Abraham Lincoln is always a good choice when you need a big name to back up your politics. The Democrats cite his progressive views about slavery; the Republicans, his role as a founding member of their party. What nobody mentions, though, is Lincoln's meteoric rise as a third-party candidate, blowing past the established Democrat and Whig parties to win the 1860 presidential election. No minority party has been as successful since, but that hasn't mollified the growing movement for a reform of the two-party system.

Despite its liberal and Democratic reputation, San Francisco is still a city of hundreds of thousands, not all of whom are fervently rallying behind Barack Obama. Despite his reputation as the most liberal senator in Washington, his politics pale in comparison to the grassroots progressive movements at work in the Bay Area. To many of these activists, Obama is just another tool of the corrupt two-party system, only mildly different from his opposition.

In addition to its large and powerful Democratic organizations, San Francisco is home to plenty of other political parties, shades beyond the typical red and blue. The independents, the Green Party, the Socialist Party USA, the Peace and Freedom Party, and the Libertarian Party all call San Francisco home—and they're all parties that are still working hard to get their own messages out before November 4, to varying degrees of success. Some are running their own candidates, some are backing other parties' candidates, and others have just thrown up their hands.

As of May 18 of this year, California's Secretary of State counted 430,259 registered voters in San Francisco. Of these, 146,257 are not registered with the Democratic or Republican parties. Surrounding counties, including Alameda, Marin, and San Mateo, report that 27, 25, and 27 percent of voters, respectively, are registered as independents or members of third parties. Even so, all three counties vote consistently Democratic in elections.

So, if third parties aren't affecting elections then what is their purpose? Today, more Americans identify themselves as independents than ever before. Many argue that the Democratic and Republican parties simply don't represent them, and are even becoming more and more alike as time goes on.

"Most media coverage sadly tends to focus on treating elections like horse races- who's up, who's down, what circumstances are affecting a candidate's chances of winning, what people are saying about a candidate, et cetera," says Starchild, outreach director for the San Francisco Libertarian Party. "What often gets lost in all of this is what candidates and parties actually stand for and believe in."

Jim Mangia was a founding member of the Reform party in 1995 along with Ross Perot, the infamous third-party presidential candidate of yesteryear. According to Mangia, like the Democratic and Republican parties before it, the Reform party soon fell into the same corrupt, self-serving games it has always tried to combat. In response, Mangia founded Independent Voice, a non-profit organization and separate political action committee.

"Very few organizations reach out to independents as independents," says Mangia. Independent Voice does not vote for third-party candidates such as Ralph Nader, who is officially running as an independent. Instead, says Mangia, the group leverages parties to incorporate independent issues; principally among them, reform of the political process and defense of democracy. Independent Voice actually holds an online poll that determines whom they will endorse for president.

"Both candidates realize that, for the first time in history, independents will determine the election," says Mangia. "As the campaign unfolds, McCain is becoming more partisan, and Obama less so.” He adds that thanks to open primaries in several states, many independent voters came out to support Obama.But, just because someone isn't a register-ed Republican or Democrat doesn't mean they're biding their time until they decide to vote for Barack Obama or John McCain. Minority party members have given up trying to appeal to the major parties in favor of their own grassroots action.

"If you oppose the war, wouldn't you like to vote against the war?" says Pat Gray, a retired teacher from San Francisco's Ingleside district.

Gray spent a good portion of 1992 phone banking and fundraising for Bill Clinton. But "Billy", as she disdainfully refers to him, let her down with policies like NAFTA. She joined the Green Party in pursuit of more liberal politics, and for a while she was content to toe that party's line, even running for Congress in 2004 as a Green. But the events leading up to this election soured her on the party she had spent so much time working for.

"I'm concerned that the Greens have been taken over by the Democrats," says Gray. She believes that the Democratic Party treats the Green Party as its left wing, and rails against her Green Party peers who support Barack Obama. Even the Green Party's 2008 presidential candidate is a former Democratic congresswoman from Georgia.

Finally fed up with the Greens, Gray registered for the coming election with the Peace and Freedom party and is the Northern California Volunteer Coordinator for the Nadercampaign. For her, the end game is to "break the two-party system", a sentiment shared by all minority party members.

"It's suicidal to vote Republican if you consider yourself a feminist," says Toni Mendicino, a member of Radical Women, a Bay Area feminist and socialist organization that supports socialist candidates. Mendicino says that Obama looks the part of a progressive candidate, but that's not enough to win her vote.

"He has just the right amount of progressive veneer," Mendicino says. "But we don't think Obama can win our issues." Erika McDonald, spokeswoman for the San Francisco Green Party, points to Senator Obama and Senator McCain's poor attendance records in recent voting sessions. "They're senators and they're not voting on their own issues," says McDonald.

This feeling is prevalent among many third-party voters. Though they appreciate Sen. Obama's message of change and his liberal politics, they don't believe that he can go the distance needed for them. Rather than get their hopes up for Obama/Biden, several parties have decided to nominate their own candidates.

Third parties have a long history of rocking the boat in American politics. Since the 1830s, when the two-party system was officially established, third parties have been forming and running in presidential elections. Many historical third parties were predicated on a single issue, and several of their candidates went on to win the presidency as candidates of the major parties.

In 1844, the Liberty Party ran on an anti-slavery platform and won 2.3 percent of the popular vote. Before he won the 1836 election as a Democrat, President Martin van Buren won 10 percent of the popular vote as the nominee of the Free Soil Party. One of the most successful runs belongs to Theodore Roosevelt, who won more than 27 percent of the popular vote and carried six states with the Progressive Party before going on to win the 1900 election as a Republican.

Adam Manassero, a present-day third-party voter, points out that many third parties disappear as they fold into the major parties.

"If a third party idea becomes popular, then it is absorbed into the Democratic or Republican platform," he says. "Neither of the 'Big Two' have a clear focus."

Today, there are many third parties in America. Some are localized to states; some are present on a national and even international level. The Green Party, Libertarian Party, Peace and Freedom Party, and Socialist Party USA all figure on the Bay Area's political landscape. These parties all share values and often endorse each other's candidates.

The Green Party is most known for its environmental advocacy, but its platform is based on ten key values, including social justice, non-violence, decentralization of wealth, and gender equity. The party serves as a "big tent organization for activists," says Erika McDonald. In addition to grassroots organizers, it employs "core policy wonks" who deal with the nuts and bolts of political organizations.

The Peace and Freedom Party, though only active in California, shares many of the same views, among them democratically controlled businesses and fighting discrimination based on sex, race or ethnicity. For this year's election they have endorsed Ralph Nader, and even share his campaign office on University Avenue in Berkeley.

The Libertarian Party has often been accused of supporting anarchy, based on their party platform of small government and absolute personal freedom. At the other end of the spectrum, the

Socialist Party USA is dedicated to transforming America's capitalist system into a "democratic socialist society based on compassion, empathy, and respect."

Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr is running for the Libertarian Party, and former Democratic congresswoman Cynthia McKinney will be on the ticket for the Green Party. Then, there is Ralph Nader, in his fourth bid for the presidency, running alongside San Francisco's own Supervisor Matt Gonzalez.

But, the minority parties are not delusional. They know that despite their best intentions and efforts, the next president of the United States will be a Democrat or a Republican. But, this doesn't faze them.
"What we want is so important, we don't care if our candidate won't win," says Mendicino.

This belief is shared equally by those involved in third-party campaigns. But if you're not actively involved in one of the parties, where might you come down on the issues?

"I am registered as a Libertarian but I don't particularly align myself with any political party anymore," says Manassero. "In the last presidential election I voted for Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party. [This year] I will be voting Obama/Biden or not at all."

The biggest obstacle facing third parties is- and always has been- ballot recognition. According to Toni Mendicino, America has the toughest ballot restrictions of any Democratic country. The other problem is gaining adequate media coverage.

"Instead of covering all ballot-qualified candidates and parties equally, or even devoting extra coverage to lesser-known candidates…media outlets tend to give most of their coverage to the candidates who are 'expected' to win," says Starchild. "This tends to create a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people only hear about McCain and Obama on the news, then it's natural for them to think those are the only two real choices they have."

Ralph Nader is the most prominent third-party candidate in recent history, taking over Ross Perot's 1990s legacy. He has been accused of taking votes away from Democratic candidates, leading to George W. Bush's win in 2000 and re-election in 2004, though this is disputed by Nader himself in his book Crashing the Party.

"In the year 2000, exit polls reported that 25 percent of my voters would have voted for Bush, 38 percent would have voted for Gore and the rest would not have voted at all," Nader writes. This time, though he plans to campaign in states where he previously wasn't on the ballot, he balks at the idea that his campaign would ruin Obama's chances.

"If the Democrats can’t landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just wrap up, close down, and emerge in a different form," he said in an interview with the late Tim Russert of MSNBC.
Still, Nader acknowledges the effect his campaigns have on politics.

"Our long-range goal is to break up the two parties," Nader says, calling the two-party system "a menace and subversion of our democratic processes…it's basically sold our elections and our government to commercial interests."

When the final numbers are reported in the wee hours of November 5, third party members won't mind that their candidates didn't win. For them, it's about getting the issues out there and sending a message to the establishment. As Socialist Party candidate Eugene Debs once said: "I'd rather vote for what I want and not get it, than vote for something I don't want, and get it."