Why do American's only have Trump and Clinton to vote for?

I'm not American, so I'm not too sure how this whole thing works. Politics isn't exactly my strong suit but if Trump and Clinton are both bad candidates then why aren't there more options of who to vote for as the American President? How did they even get there in the first place? Thanks.

Updates:
2mo *Who decided that Trump and Clinton would be the two candidates for presidency?

1|0
8|20

Most Helpful Girl

Most Helpful Guy

  • They literally chose them. There are huge selection processes by which the two main parties (democrat and republican) select candidates that they endorse, and tons of americans vote in those processes. (They are called the 'primaries', and they're quite complicated, but if you're interested you could read up on them).

    There are other people running for president either as independents or representing very small parties, but they have no legitimate chance of winning. So American voters can now vote for one of trump or Clinton. Most voters, even if they don't like one of them that much, will vote for the 'lesser of two evils'. If they vote for the third party candidates, then they are giving up the opportunity to pick which of the two real candidates will be president.

    As to why the candidates are so bad... well they're really different. Hillary is very experienced, and it's sort of her 'turn'. She lost to Obama in the primaries, and has been waiting, and a certain group loved Bill Clinton, and want a female, and so love her... and she's well connected with the establishment. She should have won the primaries easily, but was actually given a run by a guy who isn't actually a real democrat, has no connections, is way more 'left' than the u. s. mainstream, and isn't a very good public speaker. That was her opposition, and she -managed- to win.

    Trump? The republican field was really, really fragmented. There were a bunch of dull, somewhat flawed candidates, nobody obviously really strong, and trump tapped an 'outsider' vein. In the early stages of the campaign, he was getting nowhere near majority support, but he had his core, while the 'mainstream' votes were divided many many ways. The 'old' style republicans never managed to rally around one candidate in time to give him a good run, so he sort of... walked in.

    And now the two most hated candidates in history are facing off.

    0|1
    0|0

What Girls Said 7

  • They get to that position by having money and power/influence. Not really by merit.

    The US gov't is bipartisan. Which is pretty dysfunctional and not what the US founding fathers wanted. People's mentality has more or less aligned with this two party system. Because its winner take all as someone else said.
    Democratic and Republican.

    0|0
    0|0
  • There were many more but the primary elections state by state whittle it down to the two.

    0|0
    0|0
  • There were tons more deligates, but it narrowed down to just them I don't like either or them :/ but if i had to pick, Hillary. Only because I feel like Donald Trump would start World War Three

    0|0
    0|0
  • We have a winner take all system unlike the UK

    0|0
    0|0
    • 2mo

      The UK has the same system, they just have the SNP competing with the two main parties because it's geographically concentrated and therefore can win majorities in districts. Of course if the UK had presidential elections it would be only between the two main parties since Scotland is too small for a SNP candidate to win the presidency.

  • Some of the promising candidates dropped out after realizing from poll numbers that they would not win, and they couldn't last in the long run. After all campaigns do cost a lot of money.

    0|0
    0|0
  • There was a handful of people running but all of them either dropped out (since they weren't as popular) or didn't win the primary. I mean there still are two others, Jill stein (green party) and Gary Johnson (libertarian party) running but they obviously aren't as popular. I also believe that Clinton and Trump obviously got where they are today in the election because of the $$$ they have.

    0|0
    0|0
  • They got there by money honestly in my opinion

    0|0
    0|0

What Guys Said 19

  • There ARE other people to vote for, Gary Johnson, jill Stein, any number of others, hell you could write yourself in.
    However the problem is that while more americans than not would be willing to vote for a third party if they stood a chance to get elected, They see it as a catch-22,
    I don't want these candidates and I want to vote third party but I'm not going to vote third party if they don't really stand a chance when it comes to pulling in enough votes because not enough people will vote for them. So basically people are psyching themself out of voting for a third party candidate

    0|1
    0|0
  • There were dozens to choose from. Now we are having a runoff of the top two winners. But even in the final ballot there are always more than two. I've never seen less than 4-5 candidates on the final ballot, sometimes as many as eight.

    However, it depends on the state. They don't all have the same number. Smaller states might not have as many as larger states. To understand that, you have to understand that there are no national elections in the US. The presidential election is not a national election, it's 50 separate elections, each with it's own set of candidates, and it's own set of rules on how the election is run.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Because we're given the illusion that we have a choice, when we actually have no choice.

    However. There are more options. The Green Party--Jill Stein, Libertarian Party, etc. etc. There are like 5-7 or something other Parties; they will just never get elected. Independent runners are like, 1:50 for President or something. So, it's *essentially* a two party system.

    So, like South Park says, the Presidential election is always between a douchebag and a turd sandwich. Obama almost made that a lie, but he turned out to be a lot worse than all the hype in 2008. Then by 2012, he was just another turd sandwich, with Mitt Romney as the douchebag.

    Seriously though. Why would you be interested in American politics? All it is is frustrating and disheartening.

    0|0
    0|0
  • There are the options on my ballot regardless of what the media tells you...

    Darrell Lane Castle/Scott Bradley (Constitution)
    Hillary Clinton/Tim Kaine (Democratic)
    Rocky De La Fuente/Michael Alan Steinberg (Reform)
    Gary Johnson/Bill Weld (Libertarian)
    Jill Stein/Ajamu Baraka (Green)
    Donald Trump/Mike Pence (Republican)

    0|1
    0|0
    • 2mo

      Those two candidates won their party's primary election, so they represent the Republican and Democratic parties respectively...

  • There are two other options, but they're both also horrible and those parties never get many voters.

    Trump and Clinton got where they are because as the Democrats and Republicans voted state by state more people voted for them than their primary opponents (Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Bernie Sanders, Jim Webb, etc).

    I don't have much faith in either one, but at least with Trump I can agree with him on an issue or two, whereas I can't agree with Clinton on anything.

    0|1
    0|0
  • because of retarded two party politics. they were actually successful in providing the American people with only two popular options to choose from, conservative or liberal. without political variety a country cannot be managed in the right way. there is not enough popular variety for them to choose form in their two party system. its almost like a football team, the red VS the blue. and everyone wants to be on the winning team for the sake of being on the winning team. politics is not as easy as that. they have more people to choose from but the people of the US are not interested in lesser popular political ideologies. even their liberals who are supposed to be progressive are too scared of change to actually vote for a person who is actually different from what is orthodox liberal. they dont want change or progression. if they wanted that they would have voted for a person that was actually different. if they wanted progression they would have voted for a scientist not for the people they vote for now.

    0|0
    0|0
  • They have and would've had many other candidates to choose from but most people in most countries are dumb, so that's what they chose.

    0|0
    0|0
  • In simplest terms you need a lot of organisation and money to back you about a billion dollars - Only the two major parties can provide that - Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton came through the internal elections of the Republican and the Democrat parties - There are other candidates but they can't match the campaigns of the major two - Why these two got through, no one is quite sure how?

    0|0
    0|0
  • Because Americans voted for Trump and well the democrats couldn't even scrape together 5 candidates for their primary so it was between Hillary and Sanders and Hillary and Obama threatened Sanders so he threw the election in the end.

    And there you go.

    0|0
    0|0
  • We have other options. I'm voting for myself. But they are our primary options because both political parties are corrupt and the general American populus is full of retarded cucks who actually like these walking pieces of dog shit. But either way, I'll be happy. I think it'll be a shit show, but nothing gets me off more than watching bad people get exposed and people get what they paid for. Hell, as bad as hitter was, that was the last 1 Germany has ever seen

    0|0
    0|0
  • FYI, their is more than just Trump and Clinton, but the establishment and the corporate media makes it seem like Trump and Clinton is running for president. Besides Trump and Clinton, their is Garry Johnson and Jill Stein plus a few other candidates no one knows about. I myself will be voting for Jill Stein of the green party.
    #NeverTrump #JillNotHill

    0|0
    0|0
  • Democrats and Republicans will be the only winners until we abolish political parties. But oh let's not listen to the founder and fighter of our country, Washington, because he's just a fool

    0|1
    0|0
  • (Thanks AhGokira for the copy/paste)

    These are our options.
    Darrell Lane Castle/Scott Bradley (Constitution)
    Hillary Clinton/Tim Kaine (Democratic)
    Rocky De La Fuente/Michael Alan Steinberg (Reform)
    Gary Johnson/Bill Weld (Libertarian)
    Jill Stein/Ajamu Baraka (Green)
    Donald Trump/Mike Pence (Republican)

    Voting for anyone but those two would be the same as not voting because no one else has a chance of winning.

    0|0
    0|0
  • There are more candidates but only two large parties. This is because of tradition and because basing the vote on districts, instead of a national popular vote, mathematically tends to favor a two party system.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Because they are the two most well known candidates, but also morons. Even if I could vote, I wouldn't, the elections suck

    0|0
    0|0
  • They won the nominations of the two major parties.

    0|0
    0|0
  • what. they're both excellent. Just trump is more excellent.

    0|0
    0|0
  • hillary isn't as bad as idiots make her out to be. she's just been hate mongered to death by right wing nuts.

    trump on the other hand is a dangerous lunatic whose ideas will be a wrecking ball to the world economy.

    1|1
    0|1
  • cause third party candidates, don't really get elected. i can't even remember if there ever has been a third party president

    0|0
    0|0
    • 2mo

      Their hasn't cause the two party system has it rigged to ensure only a democrat or republican gets elected. In order for third party candidates to be in the debates they haft to poll at 15% or more in major polls and most poll's don't include candidates that aren't in the debates, so either way third party candidates are screwed.

Loading...