You don't just have two choices to vote for. You have a system where candidates are chosen in a vote by proxy, meaning that there are a few powerful people in each party who negotiate to decide what candidates are going to run for election. Not only that, but many states are highly polarised meaning that if you are a politician and you want to win the election, you may be highly encouraged to run for the dominant party in your area. What this comes down to is that there are a few powerful people who negotiate about who is going to run, and in many cases who is likely to win. I suspect this is why the media in the US takes a highly polarising stance on politics -- because this suits the people in power.

It's even worse when you consider the presidential elections, though. In that case, there are only 2 sets of candidates to deal with. If you had enough money/influence to spend, how difficult would it be to make sure that the candidates for both parties were selected to be sympathetic to your cause? Or if you can't do that, make sure that the match up in the election is in your favour.

A lot of people on HN have at least some experience with security on computer system. We've seen how people will search for the slightest vulnerability and leverage it to get an advantage. When you look at the electoral system, it's completely insane how vulnerable it is. And with so much money on the line, it would be completely unrealistic to imagine that it's not already completely compromised.

Having said that, I'm not really intending this to be a rant against the US electoral system only. Some systems in the world are slightly better IMHO, but only slightly. Given that the system is likely to be compromised already and the system is only changeable within that compromised structure, I think there is little one can do. Lately I think it's better to act outside of the system. If you want something done, then don't vote for it. You need to get off your bum and actually do it. This is a problem (especially for me!) because most people (including myself) feel like the situation is "good enough" that it's not worth getting involved. However, I encourage people who are more motivated than me to trying to do good with their own 2 hands instead of encouraging them to vote for the "right" person.

We need someone like Ross Perot once more, who showed that disrupting the two party system is possible, but extremely expensive.

Honestly, the only an independent candidate would win in a 3 way race like this is if many different crises hit the US all at once, like housing, unemployment, drug, crime, loss of world power status, food oil water shortages, etc