yes and in your hypothetical fantasy land where those things are mutually exclusive and not on the same ballot you'd have a point
alas..
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
I'd rather have people "waste their vote" than not vote at all
- Thread starter Xaszatm
- Start date
yes and in your hypothetical fantasy land where those things are mutually exclusive and not on the same ballot you'd have a point
alas..
i'm not sure how voting for Ralph Nader is going to help the Superintended of Public Instruction? Third party votes have more hope of actually making a difference in lower level elections but in terms of the presidential election specifically, it's a wasted vote.
As someone that cannot vote, despite my parents living in the US, it enrages me when people do not vote. I would vote if I could, and I hate that those that hold such a privilege waste it.
I was so incredibly angry when I found out one of my very good friends decided not to vote because he didn't like Hillary or Trump.
Apparently a lot of other people gave him a lot of shit after the elections, and he says he doesn't care, but I really hope he does.
I was so incredibly angry when I found out one of my very good friends decided not to vote because he didn't like Hillary or Trump.
Apparently a lot of other people gave him a lot of shit after the elections, and he says he doesn't care, but I really hope he does.
you're continuing to compartmentalize the ballot in an effort to support your bogus point that a vote for a third party is the equivalent of not voting at all
because not voting at all is not voting at all whereas voting for a third party is.....voting
I can post the picture of a sample ballot again so you can see that it's actually one singular thing and doesn't just end with president
Dude, he just won't budge on this. He clearly just doesn't want to admit he's wrong. Leave it.
Definitely. Voting third-party is still participating in the process. And even if you can't vote for the presidential candidates the two major parties are offering, there are probably going to be down-ticket races that you are comfortable supporting those candidates.
I've changed on this since 2016. No candidate is owed your vote, they have to earn it. That applies to all races. Vote for the people you can support and vote for third-party or write-in for those who you can't abide by.
I've changed on this since 2016. No candidate is owed your vote, they have to earn it. That applies to all races. Vote for the people you can support and vote for third-party or write-in for those who you can't abide by.
This is the kind of logic that leaves us with two shitty fucking options every single time. Seems kinda weird to brag about that.
If you shame someone for voting third party, what do you think is more likely: that they're going to vote for who you want or just not bother going at all?
We don't want the latter to happen because it hurts the downballot.
You keep applying elections and votes that aren't the Presidential election to my point specifically about the Presidential election, even after I've already agreed with you about third party votes in lower office elections. I'm not sure what you're trying to even achieve right now.
I don't want to shame people for voting third party, so I'm sorry if I come across that way. But for the presidential election I'd rather people use their vote wisely especially when we're witnessing the rise of a dictator in the United States right when we're also at a pivotal point in the climate change crisis. We really can't afford to let people like Trump sit in the most important office.
I guess I'm not sure what I'm saying or doing wrong here. I've repeatedly stated that I think voting third party for lower level offices is perfectly fine and have no problem with it, my point is just different when it comes to the presidential election specifically.
When all of these organizations make these commercials and shit to get people to vote, they're not saying "vote democratic or else" they're saying get out and vote.
I was merely pointing out that conflating voting with not voting is completely asinine
In the end I'd rather have people show up to the polls than not show up at all, but I still maintain my believe that voting third party for president accomplishes very little in the end.
EDIT - to clarify, this is mostly because our presidential election system is fucked up.
At the end of the day people have the right to express what limited democratic options they have as they will. If we want to move non-voters and third party voters we need a better message than "shame on you". No matter how unrepentantly awful and shamefully unforgivable you feel non-voters and third party voters are, that message don't work. A start might be having a message and platform better than "status quo but w/o trump".
But yeah I think voting at all is better than not voting. I honestly think voting and writing in "Nobody for President 2020" is better than not voting. We have very limited power and control in this system, but we have a little, and as it stands at least voting is one of the limited methods of control we have. There's no unconditional guarantee that right will last forever. Express it. If you're pissed off and think the whole system is bullshit, that's an even better reason to express it.
But yeah I think voting at all is better than not voting. I honestly think voting and writing in "Nobody for President 2020" is better than not voting. We have very limited power and control in this system, but we have a little, and as it stands at least voting is one of the limited methods of control we have. There's no unconditional guarantee that right will last forever. Express it. If you're pissed off and think the whole system is bullshit, that's an even better reason to express it.
Failing to attempt vs Failing to succeed. I'd rather do my part and lose rather than not do my part and still lose. If you think the result will be the same then you definitely shouldn't be afraid of the attempt anyway. I don't think it's a good strat to shame non voters though, but rather help folks get over the fear of failure.
I get the general idea and would normally agree that everyone should vote for who they really support. But if you live in a swing state come November next year, just do the right thing and don't be a selfish jerk.
Sacrifice your right to vote for a person who will never win any election so that others less fortunate than you don't have to surrender their rights at literal gunpoint to all the things you get to enjoy the other 1,459 days until the next presidential election.
Sacrifice your right to vote for a person who will never win any election so that others less fortunate than you don't have to surrender their rights at literal gunpoint to all the things you get to enjoy the other 1,459 days until the next presidential election.
Voted Sanders in 2016.
No regrets.
Wont make the same mistake twice and will be voting for whatever candidate the DNC chooses so as to avoid more trump, but damnit if I dont believe it defeats the purpose of voting.
It's supposed to be an individual choice, not a group decision.
Not who you think will win but who would do the best job.
*sigh*
Oh well...
No regrets.
Wont make the same mistake twice and will be voting for whatever candidate the DNC chooses so as to avoid more trump, but damnit if I dont believe it defeats the purpose of voting.
It's supposed to be an individual choice, not a group decision.
Not who you think will win but who would do the best job.
*sigh*
Oh well...
Last edited:
I find it funny how people will yell your Presidential vote is wasted if you don't vote for someone who has a chance to win, but somehow not think the Presidential vote is a waste in a state that is clearly dominated by one candidate and that other candidate doesn't have a chance to win....
One problem we have is this focus of the Presential vote being the be all and end all when stuff on the down ballot is probably much more important in the grand scheme of things. We need to de-emphasize the Presidential vote and start emphasizing other things.
One problem we have is this focus of the Presential vote being the be all and end all when stuff on the down ballot is probably much more important in the grand scheme of things. We need to de-emphasize the Presidential vote and start emphasizing other things.
OP
OP
Blame our shitty system, like fuck I want Biden but with how fucked we are right now and get fucked with a Republican, what god damn fucking choice do I have?!
I agree as a principle for organizing and activating voters, but personally, it's beyond annoying that non-voters or protest voters need to have their egos coddled into doing the right thing instead of just...doing the right thing because they have the power to do so.
At the end of the day, presidential elections are two-person races. Not voting for one is support for the other. Non- and third-party voters don't want to acknowledge this because they don't want to feel responsible for anything that comes out of that election, but the math is as simple as that.
I think this cuts both ways. On the one hand, yes, if you live in a deep red state or a deep blue state, then your individual vote will likely not change the outcome of who wins your state. On the other hand, we don't live in a vacuum, and what voters do in deep red or blue states can affect voting attitudes in purple states. The more people there are in blue states, for example, that talk about how they're casting protest votes for third-party candidates, the more it creates a narrative and a permission structure for people in swing states to do the same. The idea of "well I live in a swing state so I can't do what they're doing, I'll just vote Dem no matter what" doesn't take hold with people the same way as "I don't like either party so I'm voting Green/not voting at all" does.
I mean, voting is a group decision. You don't get 300 million different presidents come Election Day, you get one person with the biggest group of votes.
From 1963 to 1993, Canada had a legit, registered political party called the Rhinoceros Party. It was a satirical, joke party, but you could vote for them. It was a way for people to vote their displeasure about politics. It was a protest vote.
There have been a variety of not-so-serious parties that have come and gone. Some with specific agendas that people could support even though there was zero chance of them having any actual political power. But it was a way for people to make their point. Either as protest or support of something specific. These votes were counted and published. They were heard.
Were they a waste of vote? Perhaps. But even having a minimal amount of impact still showed people cared.
Not voting at all only shows that you don't care. Not even a little bit. About anything.
There have been a variety of not-so-serious parties that have come and gone. Some with specific agendas that people could support even though there was zero chance of them having any actual political power. But it was a way for people to make their point. Either as protest or support of something specific. These votes were counted and published. They were heard.
Were they a waste of vote? Perhaps. But even having a minimal amount of impact still showed people cared.
Not voting at all only shows that you don't care. Not even a little bit. About anything.
Reminder that First-Past-The-Post voting systems are broken and shouldn't be used by countries calling themselves democracies.
Right now, however, a vote like that in the US demonstrates you care more about making a point no one will notice than you do stopping and preventing the suffering of those less fortunate.
If both sides were the same and we weren't approaching multiple existential crises you'd have some semblance of a point but currently the math means a vote for a third party is a vote for radical destructive evil that will destroy the future for generations with hatred and racism as its engine vs mildly incompetent competing groups of generally decent or moral people and ideas run by a gaggle of intellectuals, power brokers and several ambitious Jerks.
The US Comstitution does not need to be changed in this instance. The Constitution does not state that only Democrats and Republicans can run for office.
No but it states that for a President to be elected you require an absolutely majority of the EC votes otherwise the House picks the President and the Senate the Vice President.... so since there's like no fucking way a third party is going to win the house and senate and an absolute majority of the EC votes ever.... how do you plan on changing the Constitution.
OP
OP
It is not simply because there are more elections than the presidential. What would you rather have:
Someone who doesn't vote period
vs
Someone who puts a third party candidate for the presidential then votes the rest of the ballot democratically
At the very least, that person is helping local and state elections which are extremely important.
I should have specified the general election is my main concern but the GOP has been extremely successful gerrymandering and warping smaller elections in part by driving likely dem voters to third parties and then cementing those districts and making them out of reach. So even on local dog catcher I'm voting (D) until the GOP does a massive reset or splinters and dies. And I mean that literally. If one of the dig catchers was a Green Party vet named Bighands McDogwhisperer I'd vote for Sally Butterfingers O'Nervouswreck if she's a (D) and trust me I do not relish that prospect.
Because the only other way the GOP survives is by creating a seriously troubling hold on power with the courts that will allow them to bypass their inevitable demographic fate.
And remember if they didn't vote, period, then it's either zero sum or a very slight negative effect on the (D) candidate averaged over the nation depending on how the seats are contorted.
I do take your point about creating a better citizen - and there's a general mathematical advantage for Dems when turnout is higher but it's not a mathematically rational construct.
We also have the not inconsidreable concern that Russia accessed all 50 states voting and voter registration systems. A newly registered voter is a potential asset for bad actors regardless of affiliation.
The fact that our election commission is complicit should be causing riots but the media continues to let us down. The Fourth Estate is now the root cause of the infection through click bait and normalization and the endless quest for scandal and horse races.
Last edited:
Again, the Constituion is not the issue.
Third party candidates have difficulty because the system is designed to favor Democrats and Republicans. Candidates for those two parties automatically get on the ballots for most states where third party candidates have to jump over more hurdles such as gathering signatures to qualify. Third party candidates are at a severe disadvantage with fundraising and do not qualify for public funding while Democtats and Republicans can easily get that money. Third party candidates often find they are not invited to debates and do not have the resources to get their messages out to the people.
Those are the injustices I would like to see fixed. Changing the Constiturion is not the issue.
I've said it before and I'll say it a million times.
If you claim to be Democratic, Liberal, or Progressive in any manner - and then you don't vote or vote third party in a General Election out of protest for your candidate not winning or a candidate you dislike winning the nomination - then you don't give a flying fuck about the ideals of the before mentioned banners that you claim to subscribe too. You're also selfish, and don't give two flying fucks about your fellow party members who are part of marginalized communities who are royally fucked over during Republcian presidencies.
If you claim to be Democratic, Liberal, or Progressive in any manner - and then you don't vote or vote third party in a General Election out of protest for your candidate not winning or a candidate you dislike winning the nomination - then you don't give a flying fuck about the ideals of the before mentioned banners that you claim to subscribe too. You're also selfish, and don't give two flying fucks about your fellow party members who are part of marginalized communities who are royally fucked over during Republcian presidencies.
It might be ineffective, but that doesn't make it a "waste" because you're still exercising your civil duty. Regardless, if you think it's immoral to vote for a candidate, and you can reasonably articulate why it's immoral, then you should be shamed for it.
OP
OP
...and you do that by making sure we get enough people in the state and local elections to vote.
The Constitution is 100% the issue the 50% +1 requirement means that a third party will never get the talent it needs to succeed, it's why 99% of third party leaders are grifters, idiots, weirdos, or all three.
And you lumping the vast majority of third party candidates into stereotypes is where you lost me. I will not be responding to you anymore in this thread. Good day to you.
So wait, you didn't vote in the primary last time and then voted third party to voice your displeasure about who was chosen in the primary?
Voting third party can be beneficial especially when you consider the electoral college. Some states are guaranteed to go one way or the other. If neither candidate speaks to you, show your displeasure by going third party. People complain about the two party system, but if a third party gets 5% of the popular vote, they are eligible for matching funds in the next election cycle. It would be huge. https://ivn.us/2016/08/12/5-important-number-third-party-candidates-2016/
In 2008, 1.4% went to all third parties, in 2016 it was 5% with two very unpopular candidates in the main parties.
I agree, I am against the vote shaming that goes on. And it's important for non-voters to get out and vote as a first step, and then their interest will most likely be drawn into the other choices on the ballot.
And of course, it's important for us all to help people we know realize that now's the time more than any to vote for what will be the main candidate over Trump. Pointing fingers and attacking people who are potentially on the same side is harmful and counterproductive. Being inclusive still can mean acknowledging mistakes and informing people.
And of course, it's important for us all to help people we know realize that now's the time more than any to vote for what will be the main candidate over Trump. Pointing fingers and attacking people who are potentially on the same side is harmful and counterproductive. Being inclusive still can mean acknowledging mistakes and informing people.
The system the Constitution has set up is what causes that though. Why give any money or support or attention to someone with no chance? Another party could qualify for funding but none has the support. First past the post system means we're only ever going to have 2 viable candidates. Should be popular vote with instant runoff. Then you can rank your choices by preference and truly vote for who you want.
The principles people gave us George Bush Jr (invasion of Iraq) and Trump (I don't have receipts, just a gut feeling about Trump). I'm not saying our system doesn't need fixed and I'm not sure how we can fix it but voting for 3rd Parties for President isn't cutting it. If there's a third party down ballot that you want to vote for have at it but even then be ready for the consequences
OP
OP
Ok, maybe I'm not being clear. If someone protests votes by voting third party in the presidential, do you think they will still protest vote the entire ticket? Getting people to vote in state and local elections, even if they won't vote the same in the presidential, should be pressed.
