No. While the issue of the spoiler effect does tend to get played up by the major parties to scare voters away from voting for new voices, we do understand people’s worries about throwing votes away, and we intend to act strategically so as not to put voters in such a situation.

That means we’re going to support efforts for structural reform, like alternative voting systems and open primaries, that allow for fairer and more open competition without spoiler worries. And where these reforms are in place, we’re going to make the most of them by bringing refreshing new voices to the stage.

It also means, most critically, that we’ll be focusing on the some-70% of political contests in our nation (and many in our state) that are uncontested, as well as those where lopsided party enrollment makes a D vs. R race a done deal. In races like these, there’s simply nothing to spoil, and our presence would be creating needed competition rather than getting in the way of it.

Yes, we do intend to support candidates in three-way (or more), competitive races. But we are going to be selective with these, emphasizing exceptional candidates (or exceptionally bad duopoly ones) or unique circumstances that give us a clear, strategic pathway to victory. The sour taste of a spoiled outcome has been the ruin of upstart parties in the past, and it’s not one we want to leave our supporters with