>Could you though?

Highly unlikely in one election cycle. The parties control both houses, the presidency, the states and the locals almost completely.

Step one is stop voting for incumbents and seriously consider voting out incumbents unless they are really, really good; exceptional. The longer someone stays in power, the more power they get, the more deals they make, the less accountable they feel. It's good to get fresh blood and a fresh outlook every term too. Really the bottom line is we expect change, but we keep voting the same people in and those people serve for decades. It's almost an insanity.

Once the existing political parties are weakened by turnover, you can start placing third party people in there. Now is a good time too, the mainstream media's credibility is on it's heels and has less influence over elections than traditionally.

> Now is a good time too, the mainstream media's credibility is on it's heels and has less influence over elections than traditionally.

Most of the ground the mainstream media has lost is to absolutely whacko q-anon and alt-right podcasters and video bloggers and alt-news, which is not a great environment for third-party people, unless the third-party that you're trying to start is a christo-fascist movement.

I would hope there's a large subsection of the population that has lost trust in the traditional news sources and the credibility of their opinions on candidates, but also doesn't buy into the wacky fringe stuff.

The UK has the same bullshit FPTP system as the USA, but they have more successful 3rd parties. The SNP dominates in Scotland. LibDems were even able to participate in a govt coalition. And both Conservatives and Labour are completely irrelevant in Northern Ireland - which has completely different parties than the rest of the UK.

So what prevents parties similar to the SNP and LibDems to get elected in the USA?