Many people say that the voting system in the US is a farce. That We The People have no "real" say in who becomes our leaders.
For that to be true, a very broad system of deception and corruption would have to be in place. Is it?
Can we trust that when we vote, there is some confidence that our votes not only count, but get counted accurately.
What evidence is there either way? How do we know for certain that the process is still faithful to those who vote?
Of course, the Electoral College ultimately says who our next leaders will be, but are they truly "influenced" by our votes or like some say,
is it a matter of who has the deepest pocket and can buy the greatest influence and therefore, our Presidents.
It would be great to hear your views and knowledge on this important topic.
Your question is complex. I'll try to give you the short version with the understanding that this is a brief and general overview.
First, recognize that there
are a number of political parties within the USA. Some are regional, some are (relatively) national. The problem a voter faces with having an opportunity to select a third party candidate from this group is various State rules on ballot access. Some of the third party organizations have been able to meet these rules in many states but not necessarily all. The only two parties currently guaranteed to show on every ballot in every State are the Democrats and Republicans. So the first thing to realize is while there may be many candidates from a number of Political Parties, very few of them (if any) will appear on all Presidential elections ballots nationwide. That's why you hear our system as being a "Two-Party" system.
The next thing to realize is that because of this two-party system our society is currently divided into four groups; Democrats, Republicans, various Third-Party members, and "Independents" (i.e. people with no party affiliation). People in the last two groups really have absolutely NO say in who get's elected President. They have minor say in who get's elected to the Senate, and it is dependent on the State. They have slightly greater say in who gets elected to the House, again dependent on the State. They have the greatest say in local elections (City or Town counsels, etc.) depending on the size of the local area.
Finally, those who control the media can direct the amount of "free" coverage that will be given to any candidates. The "newsworthy" candidates get the most free coverage. Meanwhile, a warchest of campaign contributions allows the purchase of advertising time to increase visual recognition since the more people can get to see of a candidate, the more likely they are to vote for them. This is why you see candidates courting the wealthy and special interests, for the money necessary to bombard you with name recognition.
Understanding of these first three things indicates that relatively few options are available to voters, and those are primarily controlled by the two major parties.
Now, while you hear a lot about primaries and caucuses selecting the ultimate candidates for public office, the voters in those are only selecting from a list of candidates in each party that have already been vetted by the party machines. There is all sorts of backroom negotiation and jockeying for position which happens long before you hear from most candidates in all but the smaller local elections.
The point being that while you do get to vote, and that is a choice...except that you are typically choosing from a group of candidates that have already been given the go-ahead by the Party leadership. This includes Trump and Sanders, who were allowed to wear the mantle of their respective parties because the leadership wants to present the impression of an "open forum;" but only because the Party leadership did not expect either candidate to have much if any success at all.
