Are negative odds an option? The odds are unironically greater of the election simply not happening than any third party candidate winning 270. I’d bet huge sums against one winning a single electoral vote, absent the help of a faithless elector.
Honest question: there’s no widespread support for third parties (I think we can agree), they haven’t laid the state by state foundation or track record necessary to convince people, first past the post … what do you, good faith, think the odds of a third party winning this year are?
At least No Labels put in a little effort to try to get established.
If serious about a third party, put the work in all 50 states, develop a platform , recruit donors and candidates locally first.
Win city/county/state seats, then for the Pres.
Why does 3rd party only come every 4 years?
Because they're not actually political parties. They look like them, cosplay as them, but they've done zero effort to actually attain any real political power (Fusion voting, finding competitive districts, overturning FPTP) in 30+ years and clearly don't want to.
They're grifters and cranks.
Nobody needs 270. Not a requirement. Most people know that, but people keep parroting 270 until most forget there's any other way.
Wallace's performance of 46 electors in '68 is likely enough this time. Fewer may do.
(your parenthetical is a canard)
If voters cause a contingent election, the House they chose looks much more like the House that impeached Trump than like the one that didn't.
Likelihoods:
1. Biden, with reduced power.
2. Third candidate, likewise but more so.
distant 3. Trump, same.
Yup, most of the EC votes are bundled in a way that makes them completely unwinnable to a 3rd party. If they were actually awarded by their "source" third parties might be able to win like 20ish nation wide.
And that would take very different campaign strategies and way more money than the Green Party is likely to get ( the Libertarians might get a billionaire sugar daddy or three )
