I deleted that because it was poorly worded, and not well thought out.
I’m basically wondering whether a swing state is more likely to have third-party candidates on the ballot. Anecdotally it seems to me the third party candidates are attracted to the swing States.
These days swing states are more likely to have third party candidates because in the current case, both third party candidates are supported by MAGA millionaires who want them to spoil the election.
Traditionally, third party candidates perform best in races with no second party opposition. A Libertarian or Green running against an otherwise-unopposed candidate will do 10-20 pts better than one running against candidates from both parties.
If you go back to Bush v Gore, Nader underperformed his popular approval. It was Pat Buchanan who significantly over performed in Democrat districts. And that was largely attributed to the (deliberately) poor design of the Butterfly Ballot.
How do you mean? Like number of votes, or who’s on the ballot?
I deleted that because it was poorly worded, and not well thought out.
I’m basically wondering whether a swing state is more likely to have third-party candidates on the ballot. Anecdotally it seems to me the third party candidates are attracted to the swing States.
These days swing states are more likely to have third party candidates because in the current case, both third party candidates are supported by MAGA millionaires who want them to spoil the election.
Traditionally, third party candidates perform best in races with no second party opposition. A Libertarian or Green running against an otherwise-unopposed candidate will do 10-20 pts better than one running against candidates from both parties.
If you go back to Bush v Gore, Nader underperformed his popular approval. It was Pat Buchanan who significantly over performed in Democrat districts. And that was largely attributed to the (deliberately) poor design of the Butterfly Ballot.