By Abdul Mughees
Voting is fundamental to influencing the policies that shape our lives. When we elect leaders, we aim to choose people who reflect our values and have the potential to impact legislation. Yet, to create meaningful change, our vote must support a candidate with a viable chance of winning. Historically, third-party presidential candidates in the U.S. have never come close to securing a winning majority, and this cycle is no different. Polls show them drawing only a small percentage of the vote, reinforcing that a third-party victory remains unrealistic. My perspective, shaped by experience, leads me to believe that a third party will not be making laws or shaping policies in the United States anytime soon.
In this pivotal election, voting for a third party poses a risk of tipping the scales in Trump’s favor. The notion that one can vote third party for “change” while hoping to prevent Trump’s return to office simply doesn’t hold up.
Lately, third-party outreach, especially from the Green Party, has ramped up, targeting Muslim and Gen Z voters by emphasizing issues like Palestine and Gaza. They’ve even nominated a Muslim vice-presidential candidate, tapping into the frustrations of communities that feel overlooked by mainstream politics. Many Muslims, who have historically supported the Democratic Party, now feel disillusioned and perceive a lack of acknowledgement for their concerns after years of dedication and support.
In this climate of frustration, powerful and emotive slogans like “A vote for Kamala is a vote for genocide” are circulating, though they don’t reflect the facts. Democrats have been vocal advocates for a ceasefire in Gaza, with 17 Democrats co-sponsoring H.Res.786, which calls for immediate action to rebuild Gaza. Conversely, no Republican has supported a ceasefire, including Trump, whose rhetoric has been quite the opposite. While Democrats are taking action, Trump’s language only escalates the situation, yet the rhetoric persists, fueled by frustration rather than by a factual appraisal of party actions.
A popular argument in third-party circles is that securing 5% of the vote will qualify them for federal funding, potentially breaking the two-party stronghold. However, this line of reasoning overlooks the fundamental flaw: third parties lack the infrastructure to make meaningful changes in U.S. policy. With little organization, minimal presence in most states, and a near-absent local-level strategy, third parties reemerge only during presidential elections to leverage hot-button issues like the environment, financial reform, or Gaza.
A Vote for the Green Party Is Effectively a Wasted Vote
This year, a vote for the Green Party with the hope of bringing about change is effectively a wasted vote. Despite powerful rhetoric, they remain incapable of influencing policy in the foreseeable future. For Muslim Americans concerned about Gaza, Kamala Harris has articulated a clear commitment to humanitarian aid and peace. She stated:
“Given the scale of death and destruction in Gaza, as well as the displacement of civilians in Lebanon, we are facing a devastating crisis. We must end the war in Gaza, bring hostages home, and work tirelessly to relieve suffering, for security and dignity for all people.”
Meanwhile, Trump has called for Netanyahu to “finish the job” in Gaza, implying Biden is holding Netanyahu back. His son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has even discussed potential commercial opportunities on Gaza’s waterfront, underscoring his disregard for the humanitarian crisis. The stakes could not be higher: voting for a third party only serves one predictable outcome—assisting Trump’s return, which would be disastrous for Gaza, Lebanon, women, Muslims, Latinos, Black Americans, and all marginalized communities across the U.S.
We must ask ourselves: Is this the kind of leader we want—a convicted felon, a documented racist, a climate change denier, a divider of our nation, and a man with open disdain for Islam? He’s even pledged to reinstate the Muslim Ban. For anyone who values social justice and environmental protection, how can they justify risking Trump’s re-election by voting third party?
Conclusion: Vote Wisely to Protect Progress
Let this be food for thought: voting is not just a right but a responsibility. By casting our ballots strategically, we can support a leader who, while imperfect, is capable of advancing progress. Voting for a third party may satisfy frustration in the short term, but it doesn’t build power or advance our values. This election, let’s vote with our communities in mind and vote for Kamala Harris—because the stakes are simply too high.
