How A GOP 3rd Party Could Split November's Presidential Vote, Throwing Decision To Congress

Who's on third?

Another option anti-Trump activists are discussing is the prospect of a third-party challenge. In this scenario, anti-Trump forces would coalesce around a consensus conservative and use their money and organizational muscle to run that candidate on a third-party ticket. This scenario would pose logistical challenges. Obtaining ballot access in all 50 states is an expensive and time-consuming endeavor that would need to begin swiftly.

Under this scenario, the goal would be for the conservative third-party candidate to pick off a few key states—enough to deny both Trump and likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton the 270 electoral votes required to win the presidency.

Under the Constitution, the outcome of the election would then be determined by Congress. The House of Representatives would select the President from among the top three candidates, with each state delegation getting one vote, while the Senate would choose the Vice President from the top two candidates. Both chambers of Congress are controlled by the Republican Party, so the conservative third-party challenger would stand an excellent shot at becoming Commander-in-Chief, though they might end up with Trump as their vice president in exchange.

That’s the best-case scenario. If the plan goes bad—indeed, if the group can even get it off the ground—it could cannibalize Trump’s candidacy and boost Clinton’s chances of getting elected, while infuriating Trump’s loyal band of supporters in the process. The party’s fault lines would split even further. That’s why even Erickson, a proponent of developing a plan to run a conservative on a third-party ticket, calls it “kind of the last lifeboat option.”