The most common argument against voting third party seems to be that “you’re throwing your vote away” because a third party doesn’t have a chance of winning. OR that a vote for a third party is actually a vote for insert-awful-candidate-here.
I want to show how both of these arguments are (usually) mathematically inaccurate.
First, let’s do a quick overview of how presidential elections work in the United States. In order to win, a candidate must receive 238 electoral votes.
The popular vote doesn’t matter.
The majority of states are winner-take-all. The only exceptions are Maine and Nebraska; which can split their electoral votes.
Is there such a thing as a wasted vote?
I would propose that if there is, that the way you would define it wouldn’t be voting for someone that has no chance of winning, I would define it as a vote that doesn’t have any impact. (And yes, that does sound an awful lot like all votes are wasted — but hold on, hear me out)
I live in Tennessee, so I am going to use it as an example. Tennessee has 11 electoral votes, and is a winner-take-all state. Tennessee has gone Republican for the last four elections in a row, and the current polls put Trump ahead of Clinton at 55-37. Tennessee will not be going for Clinton. It's just not going to happen. Which means that if you vote for Clinton or Trump… either way it doesn’t matter. All 11 electoral votes are going to Trump no matter what button you push come November. Or if you don’t push any buttons at all. That means a Clinton or Trump vote both have literally no impact, and therefore (in my opinion) would be wasted.
The interesting thing is I hardly know anybody in Tennessee who actually wants Trump. Nor do I know any who actually want Clinton. Almost without exception, everyone I personally know who has decided to vote one way or the other claims their reason is that they are voting against the other, and they are choosing the lesser of two evils.
But like I said… mathematically speaking, it doesn’t matter. Press whichever button you want, and all 11 electoral votes — which are the only ones that count in determining the outcome — are all going to go to Trump.
What about not voting at all?
I understand the thought process behind not voting at all. My friend @lukestokes leans more and more as a proponent of this approach, and I highly respect his opinions. However, the issue with that (again, in my opinion) is that the average person can’t tell by looking at the voting statistics whether a person didn’t vote because they are apathetic/don’t care/aren’t involved OR if it’s an active choice to protest the system. I would say that the average person is much more likely to assume the former over the latter. I would also guess that that is probably accurate -- that the majority of people who don't vote don't do so because they don't care. The number who don't vote due to active protest may not even be in the single digit percentages.
Here’s the case for voting third party, as I see it, even though a third party is highly unlikely to win:
It is specifically to record and demonstrate opposition to the two party duopoly. What if third party candidates got a total of 15-20+ percent of the popular vote this year? If that happened (and let’s assume no third party gets any electoral votes at all in that scenario) think about the implications for the next election. People actually see on paper a large percentage are fed up enough with the two party system that they actually got off the couch and recorded an opposition vote against what has been presented to us as the only viable choices.
The higher that number is, the more confidence people have next time around that people are waking up and don’t have to only choose between R & D anymore.
If you live in a swing state, I understand how you may feel pressured to vote R or D out of fear, especially if you’re voting against who you fear most, rather than for someone you don’t really believe in — but even in that instance, I would say this: If the votes are close enough, there will be recount after recount and the courts will decide anyway — in which case your vote still isn’t actually going to matter. It’s going to come down to who has the best legal team and/or who is better at cheating to come out on top.
If you’re dead set against voting for any of the candidates, Libertarian or Green Party included, I would ask you to consider still showing up and vote, and do a write in. Write in your own name. If not your own name, just write in “none of the above”. Just anything that shows that you are against what has been presented to us as the only two choices that count. For those of you who actively don't vote as an act of opposition, imagine if a large enough percentage of you showed up and all did a write in for "none of the above"? That could make a huge statement as opposed to simply a higher percentage not turning out, which just continues to communicate the idea that people are becoming increasingly apathetic.
Best of luck come November. I hope you consider not wasting your vote on Republicans or Democrats this time around.
If you don't live in a swing state, it should be an especially easy action to take, now that you are aware that you are statistically far more likely to be hit by lightning on the way to vote than you are to have any effect whatsoever on the allocation of electoral votes for your state.
You're right about maybe having some impact on people's mindsets overtime if we can get some sizable percentage voting 3rd party but voting 3rd party is still a wasted vote with respect to the current election as it won't affect the results in any way. And it's worse than wasted if you're in a swing state.
The only way to show you don't whatsoever endorse not just the republican and democratic parties but the voting system itself which I don't is to not vote.
Unfortunately, not voting because you don't support the system is indistinguishable from those who don't vote because they don't care (from the perspective of those in power) -- All the more reason to write in "none of the above" - thus not supporting any of them, but actively showing refusal of all of them. If 10% more people quit voting... I don't see how anything changes. If 10% wrote in none of the above, now you're talking major headlines
Yes, because the media isn't a cog in the machine. Lol
Hi well America has a wonderful; actually I mean, apologies ...
America HAD a wonderful voting system until the whole thing got rigged. I am not saying this because I am just saying politics is messed up in the United States ...
The Constitution has the First Amendment, how people got around the freedom of the press was simple. Privately own media outlets, today guess who supports the Republican Party and which media outlets support the Democratic Party.
Once private ownership purchased media outlets editors became spokespeople for their owners and investigative independent journalists became rarer than light house keepers . . .
Today professional politicians rely upon panhandling for money to buy media coverage. These politicians are insulated from life by their minders and advisers and only see the information their handlers want them to see to encourage the voting process.
Lobbyists are solely concerned with the trillions and trillions of dollars in awarded governmental contracts. The freeloader in the White House is just a status symbol of a platinum bum working for welfare. Simply it is like actors or sports stars etc. If you try and convince all people actors make as much as Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp or Angelina Jollee or Whoppee Goldberg everyone will work harder hoping to break into the big time money stakes.
The President is simply an American citizen born in the United States without a mental health history nor felony convictions; simply 100 million Americans could choose to run for public office but 99.9% of citizens simply have to much self respect to tell falsehoods for platinum level welfare payments.
The American democratic process will not get fixed till you get rid of professional politicians. If you cannot vote for an honest politician in the November election simply tell your sitting Representative " you're Fired ! ! ! " so lobbyists see less of a money return from investing in temporary politicians . . .
There is no better human government process than Democracy so make sure you vote to remove professional politicians from the Congress landscape. If you cannot bother to vote then you work for these slime bags feeding at the public wallet feed trough.
So be a Patriot and stop you elected Representative from harming America instead of being a Domestic Terrorist by continuing to support the dysfunctional Congressional voting processes that have led the Super Power of the United States down the status symbol road to just being a nation called ' America ' ! ! !
There is another argument that the voting process is corrupted and that if you vote it may be counted toward one of the primary canidates.
Possible, for sure. But if votes are being altered, there's probably an equally valid chance votes are being conjured out of nothing... maybe even in the names of people who didn't show up to vote at all.
If you are going to participate, it does make sense to me to vote third party or write in yourself or possibly "no rulers" as @lukestokes has now suggested... primarily (for now, anyway) just to give other fellow humans confidence that there are, in fact, a large number of dissatisfied populace who no longer wish to settle for the lesser of two evils, and who are dissatisfied enough that they won't when it comes time to actually vote.
Great post, Sean!
That's a really good point. I'm hopeful the overall percentage of people who chose not to participate (for whatever reason) will eventually lead to a generally accepted understanding that those "in power" have no real power and "consent of the governed" is statistically a myth. If only 10% of the people (as an example) actually voted for the "rulers" then why would the other 90% obey whatever the rulers decree? The "didn't participate" percentage is also an important number to show.
Curious if you have any data on this or is it just a feeling?
I like the "none of the above" idea (seriously, we should all be watching Brewster's Millions right now for some perspective). In a sense, "none of the above" numbers could be combined with "didn't participate." What if we could actually coordinate something more interesting... maybe write in "no rulers" or something like that? If enough people got onboard, that would be really interesting. That clearly sends the message "I'm not just upset with the choices given to me, but with the entire process of picking a ruler itself."
That, I think, might be worth showing up and voting for. :)
Again though, if you read a lot of @larkenrose's stuff, he makes some good arguments for why voting actually validates the system which is then used to enslave us. I haven't completely written off the idea of voting entirely... but I'm also not super excited about the process as if it matters at all to my daily life.
Okay, I just put together a a post on this topic. I hope you enjoy it. :)
"If only 10% of the people (as an example) actually voted for the "rulers" then why would the other 90% obey whatever the rulers decree?"
Three answers... weapons, prisons, and belief in their authority. I'm not convinced that voting is why people believe in their authority so much as the fact that they can and will come after you in the right circumstances. There's a huge difference in 90% of people not voting due to apathy vs. 90% of people not voting due to lack of belief in authority.
Possibly, but again, if someone comes to a house with a gun to throw them in a cage because they didn't give a portion of their income to rulers, and only 10% percent of the population agrees with the validity of that person's "authority" to cage them, don't you think we'd see more people with guns saying, "Uh, nope. Nice try, but you have no authority here. I'll freely defend myself against you."?
The numbers I'm talking about would, I think, have a direct impact on the "belief in their authority" concept. I wrote about that here as well.
Yes, people may come after you, but there's also this "social contract" idea and the "consent of the governed" that holds it all together. We've seen numerous examples throughout history where humans stood up against obvious injustice, even to the point of personal harm, when their position is the morally correct one.
"and only 10% percent of the population agrees with the validity of that person's "authority" to cage them, don't you think we'd see more people with guns saying, "Uh, nope. Nice try, but you have no authority here. I'll freely defend myself against you."?"
Sure - but that's specifically 90% not believing in authority; which, again, isn't necessarily correlative to 90% not voting.
Why do you make that distinction? 90% is 90%. We don't have to go into the philosophical details of why those 90% decided the way they did, the obvious fact of the numbers still communicates only 10% agree to this existing system and specifically advocated for it. Your argument states, "People don't get the philosophical motivations" and my argument also says the same: The details don't matter. The numerical result is only 10% agree to this, so does it really have the "consent of the governed"?
@lukestokes "Why do you make that distinction? 90% is 90%. We don't have to go into the philosophical details of why those 90% decided the way they did, the obvious fact of the numbers still communicates only 10% agree to this existing system and specifically advocated for it. Your argument states, "People don't get the philosophical motivations" and my argument also says the same: The details don't matter. The numerical result is only 10% agree to this, so does it really have the "consent of the governed"?"
It seems we have different opinions as to what constitutes "consent of the governed" -- you are suggesting that voting gives consent. I think it's much more involved than that. The state certainly doesn't believe that they need your consent via votes. Your consent is via the fact that you happen to live here, or that people signed documents a long time ago and that has bound you, etc. there are all sorts of reasons for it.
If you search for articles on voter turnout there are numerous given reasons, polls, explanations, etc. for low turnout. Most of it has to do with people being busy, not being able to take time off work, people thinking their vote won't influence anything, any any other number of reasons. It's not even in any average person's mind that not voting is due to non-consent to being governed. Or if it is, it certainly isn't reported that way. I never would have thought of that before being exposed to the ideas of self government.
I believe the turnout for the last midterm was 42% of eligible voters? Nobody suggested that 58% didn't give consent to be governed.
More specifically, I say the reasons behind not voting matters is because if it is because people don't believe in authority of the state, their behavior would actively change in ways that would break the system.
If the state has no authority, people wouldn't vote because it would be a joke. They also wouldn't pull over for police, wouldn't pay taxes, wouldn't show up for court for victimless crime accusations, etc. the system would fall apart.
If they believe the authority exists, and the majority of people don't vote for other reasons (which already happens... e.g. the last midterm) people still go along with everything. Taxes get paid, people request permission for permits to build on their own property, people request permission slips to get married, etc.
Voting is more of a symptom of the problem than a cause of it, it seems to me. I don't personally know anybody who votes and then thinks "now I have actively given my consent to these people" due to having pressed a button.
If 90% of people stopped voting, but they all still believe in the authority and legitimacy of the state over them and everyone else, how does that change anything other than more people complaining about how apathetic everyone is and more chanting about how people "get the government they deserve" due to "not exercising the rights that others does to preserve for them" ?
A majority already don't vote and I haven't seen any evidence that it has made any difference thus far. I do believe the US has one of the lowest turnout rates in the world as it stands already.
Good Job.
I'm voting libertarian to help them with ballot access.
Great post! Jill Stein 2016!
Thank you for reading!
I have a hard time supporting any ruler. Especially since all of them advocate using the state as an initiator of force. Not voting and not endorsing this corrupt system of mob enslavement is much better than playing the game.
All the more reason to write in "none of the above" - thus not supporting any of them, but actively showing refusal of all of them
This is why I prefer a vote for "no rulers."
I think I might write a post on this. :)
No rulers is a good phrasing.
If I actively participate in the system of mob rule by taking the time to do the exercise, that would go against my principles, so I don't want to be counted to show increased participation. Voting none of the above would convey that I would vote for a candidate if there was another of my liking, which isn't true
Perhaps a vote for yourself, then // as the only viable option for who to rule you :)
I understand not wanting to participate - it's just tough when you not participating doesn't mean the other players with power won't stop playing the game with you. If you don't pay property taxes to show non support of the system, for example, that doesn't stop your house from being taken from you.
My house will be taken whether I vote or not. The chance of my one vote counting is lottery ticketish, and compromising my principles is too a high price to pay
Donald Duck gets a number of votes whenever there is an election in Finland. Should interesting to see how this goes
My friend's voting for Mickey Mouse. (Florida)
Ha - that's great. Wasn't aware of that
I vote every election and my state is a dead state. It goes one way every time by a landslide. Though I know my vote is wasted, no matter who I vote for (I'm a Libertarian), I will never miss a chance to vote. It is a privilege that many countries don't have.
And you get a kewl sticker.
This post has been linked to from another place on Steem.
Learn more about linkback bot v0.4. Upvote if you want the bot to continue posting linkbacks for your posts. Flag if otherwise.
Built by @ontofractal
from the standpoint of law, if i vote for someone, pretending for a moment that my vote counts, and that person is elected, then, they use their power to cause injury to anyone, technically, i am lawfully responsible for that injury. people tried at Nuremburg were not allowed to claim, "i was only following orders" there is not a candidate that i've seen that i trust with my vote. voting for any ruler over others is philosophically immoral.
Hence the suggestion to vote for "none of the above" if you're against voting, or for "no rulers" as per @lukestokes suggestion.
Having said that, I do understand and respect your viewpoint.
I seemingly should have titled this post "A mathematical explanation how voting against both major parties is the only vote that counts" :)
Thanks for the article - I really enjoyed reading it. I have one problem with it though. You said one can't look beyond the voting statistics and tell from the absence of voting that people don't want the options presented. Then how come he would be able to tell from votes for at third candidate that the two main options were rejected. In other words, why wouldn't this be seen just as for the 3rd party instead of votes against the system.
I don't really see a choice against the system being offered by the system.
Congratulations @seanmclellan! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about this award, click here
Congratulations @seanmclellan! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
SteemitBoard World Cup Contest - The semi-finals are coming. Be ready!
Participate in the SteemitBoard World Cup Contest!
Collect World Cup badges and win free SBD
Support the Gold Sponsors of the contest: @good-karma and @lukestokes
Congratulations @seanmclellan! You received a personal award!
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!