The thing is that the independent voters are independent of each other, as well as of the two major parties. They don't agree on anything, other than opting out of the national discussion and accepting the decisions of the other two.
This is often mis-represented as a "third party". There is no third party. There are nineteeth, twentieth, twenty-first, etc. parties. Technically some party must be "third" but it's so far behind the two major ones that it doesn't matter.
Elections only have one winner. You can have as many losers as you want, but in the end you must assemble a large enough coalition to be the single largest vote-getter. "None of the above" is not such a coalition.
Comments
The thing is that the independent voters are independent of each other, as well as of the two major parties. They don't agree on anything, other than opting out of the national discussion and accepting the decisions of the other two.
This is often mis-represented as a "third party". There is no third party. There are nineteeth, twentieth, twenty-first, etc. parties. Technically some party must be "third" but it's so far behind the two major ones that it doesn't matter.
Elections only have one winner. You can have as many losers as you want, but in the end you must assemble a large enough coalition to be the single largest vote-getter. "None of the above" is not such a coalition.