Third Party Candidates

Third party candidates have often swung elections, frequently undermining the cause they purport to be working for.  I did a little research (mostly on wikipedia).  several of these elections have been pretty interesting, including several free for alls.  quite a few November elections have seen two or more candidates from the same party, and several have switched parties.   My bottom line:  there have been 6 third party candidates which caused a consequential change in the results, but far more where they did not.   There were several who were plainly out to undermine another candidate, the most recent being John Anderson.   Here's a list

2000:
Gore: 48.38%
Bush: 47.87%
Nader: 2.74%

Bush won the electoral college by 1 vote.  Gores margin of victory was probably much larger than official counts, due to various vote rigging.  Nader pretty much stood against everything Bush stood for, although Bush ran as a very different guy than he governed.    Nader's votes clearly changed the election, although it's probably also the case that Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris did too.

1996:
Clinton: 49.24%
Dole: 40.71%
Perot: 8.40%
Nader: .71%.

Add up Clinton and Nader, and Dole and Perot, Clinton/Nader wins.  but without Nader, Dole/Perot win.  But I suspect all Nader votes would have gone to Clinton and 1/3rd of Perot's would have too.

1992:
Clinton: 43.01%
Dole: 37.45%
Perot: 18.91%

Dole/Perot is a clear winner.  1/3rd of Perot to Clinton, 2/3s to Perot, and Clinton wins, but just barely.  But the places Perot did well are places that Dole won anyway, so the electoral college probably would have ended up about the same.

1980:
Reagan: 50.85%
Carter: 41.01%
Anderson: 6.61%

Anderson probably took votes from Carter, which is probably the main reason he ran.  Didn't matter.

1968:
Nixon: 43.42%
Humprey: 42.72%
Wallace: 13.53%

In the first post-civil rights act election, Wallace could not bring himself to support either the race-traitor Humphrey or the Party or Lincoln member Nixon.  He won big in most of the south, but nowhere else.  The southern states he didn't win were fairly close between Nixon and Humphrey.  Hard to call.  Had RFK not been murdered, I think he'd have won big.

1948:
Truman: 49.55%
Dewey: 45.07%
Thurmond: 2.41%

Thurmond probably took votes away from Truman.  Dewey was a liberal republican.  No change.

1924:
Coolidge: 54.04%
Davis: 28.82%
LaFollette: 16.61%

I can't speak to the messaging: LaFollette though was a progressive, Davis a pro-business democrat, and Coolidge, one of the most conservative presidents in history.  By vote count, it wouldn't have made a difference.

1912:
Wilson: 41.84%
Roosevelt: 27.40%
Taft: 23.17%
Debs: 5.99%

Together, the two nominal Rs had more than 50%, but Roosevelt didn't like Taft turning against his agenda.  This is the best showing by a Socialist, Eugene Debs, ever.

1892:
Cleveland: 46.02%
Harrison: 43.01%
Weaver: 8.51%

Weaver ran as a populist.  this was pro-union, anti corporation, pro gold standard.  Probably closer to Cleveland (the D) than Harrison.  no change.

1888:
Harrison: 47.80%
Cleveland: 48.63%
Fisk: 2.20%
Streeter: 1.31%

Cleveland won the popular vote but Harrison the electoral college.  Streeters Union Labor party votes probably would have gone mostly to Cleveland, which might have swung the election.  Fisk was from the Prohibition party.

1884:
Cleveland 48.85%
Blaine: 48.28%.
St. John: 1.51:
Butler: 1.33%

Butler's anti monopoly votes would probably mostly have gone to Cleveland, who won anyway. St. John was prohibition.

1880:
Garfield: 48.31%
Hancock 48.22%
Weaver: 3.31%

Weaver's votes would probably have swung the election to Hancock.  this is by far the closest election in US history, with both winning 19 states and a vote difference of about 9000.

1860:
Lincoln: 39.8
Douglas: 29.5
Breckenridge: 18.1
Bell: 12.6

the issues were so much larger than party I throw up my hands.

1856:
Buchanan: 45.3
Fremont: 33.1
Fillmore: 21.6

Had Fremont stayed with the Whigs, it have been a clear whig victory.   definitely swung it

1848:
Taylor: 47.3
Cass: 42.5
Van Buren: 10.1

Van Buren's votes probably would have mostly gone to Taylor.  No difference

1836:
Van Buren: 50.83
Harrison: 36.63
White: 9.72
Whites votes probably would have gone to Harrison but it didn't matter.

1824:
Jackson: 41.4
Adams: 30.9
Clay: 13.0
Crawford: 11.2
There was no winner in the electoral college, but Clay (who was speaker of the house) gave his votes to Adams, which made Adams the winner. third party definitely did matter.

1812:
Madison: 50.3
Clinton: 47.6
King: 2.0

King's votes would probably have gone with Clinton but it didn't matter.