And they stand basically no chance because people don't vote for them. If the popularity of either of the existing big parties decreases, and the popularity of any one "third party" increased to the point they could win some state-wide or federal office, chances are they would become the new "second party" in this supposed "two party system". Any period of time where all three parties could present viable candidates would be very brief, at best. People would then vote for the new 2nd party instead of the one that lost popularity, and people who want to denigrate the results or the voters will continue to whine about the "two party system". This isn't because American voters are dumb or craven, it's because we are smart and think we're brilliant. Logically "gaming things out", a favorite practice in the US, will always end up with two major parties that share nearly 100% of offices between them. This is because there's only two positions on any policy or bill: aye or nay, yes or no, you're for it or against it. The reasons why and ways to improve the policy or bill are infinite, but the choice is still binary, and so both politicians and voters, being aware and self-determining, coalesce into two main ("primary") parties. And it will always be that way, and trying to change it will definitely NOT improve our politics in any way at all. Yes, other countries have a 'parliamentary system' which don't have only two major parties: instead they have only two factions, ever: the government (including all the minor parties that joined their "coalition" and so act as sock puppets for them) and the opposition (everybody else).