Your 1/3 1/3 1/3 analysis works in a two way race: the R gets the pro business 1/3, the D gets the affirmative action 1/3, and they fight over the remaining 1/3. The stronger candidate wins.
That’s not what happens in a three way race like 1992, where the 3rd party candidate runs a pro business campaign to the right of the Republican.
What happened in 1992 is that Perot ran a pro business campaign - to the right of Bush - thereby taking half the pro-business Republican votes that Bush got in 1988.
Clinton got the dumb affirmative action 1/3 that always votes Democrat, plus a third of your “mushy middle”.
If I’m wrong about 1992 - let’s do an experiment - let’s have a three way race in 2024 between:
Any random brain-dead Democrat as the Democrat nominee.
President Trump as the MAGA Republican nominee.
Ron deSantis as the ultra MAGA third party nominee.
What do you think will happen? Obviously, the two MAGA candidates will split the pro business vote, and the Democrat will win with a plurality, just like Clinton did in 1992.
The 1/3 1/3 1/3 is REALITY. That’s how American politics are currently divided, and have been for a long time. And strength of candidate has very little to do with it. Every once in a while especially strong or weak candidates break the cycle, but the vast majority of American elections since the late 1800s have run on this cycle. Forget platforms and all that. It has so little to do with election results as to be completely pointless.
It IS what happened in ‘92. And ‘96. And 2000. And and and. Really American elections run on this cycle. I first read about all this in 2003. Of the 10 elections that have happened since then (the pattern also effects mid-terms) 2020 was the first election to break the cycle. And with GOP gains later this year we’ll be right back on cycle.
DeSantis isn’t 3rd party. He’s GOP. That would be basically Anderson in 1980. He’d be a non-factor, thought of as a sore loser. The cycle has the dem winning in ‘24 unless something crazy happens.