Animal science junior Brittany Castete voted for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson in the presidential election, even though she predicted Johnson wouldn’t win.

However, Castete was surprised none of the major national news outlets addressed anything about his standing during their coverage.

At the election party she attended, she said everyone else was paying attention to President Barack Obama and former Republican candidate Mitt Romney, and she “was freaking out about whether Johnson would get the 5 percent.”

If he would have, bipartisanship would be over, Castete said.

Like Independent Ross Perot’s presidential campaign in 1992, any percentage at or above 5 percent would guarantee that party a place on every state’s ballot in the next election.

Johnson ended up with 1 percent of the national popular vote, but one of his major issues, marijuana legalization, passed at the state level in Colorado and Washington.

Third party mayoral candidate Gordon Mese lost his election by a landslide as well, but told local news he accomplished what he set out to do with his race: speak about issues other than crime.

Political science professor James Garand said there is a long history of third-party candidates running to get an issue on the agenda that would not otherwise be there.

Garand said the Progressive party in the 1920s was a successful example of this because its ideas eventually folded into the Democratic party platform.

Under the current Electoral College system, this is the main way third parties can be useful, considering they will never accomplish the end goal of attaining seats in Congress or electing a president, Garand said.

He said third parties can also act as “safety valves.”

Voting for a third party can be a way for voters to express their unhappiness with other candidates, a way to make a statement, Garand said.

They serve as placeholders for voter dissatisfaction, and in the case of Louisiana Libertarian House candidate Rufus Craig Jr., some candidates run so a party-affiliated candidate will not campaign unopposed.

“It provides a choice for voters who don’t want the other candidate,” said Kyle Aycock, president of the University chapter of Young Americans for Liberty.

Aycock summed up the point of third parties in one phrase, saying they exist “to highlight ideas that aren’t in the mainstream and give people a choice.”

In terms of that, both Aycock and Garand agreed this election was a mixed bag.

Garand said the results are typical and not likely to affect change in the near future.

“There’s been talk of change ever since I’ve been an adult, thinking person,” Garand said.

He said change would be possible if a presidential candidate won the popular vote but lost the electoral college, which is “very possible.”

Many European countries use a proportional system. If a party meets a certain minimum percentage — around 5 or 10 percent — of the vote in a national forum, that percentage is reflected in its equivalent of Congress.

Garand said the lack of this system in the United States is a “structural problem.”

English junior Maggie Tyson said she wishes there were more third parties to reflect the views of the American people.

Chemical engineering sophomore Chris Galli said he never votes third party because he knows they’ll never win, but third party candidates deserve recognition.