Sep 9, 2026 · 1 hr 16 min · 17 segments
In this episode of All American Why, Michael asks why American elections so often leave voters choosing between two major-party candidates. From primaries and independent voters to ranked-choice…
Tom JosephGuestAnyways, if Americans don't naturally sort themselves into two perfect political groups, why does our electoral system so consistently sort our choices into these two? That gets us to one of the strangest words in American politics, viable.
And I was still told in various ways that I wasn't ready to serve in the same institution where Lauren Boebert serves today.
I'll talk more about my own experience with viability in a future episode, because I have a lot of thoughts.
Long before Election Day, there are media outlets, PACs, political organizations, city clubs, business chambers, donors, endorsers, and other institutions that decide whether candidates are serious.
And those decisions matter because these are often the institutions that the public relies on to figure out who is worth paying attention to.
A candidate is considered non-viable, so they get less coverage, fewer endorsements, less money, and less exposure.
Voters hear that the candidate can't win, so even people who like them start looking elsewhere.
Then election day arrives, the candidate gets 5% and everybody just says, see, they weren't viable.
But were they actually non-viable or did our political system help make them non-viable? Because voting for the person you actually prefer can sometimes be treated as irresponsible in American politics.
But everyone tells you that if you vote for candidate C, they can't win, so why bother? So do you vote for C because that's your favorite person, or do you vote for A because you're afraid that supporting C could help B, who you don't want to win at all? Voting for A, not your favorite candidate, your second choice, can seem or be completely rational.
Why should voting for the person you want most representing you ever feel like you're wasting your vote? And we know voters themselves aren't always thrilled with the choices that survive this process.
And 53% said that if they could choose the major party candidates themselves, they would replace both Biden and Trump.
Anyways, if Americans don't naturally sort themselves into two perfect political groups, why does our electoral system so consistently sort our choices into these two? That gets us to one of the strangest words in American politics, viable.
And I was still told in various ways that I wasn't ready to serve in the same institution where Lauren Boebert serves today.
I'll talk more about my own experience with viability in a future episode, because I have a lot of thoughts.
Long before Election Day, there are media outlets, PACs, political organizations, city clubs, business chambers, donors, endorsers, and other institutions that decide whether candidates are serious.
And those decisions matter because these are often the institutions that the public relies on to figure out who is worth paying attention to.
A candidate is considered non-viable, so they get less coverage, fewer endorsements, less money, and less exposure.
Voters hear that the candidate can't win, so even people who like them start looking elsewhere.
Then election day arrives, the candidate gets 5% and everybody just says, see, they weren't viable.
But were they actually non-viable or did our political system help make them non-viable? Because voting for the person you actually prefer can sometimes be treated as irresponsible in American politics.
But everyone tells you that if you vote for candidate C, they can't win, so why bother? So do you vote for C because that's your favorite person, or do you vote for A because you're afraid that supporting C could help B, who you don't want to win at all? Voting for A, not your favorite candidate, your second choice, can seem or be completely rational.
Why should voting for the person you want most representing you ever feel like you're wasting your vote? And we know voters themselves aren't always thrilled with the choices that survive this process.
And 53% said that if they could choose the major party candidates themselves, they would replace both Biden and Trump.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.