Although third-party candidates have shaken up presidential races in the past, ISU students and political experts said it’s too soon to predict whether they will be a strong factor in the 2000 election.

James Hutter, associate professor in political science, said it is too early to tell what a third-party candidate will mean to the Republican and Democratic races.

“The third party is looking for a candidate that will draw in a strong percent of the votes, meaning over 5 percent,” Hutter said.

In the 1992 election, billionaire Ross Perot garnered 19 percent of the popular vote, drawing some support away from President George Bush.

Hutter said Republican-turned-Reform Party member Pat Buchanan, who is a good campaigner and has the political experience, is a possible candidate. Billionaire New Yorker Donald Trump has also publicly explored running as a Reform Party candidate.

But Hutter said Trump, like Perot, seems more like a flaky businessman, and independent voters may be more likely to vote for a candidate such as Arizona Sen. John McCain, who has a “straight-talking” reputation.

“Independents look at the government as seriously troubled to a greater degree and are looking for a candidate who will fix it,” he said. “Establishment candidates such as [Vice President Al] Gore view the system as healthy.”

Hutter said he believes two things are important to most voters: an accomplished political background and a personality that people like.

“An example of that is Ronald Reagan. If he didn’t have the experience of being governor of California for eight years, he might not have had a chance to win the presidency,” he said.

However, Hutter said independent voters are looking for different things, and the personality of a candidate is even more important to them.

Glen Richardson, temporary political science professor, said historically, the third party has been most successful at changing the political agenda rather than winning elections.

“When third-party candidates influence issues that appeal to a large number of voters, the major parties will try to co-op the issue and claim it as their own,” Richardson said.

Richardson said that an example of this happened in 1992, when President Bill Clinton took on some of Perot’s issues such as campaign finance reform and balancing the budget after he was elected.

There are several reasons why America has a predominantly two-party system, Richardson said, including the fact that candidates must receive a majority of votes in a state to receive any electoral college votes.

“We are socialized to the two-party system. We grow up with parents who were predominately loyal to one of the parties,” Richardson said. “It is what we are comfortable with.”

Richardson said he’s curious to see who will be the Reform Party’s nominee for the presidency.

“They have a colorful array of candidates. [Minnesota Gov.] Jesse Ventura says he won’t run, but if he does, it will be at the last minute. It will be interesting to see what happens,” he said.

Kenneth Achey, senior in political science and sociology, said he does not think third-party candidates have much of a chance because they lack media coverage and public respect.

“I don’t think they affect the presidential race much at all. I think that Pat Buchanan is the most likely candidate because he has the existing track record with the Republican Party and political organization,” Achey said.

Katie Hart, freshman in political science, said it’s important to have as many parties as possible vying for the presidency.

“There are lot of people in the United States that aren’t represented by the Democratic and Republican [Parties],” she said.

For example, Hart said she is a strong Christian and she disagrees with some liberal viewpoints, but she stills sides with Democrats on some other issues, such as economic polices.

“It is really hard to hard to balance between Democratic and Republican [parties],” she said. “Nobody that is running right now is doing anything for me.”