vote for the “lesser evil,” but for a point. Some reports say that Trump is a uniquely dangerous president who would candidate they can believe in. cause more harm in ofce than a Biden cially on issues like For Green Party members, voting for presidency, espeenvironmentalism and LGBTQ+ rights. persuasive argument Biden over the Green candidate Harm reduction is a against voting third party, and in some in- Howie Hawkins is not stances the best possible choice one can make is voting for the “lesser evil.” Even so, settling for a less-ideal platform that is should politics not be about more than just One of the factors still largely representative; it would mean harm reduction? that drives people to vote third-party is the used by leaders in the sacrificing one’s own core values. controversial rhetoric Democratic Party. During an interview This is obvious when comparing the two with Charlamagne Ta God, Democratic nominee Joe Biden said, “If you have a platforms. problem fguring out whether you’re for me or for Trump, then you aren’t black”. Biden expresses extreme confdence that he is the better alternative for Black Americans. However, it must be acknowledged that Biden helped to write the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 which greatly contributed to America’s mass incarceration crisis by subsidizing prison construction and cracking down on non-violent drug ofenses. Tis disproportionately afected Black and Latino communities. Biden was also previously accused of being against court-ordered bussing, a policy that sought to end racial segregation in schools. Biden’s comments could be refecting a general entitlement amongst Democrats with regard to

Politics Page 34 the Black vote, despite enacting policy that some say has actively harmed the community. Signaling support on an issue is not enough - enacting policy change is what is necessary to truly represent Black constituents.

Te fundamental issue facing the third-party voter is they do not want to vote for the “lesser evil,” but for a candidate they can believe in. For Green Party members, voting for Biden over the Green candidate Howie Hawkins is not settling for a less-ideal platform that is still largely representative; it would mean sacrifcing one’s own core values. Tis is obvious when comparing the two platforms. Biden’s environmental plan calls for 100 per cent renewable energy by 2050, while Hawkins’ is by 2030. In December, Biden’s climate action plan was given an “F” (75/200) by the Sunrise Movement, an organization pushing political climate action. Te movement said that it needed “to see more details, and more overall ambition from former Vice President Joe Biden” as his plan failed to meet their criteria for preventing long-term climate disaster. Tis pales in comparison to Hawkins’ vision of an “Ecosocialist Green New Deal,” a policy plan intended to totally restructure the U.S. into a sustainable economy with particular focus on displaced fossil fuel workers. In terms of healthcare, Biden has repeatedly said he would veto a Medicare-for-all bill. He believes in expanding the Afordable Care Act and people’s access to afordable healthcare. Hawkins supports universal health care and has a comprehensive plan to pay for the Medicare-for-all and his Ecosocialist Green New Deal on his website. Hawkins has policy goals that members of the Green Party enthusiastically support, while Biden has apparent “half-measures.” Progressive congressional freshman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez understands the policy divide between progressives and moderates. She admits that “in any other country, Joe Biden and I would not be in the same party, but in America, we are.” Te spectrum of beliefs in the Democratic Party is vast and results in a lack of policy focus. Tus, some concern has been voiced that the progressive promises made by Democrats may only be intended to sway progressive voters for the election and will not be refected in governance. As Hillary Clinton famously said, “there is a public position and a private opinion”. Te Green Party is unlikely to achieve federal power in the near future, but as an American voter I fnd it important to fght for candidates who represent my beliefs rather than to settle for a “lesser evil.” Like so many Americans in my generation, I consider myself to be politically homeless, not feeling represented by either major party. As it stands, the parties have no incentive to change as long as the politically homeless continue to provide their begrudging support. Te most potent political statement one can make may not be by voting Democrat or Republican, but instead by voting for someone who actually represents them.

Editor in Chief

Samantha Tancredi

Deputy Editor

Orla Murnaghan

Copy Editor Olivia Moore

Public Relations Ofcer

Zoe Timmons

Editorial Board

Demilade Adeniran, Dylan Krug, Ellen Hyland, Emma Bowie, Eoin Gormley, Kat Neumann, Lucy Mockler, Matthew O’Shea, Michael Archer, Rory Hearn, Scott Murphy

The Eagle staff strives to practice ethical journalism and to promote integrity in its work. The editors and staff reserve the right to publish only those articles which they consider accurate and not injurious. All articles must meet these criteria in their inception and execution. The opinion articles do not necessarily represent the views of the entire staff, faculty, students, or administration of TCD.

The Eagle wants to be inclusive of the entire Trinity College Dublin community, and we welcome submissions from students, faculty, and alums. If you would like to contribute, please contact us at our email. We do not guarantee that every article will be published. Every article sent is subject to be edited for content and size.