1
Despite more than two hundred years of independence, a distinct British influence
appears in the laws, and politics of the United States. One aspect of the British political system
shared by the United States is the endurance of a two major party system.
1
Candidates often
believe that they have little opportunity for electoral success unless they are willing to work
within these groupings and experience has largely born this perspective out.
We extend the research on minor political parties by examining two recent deviations
(one from the United States and one from Great Britain) from the two-party system, and why
voters supported these candidates over major party candidates.
2
We examine the 1998
Minnesota (U.S) Governor’s election in which Reform Party Candidate Jesse Ventura defeated
the two major party candidates and the 2000 London (U.K.) Mayoral election where independent
candidate, Ken Livingstone won in a crowded 11 person field. While the powers vested in each
position differ, as do the political careers of the individuals themselves, Ventura and Livingstone
represent a departure from the political mainstream in adopting a maverick style of political
campaigning and strategy.
We contend that the maverick style candidates and campaigns in these elections may
serve as blueprint for future third party candidates to win elected office in two-party systems.
For the purposes of this paper, we define maverick candidates as those candidates that are able to
mount significant challenges to the existing political order from outside the traditional party
systems.
1
While the Liberal Democratic Party of the UK has succeeded in gaining a reasonably large percentage of the
popular vote, it has not posed the possibility of forming a government, nor has there been the need for a coalition
government in the recent past.
2
We define minor/third party candidates as any candidate running who is not a member of one of the two major
parties.
Convention