This phrase..."two-party elitism"...I do not think it means what you think it means. (Really, that statement doesn't make much sense actually, I just wanted to make the Princess Bride reference.)
Anyway, "two-party elitism" isn't the proper term for something that is borne out of the very structure of our elections, and has nothing to do with elitism whatsoever. The fact is, our system of
plurality voting is destined to lead to two parties. There's even a term for this: it's called
Duverger's Law. Elitism has nothing to do with why it's always
the
same
old
shit
(love
that
enter
key)
I agree 100% that we could use more options, and I think a lot could be done to move in that direction (a short list: 1. Ensure that the requirements to get on the ballot are the same for third party candidates as they are for major party candidates, 2. Return
control of presidential debates to the
League of Women Voters (
one more link on this issue) or the
Citizen's Debate Commission, 3. Make the requirement for third party debate participation 5% in national polling again, like it was before Ross Perot scared the establishment in 1992, and 4. Migrate to a
Condorcet method of voting, where the winner is the candidate that would defeat every other candidate in a head-to-head matchup, and where voters are able to rank candidates in order of preference).
Still, the fact that third parties are actively discouraged - even beyond Duverger's Law - has nothing to do with whether or not people are voting FOR Obama this election. There will always be a decent chunk of people who dislike all the candidates, whether there are 2 or 20, but the fact is that voters are generally mobilized FOR Obama in ways that go beyond what is normal. Registration is swelling in record numbers, and it is concentrated in states where Obama has greater support. There are lengthy delays for simple campaign materials like yard signs because so many people not only plan to vote for Obama, but want to publicly display their support. There are unprecedented levels of volunteer involvement, and many of these people have never before volunteered with a political campaign - but Obama has inspired them to stand up and be part of the Democratic process in a way that goes beyond drawing a line or checking a box.
There's no denying that some people are voting AGAINST McCain rather than FOR Obama, but the FOR votes this year are certainly looking to be more than any other election in recent history (Clinton benefited greatly from votes AGAINST Bush in 92, not to mention the Perot spoiler, and while one could argue that voters voted FOR Clinton in 96, it was such a sleeper of an election he might as well have run unopposed). I'm sorry that, for whatever reason, you can't find anything to like about either major candidate, but don't conflate your own experience, and perhaps that of your peers, with the entire nation.