Third Party Candidates Analysis

If I live in a battleground state during a presidential election and the major parties are neck and neck with each other, I would probably not consider voting for the third-party candidate. As Ryan Lizza pointed out, it takes a lot for a third-party candidate to even make it to the presidential election. Some of the obstacles they must endure are getting on the ballot in the first place with such harsh burdens placed on them by the other two major parties who do not want third-parties there, as well as doing well in polls. If the two major parties are very close with polls, I don’t see any way how a third-party runner could win anyway. Why would I waste my vote? Therefore, I would vote for the major party candidate that I more closely identify with even though I support the third-party candidate. Inhibiting the party I disagree with is more significant to me than wasting my vote on someone who will not win.
He says that the extremes of the two-party system are becoming more moderate, so they are learning to work with each other and compromise. Noonan, a third-party supporter, says the opposite, that the two parties are so polarized as well as the citizens of the United States. Lizza would add that third-parties bring unvoiced issues to the table that is necessary to balance opinion. If Brooks is right, the other two opinions seem less convincing, but they are not insignificant. Personally, I would agree with Noonan that society and government is becoming extremely polarized. However, I don’t think a third-party is the remedy for the stark differences in opinion. Third parties, as Lizza said, do bring some controversial topics to the table, but, again, I don’t think this is enough to reform the strong partisanship in America. Brooks’s thought that the centrist ideology is calming the storm is the only hope we can