Posted on Aug 25, 2016
Is there any value in voting for a third party candidate for President? Or is your vote "wasted"?
13.9K
163
112
9
9
0
Politics
Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton
Gary Johnson
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 43
15
15
0
The vote is never wasted even if the candidate has little chance of winning. The point of voting is to vote for the person you feel is best for the job. Voting for the third party because you like what they are saying says a great deal about your integrity. You are being true to yourself and not simply voting for the person you think will mess things up less. If everyone who voted for the lessor of the evils actually voted for the 3rd party that they preferred, I think we would see a change in the mindset that the vote is wasted. No where in the constitution does it say we only can vote Democrat or Republican.
(15)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS - Nobody that I personally know, who is planning on voting for GJ, would ever... evereverevereverever... vote for HRC. Granted, most of my friends are military or former military.
That being said, the argument isn't flawed. Historical voting trends and Libertarian turnout among the majority of the American population back my argument up. The closest a Libertarian came to having national appeal was Ron Paul... who still had to run as a GOP candidate to have any shot at victory. Also, based on the Libertarian Platform of limited gov't, free markets, pro-2nd Amendment, anti-gov't subsidies (of any kind), choice in education, private property, abolished income tax, anti-social security, parental rights, privacy rights, and personal liberty... how many Democrats align? I can only find a VERY few platform stances that align with the DEM (big gov't) party (anti-death penalty, pro-LGBT marriage, and a couple others).
That being said, the argument isn't flawed. Historical voting trends and Libertarian turnout among the majority of the American population back my argument up. The closest a Libertarian came to having national appeal was Ron Paul... who still had to run as a GOP candidate to have any shot at victory. Also, based on the Libertarian Platform of limited gov't, free markets, pro-2nd Amendment, anti-gov't subsidies (of any kind), choice in education, private property, abolished income tax, anti-social security, parental rights, privacy rights, and personal liberty... how many Democrats align? I can only find a VERY few platform stances that align with the DEM (big gov't) party (anti-death penalty, pro-LGBT marriage, and a couple others).
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGM (Join to see) - The platform split is pretty even. You gloss over LGBT issues as a whole, Pro-Choice, Marriage quality, Anti-DP, anti-expansionist, and generally anti-Hawk. The party as a whole aligns with RNC on "fiscal" (stay out of my wallet) while it aligns with the DNC on "social" (stay out of my bedroom).
Just because you view the DNC as having a "big government" platform, doesn't mean that is all its planks, though I agree many of them lead that way... but so does the RNC with its hawkish stance on DoD spending.
You forget that GJ is not just pulling from HRC as a candidate but from Bernie Sanders, who the DNC is trying to reconsolidate back in. There are A LOT of anti-establishment folks out there.
The LP ends up pretty much middle of the road on "single voter issues."
Just because you view the DNC as having a "big government" platform, doesn't mean that is all its planks, though I agree many of them lead that way... but so does the RNC with its hawkish stance on DoD spending.
You forget that GJ is not just pulling from HRC as a candidate but from Bernie Sanders, who the DNC is trying to reconsolidate back in. There are A LOT of anti-establishment folks out there.
The LP ends up pretty much middle of the road on "single voter issues."
(2)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
The difference in the LP and DEM stance on social issues is that the LP insists the gov't stay out of it, while the DEMs insist the gov't mandate the solutions... that is a wide gap to cross for DEMs. You are also talking about the HUGE gap between Bernie's Socialist platform and the LP's limited gov't platform. The only pull GJ has with them is his desire to legalize pot.
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGM (Join to see) - The other pull he has is "Not HRC" and "Not Trump." Democrat supporters will not vote for Mr. Trump, but they might vote for Gov Johnson as he meets the anti-establishment mentality.
(1)
(0)
8
8
0
"Wasted Votes" by definition mean any vote that does not directly assist the WINNER of the election.
As an example, 100 votes, it requires 51 votes to win. The 52nd-100th vote for the WINNER are "Wasted Votes" and the 0-49 votes to the LOSER(S) are "Wasted Votes."
Therefore, it is actually "beneficial" to vote third party, as it changes the Voting Dynamic. It actually CHANGES the "Wasted Votes" because it has a potential to decide the election at 34-51 Votes, instead of the "normal" 51.
Additionally, by voting outside the bipartisan tickets, you have the "potential" shift shift party alignment left/right. If the Right/Left starts "losing votes" to an outsider, they modify their platforms to make the third part more included. The goal being to "reabsorb" those potential voters for a more decisive win.
As an example, the current "third party frontrunners" are the Libertarian & Green Party. The Libertarian part draws "about" equal numbers from BOTH primary parties (currently slightly ahead on Dem), while the Green leans towards Dem.
The (flawed) logic of "A vote for Third Party is a vote for X" just does not hold true, mainly because we have "safe states" where it is Winner Take All.
In CA, someone choosing to vote for Gary Johnson over Donald Trump is going to have "no effect" on the OUTCOME of the election within that state. Someone choosing to vote Gary Johnson over Hillary Clinton "might" affect the OUTCOME, but because there are so many "wasted votes" (overage to winner) it is unlikely. The opposite holds true in TX and "Red States."
I notice you are located in VA (Purple = Swing State). Your vote here has the "most" power to alter the election, however the mathematics model shows it unlikely.
As an example, 100 votes, it requires 51 votes to win. The 52nd-100th vote for the WINNER are "Wasted Votes" and the 0-49 votes to the LOSER(S) are "Wasted Votes."
Therefore, it is actually "beneficial" to vote third party, as it changes the Voting Dynamic. It actually CHANGES the "Wasted Votes" because it has a potential to decide the election at 34-51 Votes, instead of the "normal" 51.
Additionally, by voting outside the bipartisan tickets, you have the "potential" shift shift party alignment left/right. If the Right/Left starts "losing votes" to an outsider, they modify their platforms to make the third part more included. The goal being to "reabsorb" those potential voters for a more decisive win.
As an example, the current "third party frontrunners" are the Libertarian & Green Party. The Libertarian part draws "about" equal numbers from BOTH primary parties (currently slightly ahead on Dem), while the Green leans towards Dem.
The (flawed) logic of "A vote for Third Party is a vote for X" just does not hold true, mainly because we have "safe states" where it is Winner Take All.
In CA, someone choosing to vote for Gary Johnson over Donald Trump is going to have "no effect" on the OUTCOME of the election within that state. Someone choosing to vote Gary Johnson over Hillary Clinton "might" affect the OUTCOME, but because there are so many "wasted votes" (overage to winner) it is unlikely. The opposite holds true in TX and "Red States."
I notice you are located in VA (Purple = Swing State). Your vote here has the "most" power to alter the election, however the mathematics model shows it unlikely.
(8)
(0)
8
8
0
It isn't wasted. It's a vote take away from the other two parties. It's my right and it's also principals. I can honestly say, when people are dissatisfied with the country (as usual), I voted for someone who actually had interest in the people and the country.
(8)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google