Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

How the 2024 election is already 'spoiled'

No Labels sign

Many Amerians fear a third-party campaign, perhaps one organized by No Labels, would be nothing more than a spoiler in 2024.

Ernst is a volunteer and state leader at Veterans for All Voters.

Fear. I smell fear.

Over the past few months, the wider media enterprise has written innumerable pieces casting doubt on third parties competing in the 2024 election – not just third party viability, but their intentions and appropriateness in America's de facto duopoly. Indeed, there is much to be uncertain about, mostly because these are uncertain times. But to dismiss third parties and electoral reforms that may enable them out of fear of "spoiling" a true race is missing the larger point – America's system as a democratic republic is already spoiling itself.


More importantly, skeptics are not recognizing that in this crisis there is also an opportunity – a chance to transform from a “spoiling” system to one of better choices. But it won’t be easy. Simple change requires a fleeting impulse. Evolution requires an enduring stressor. But true transformation requires a choice. Those who dare to transform must choose to act with courage – and be ready for a little discomfort.

Yes, the current system is already "spoiled"

America faces a crisis because the duopoly simply cannot sustain our democracy. Trust in institutions is at an all-time low, and only 10 percent of Americans are satisfied with the state of national governance while over 60 percent of Americans strongly dislike the inevitable rematch between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. This isn't about one or two administrations. These are trends and neither Trump nor Biden is the problem – they are the symptom, the result of a flawed process.

Rest assured, the United States has navigated many crises before, including at least three of the constitutional variety. The first occurred when the Founders had to wrestle with the question, "What does it mean to be a nation?" They chose to discard the Articles of Confederation and start afresh, resulting in the Constitution. The second crisis involved addressing the question, "What does it mean to be a citizen?" That resulted in the Civil War and then the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. The third crisis spanned the middle of the 20th century, in response to unresolved questions asking, "For who, where and when should elections be?" The answers were codified in the 20th, 22nd, 23rd, 24th and 26th amendments. But glaringly missing is any answer to the question of “how?”

That brings us to today. The amended Constitution does not delve much into how our democratic processes should function – parties, primaries, ballot access, security and more. Answer these questions will be challenging as both sides implement measures completely unacceptable to the other. Change, we must.

So, why be afraid of change?

The answer is two-fold. First, opponents of change tend to align with either of the two major parties, and change will only lessen their ability to impose a false choice upon the electorate.

But more importantly, critics of third-party candidates and electoral reforms seem to favor the status quo because of the uncertainty they will introduce in November. Uncertainty is always scary, and many people choose the devil they know over the one they don't. But there is no realistic way to alter the status quo without discomfort and uncertainty, just as Abraham Lincoln discovered in 1860 with the early days of the Republican Party. Like then, the conditions of 2024's election cycle are prime for transformation.

How transformation could unfold

There are many ways transformation could ensue in the years ahead, some easier than others. Certainly pressures can continue to mount until the nation reaches a constitutional crisis from which it may not recover. This scenario might not be likely and the crisis might simply be manifest in states not conforming to norms, rulings and laws. A better alternative would be systemic reform that resolves the “how” questions.

Electoral reforms are being considered in nearly every state and territory this year, using the dysfunction and dismay of the 2024 race so far as the backdrop for driving necessary change. These reforms include open primaries, ranked-choice voting, independent redistricting commissions, term limits and dozens more innovations within the bucket of "how."

Democracy reform is complicated and it is easier for politicians and the media to blame third parties rather than address the dysfunction of the current two-party system.

Those who blame the third parties for being nothing more than spoilers are rejecting the democratic principles they supposedly champion.

If you are fearful of reform, ask yourself this: If transformation should not be driven from beyond the duopoly, then by who? If not in 2024, then when? If not by promising new choices, then how?

If you are unsure how to answer these questions, then consider joining any of the major national or state-level organizations dedicated to electoral reform. Ultimately, no change or transformation will be possible without citizens like you who choose to act with courage, despite the discomfort.

Read More

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for U.S. Senate, speaks at an event in Lubbock on Oct 7, 2025. Paxton is seeking to shut down Jolt Initiative, a civic engagement group for Latinos, alleging that it's involved in illegal voter registration efforts. The group is fighting back.

Trace Thomas for The Texas Tribune

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Jolt Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to increase civic participation among Latinos, is suing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to block his efforts to shut the organization down.

Paxton announced Monday that he was seeking to revoke the nonprofit’s charter, alleging that it had orchestrated “a systematic, unlawful voter registration scheme.”

Keep ReadingShow less
MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

A deep dive into ongoing threats to U.S. democracy—from MAGA election interference and state voting restrictions to filibuster risks—as America approaches 2026 and 2028.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

Tuesday, November 4, demonstrated again that Americans want democracy and US elections are conducted credibly. Voter turnout was strong; there were few administrative glitches, but voters’ choices were honored.

The relatively smooth elections across the country nonetheless took place despite electiondenial and anti-voting efforts continuing through election day. These efforts will likely intensify as we move toward the 2026 midterms and 2028 presidential election. The MAGA drive for unprecedented mid-decade, extreme political gerrymandering of congressional districts to guarantee their control of the House of Representatives is a conspicuous thrust of their campaign to remain in power at all costs.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person putting on an "I Voted" sticker.

Major redistricting cases in Louisiana and Texas threaten the Voting Rights Act and the representation of Black and Latino voters across the South.

Getty Images, kali9

The Voting Rights Act Is Under Attack in the South

Under court order, Louisiana redrew to create a second majority-Black district—one that finally gave true representation to the community where my family lives. But now, that district—and the entire Voting Rights Act (VRA)—are under attack. Meanwhile, here in Texas, Republican lawmakers rammed through a mid-decade redistricting plan that dramatically reduces Black and Latino voting power in Congress. As a Louisiana-born Texan, it’s disheartening to see that my rights to representation as a Black voter in Texas, and those of my family back home in Louisiana, are at serious risk.

Two major redistricting cases in these neighboring states—Louisiana v. Callais and Texas’s statewide redistricting challenge, LULAC v. Abbott—are testing the strength and future of the VRA. In Louisiana, the Supreme Court is being asked to decide not just whether Louisiana must draw a majority-Black district to comply with Section 2 of the VRA, but whether considering race as one factor to address proven racial discrimination in electoral maps can itself be treated as discriminatory. It’s an argument that contradicts the purpose of the VRA: to ensure all people, regardless of race, have an equal opportunity to elect candidates amid ongoing discrimination and suppression of Black and Latino voters—to protect Black and Brown voters from dilution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’
Independent Voter News

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’

The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation.

The Princeton Gerrymandering Project developed a “Redistricting Report Card” that takes metrics of partisan and racial performance data in all 50 states and converts it into a grade for partisan fairness, competitiveness, and geographic features.

Keep ReadingShow less