Chase Oliver received 650,000+ votes in 2024 with no debate access, rigged ballot access, and media silence. That number would be millions in a fair system.
The LP received only 0.42% of the presidential vote in 2024. End The LP argues this is proof that the party is irrelevant and should dissolve. But this conclusion ignores everything that happened before election day.
In 2024, the Libertarian Party faced coordinated efforts to keep Chase Oliver off state ballots. Legal challenges were filed in multiple states by partisan actors. The LP had to fight expensive court battles just to appear on the ballot — in states where voters had a legal right to vote for an alternative.
At the same time, the Commission on Presidential Debates excluded Oliver entirely. Without debate access, building name recognition is nearly impossible. The major media outlets covered the race as a two-person contest, making third-party votes feel "wasted" before a single ballot was cast.
With all those barriers, the LP still received over 650,000 votes. Think about what that number represents: 650,000 Americans who knew they'd be told their vote "didn't count," who knew the candidate had no debate exposure, who chose to vote their values anyway. That's not failure — that's a committed base building toward something larger.
When critics call 0.42% a failure, they ignore history. The Republican Party ran its first presidential candidate (John C. Frémont) in 1856 and received 33% of the vote — but only after years of building infrastructure and gaining ballot access in a system without the modern ballot-access barriers. In today's environment, with today's rules, that growth trajectory would look very different.
In 2016, when polls showed Gary Johnson at 13% — just below the 15% threshold for debate inclusion — the CPD refused to adjust the threshold. Johnson ultimately received 3.3% of the vote (over 4 million votes). Imagine what would have happened if those polls had triggered debate access. The LP was measuring its own ceiling by a measuring stick its opponents controlled.
0.42% in a suppressed election with no debate access, coordinated ballot removal efforts, and wall-to-wall two-party media coverage is not evidence of libertarian failure. It's evidence of a system designed to produce exactly that number. The real question is: what would the LP's vote share be in a fair election? Historical data and polling suggest it would be dramatically higher.
We’ve all heard the critics, the pundits, and the defenders of the status quo point their fingers and laugh at third-party vote totals.…
When critics say the Libertarian Party has "never won a federal race," they ignore the rigged rules that make winning nearly impossible for any third party.
Critics cite Duverger's Law to argue third parties are doomed. But Duverger himself said his law had exceptions — and Ranked Choice Voting changes everything.
Get the latest articles and rebuttals delivered to your inbox. No spam. Unsubscribe any time.