Obama is a social/civil moderate in my eyes. Neither authoritarian nor libertarian. He likes to use power when he believes it is right, but in other scenarios he has been libertarian. His position fluctuates a lot (much like his views.) 

 I agree very much that they've misplaced Ron Paul. Ron Paul fluctuates above and below the axis. I think he should be near Friedman, but possibly since the survey asks "Do you support abortion?" , "Are you religious?" without asking "do you think the government should regulate abortion", "do you think the government should regulate religion?", etc, it skews Ron Paul's position. 

People of his party are already going to vote. This is called the median voters theorem. 

You must have misunderstood me. Only 57.5% of americans who are eligible-to-vote voted in the 2012 presidential election. Source.  Those 40% that didn't vote are more important than trying to sway independent voters.

You don't need a no party system to win an election. You can write in a candidates name instead but why aren't many doing that ? 

Whether or not they belong to those parties don't matter. It's who they vote for that counts and if they choose a nominee from either party then their implicitly backing them up no matter what ... 

I still think third parties are a waste of time. If people wanted to change something then do it from within those two big parties. Donald Trump has changed the republican party forever despite having next to zero political experience and similarily Bernie Sanders was trying the same thing with the democratic party but to no avail ... 

Do you think those 57.5% are Republicans and Democrats? Of course not. They are independents or non-voters. Independents are the largest political group.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/3934/independents-rank-largest-us-political-group.aspx

Like I said, they are miseducated/uneducated. How many people know or think voting for a third party or unaffiliated candiate can work?

Many people have tried. Donald Trump is an exception because he is a populist who changes his views on a dime and knows how to tap into anti-political correctness and protectionist views of Americans to remain popular. Most people are not populists and don't do that. For everybody else, the establishment acts as a barrier.

You're both correct and incorrect.

Both parties are on the brink of collapse, yes. A Trump Presidency will damn both parties - Republican establishment falls apart and are lose-lose if he succeeds or fails because they get blamed either way; if Trump wins, Republicans have a majority on all three fronts and they win the right to gerrymander the districts even further, further screwing the Democrats' chances of coming back as they currently stand. Not to mention this race is one indictment away from being entirely non-establishment.

BUT, if you live in most states, your vote does not matter. Your state is likely hardwired one way or another, and there's an insanely low chance of any number of votes flipping the state one way or another. The only reason to vote third party is IF you're actually a third party and want to try to push towards that 5%. Until the impossibe happens, and more states take Nebraska/Maine's district delegate system, this will remain true. Hell even then districts are usually gerrymandered one way or another, or the district is defined by class and therefore biased one way or another either way.

Surely the citizens do know that write in candidates ARE allowed, right ? 

I agree that it's unlikely to change the party from within but how likely do you think your idea is going to fare when bringing change upon the political landscape ? 

They don't have support from the masses because the masses keep telling themselves that voting for a third party candidate is a complete waste of time. If just a few million people would get out of this mindset, they would realize that all it would take is 5% of the national vote to change everything. The party that gets a minimum of 5% of the vote is eligible for national funding and other rights that are currently enjoyed by the two main parties. In 2012, Gary Johnson, who was running under the Libertarian ticket got 1% of the vote, which was considered an accomplishment. So I say if you feel like voting for a third party is a waste of time, then don't vote at all because voting for the lesser of the two evils is still a vote for evil.

So if you end up voting for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton even though you don't like either one of them, then you're part of the problem and not the solution.

Agree with OP. Voting Hillary or Trump when you hate both candidates is wasting your vote. Neither is good for this country. It may take some time but voting for third parties will slowly bring them to relevance. Fuck Dems and GOP.