The Biggest Variable in the US Presidential Swing States: Third-Party Candidates? Focusing on the 'Spoiler Effect'

Trump or Harris Vote Encroachment Adds Variable to Election
Democrats Lost Votes to Third-Party Candidate in 2016 Presidential Race

With the U.S. presidential election just three weeks away, third-party candidates who have thrown their hats into the ring are being identified as the biggest variables in battleground states. Since a close race is expected, experts point out that the election landscape could be overturned depending on how much these candidates siphon votes from the major party contenders.

According to the New York Times (NYT) on the 14th (local time), at least one third-party or independent candidate appeared on the ballot in all seven battleground states this year. The candidate with the most appearances is Chase Oliver of the Libertarian Party, who is registered in all seven battleground states. Green Party candidate Jill Stein appeared on the ballots in six battleground states, excluding Nevada. Independent candidate Robert Kennedy Jr., who dropped out mid-race to join the Trump campaign, failed to remove his name from the ballots in Michigan and Wisconsin among the seven battleground states.

[Image source=Reuters Yonhap News]

Although Oliver and Stein qualified as candidates in most battleground states, their nationwide support remains around 1%, making their election impossible. However, the NYT noted that their mere presence on the ballots in several battleground states could be a game-changing variable. Analysts suggest they could produce a "spoiler effect" by eating into the votes of the major party frontrunners, former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, thereby influencing the election outcome.

Bernard Tamas, a political science professor at Valdosta State University, explained, "For a third-party candidate to act as a spoiler in an election, they need to receive significant support or the election must be noticeably close." He added, "The key battlegrounds in this election could be decided by razor-thin margins." Lana Epting, executive director of the progressive political group MoveOn, emphasized, "This election could be decided by just a few thousand votes in some states. Third-party candidates remain a significant threat in this election."

The Democratic Party appears more sensitive to the proliferation of third-party candidates than the Republican Party, due to historical losses caused by vote splitting. In the 2016 election, third-party candidate Jill Stein received 31,072 votes in Wisconsin, surpassing the vote difference of 22,748 between then-President Trump, who secured Wisconsin's electoral votes, and his opponent Hillary Clinton.

[Image source=Reuters Yonhap News]

The NYT stated, "Mrs. Stein and Wisconsin, where she ran, represent a painful history for the Democrats," adding, "The Democratic Party views Stein as the main culprit for their loss at that time." Last week, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) aired TV ads in three battleground states?Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin?where Stein was on the ballot, promoting the message that "Voting for Stein is voting for Trump." This contrasts with former President Trump's support for Stein's candidacy, as he said at a rally in June, "I really like her."

Julia Azari, a political science professor at Marquette University, assessed, "(This year's U.S. presidential election) will be so close that third-party votes could exceed the margin of victory." However, she cautioned, "All analyses are based on assumptions about which candidate voters would prefer as a second choice or what they would have done if there were no third options, so it is difficult to determine who?Trump or Harris?will benefit more."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.