3 ms·

> "But in THIS election almost everyone seems to agree that one or both of the candidates are horrible and will ruin everything." I'd argue that's why it's a g

> "But in THIS election almost everyone seems to agree that one or both of the candidates are horrible and will ruin everything." I'd argue that's why it's a great chance to vote third party. Both major candidates are terrible choices, and quite frankly even though people say Hilary is less terrible than Trump, I don't buy it, just look at her track record. If you vote third party in this election, you might not win this time, but you can start laying the foundation for a strong third party to emerge in future elections.

MBCook 10y ago
So that's the tradeoff. Would you rather that the X party might get a seat at the table next time or would you rather that you do your best NOT to elect the person you don't want by voting for their opponent.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  I'd take the first option. Look at the shitshow that's been unleashed by continuing to vote for the lesser of two evils. We'll only stop things getting worse by making politicians earn our votes, rather than winning by default by being slightly more palatable than the other candidate. Voting with your conscience means you want to hold your politicians to higher standards, and whilst that might not have an immediate impact, it is the type of action that can make a noticeable difference over time.
int_19h 10y ago
> If you vote third party in this election, you might not win this time, but you can start laying the foundation for a strong third party to emerge in future elections. Assuming that there are future (fair) elections. I have serious concerns about that if Trump is to become the president. I've heard many people on the right having the same concerns about Clinton.
- MBCook 10y ago
  Whoever wins I'm VERY interested to see what election/campaign/voting reform laws get proposed or passed. Do people try to make tax returns a requirement? Birth certificates? Do we move to a more federal election system so it's not 50 states + 1000s of counties deciding how elections are run? Do presidential powers get reigned in a bit? Much of that may require amendments, but I have a feeling we're going to have the discussions.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  Improvements to the fairness of elections won't come from those who benefit from the status quo, it'll come from those at the grassroots level. Boosting the electoral performance of third party candidates builds confidence that grassroots movements can make a significant political impact. As for whether Trump or Clinton would actively block fair elections, that wouldn't surprise me, but I wouldn't put it past either of them (Trump's already made it clear he wants to make it easier to manipulate the press, and Clinton was clearly willing to engage in underhand tactics to get the Democratic nomination). If you're of the same mindset then it makes no sense to vote for either of them, as it appears neither are interested in engaging in fair elections.
  - int_19h 10y ago
    > rump's already made it clear he wants to make it easier to manipulate the press, and Clinton was clearly willing to engage in underhand tactics to get the Democratic nomination I would dare say that these two things aren't equivalent. Clinton "rigging" the primaries didn't involve preventing people from speaking out, or excluding them from voting. It was mostly about the system itself being "pre-rigged" by design, so to speak, and then some coordination with the DNC behind the scenes. All bad juju, but not the kind of thing that causes lasting damage compared to the current state of affairs. Compared to Democrat "machines" of the old, it's practically peanuts - and the country and its political system survived those. OTOH, Trump's talk about expanding the libel laws and otherwise targeting the press, if implemented to its logical completion, would take a lot of time to dig out of. That's not even taking into account his threats to "investigate" his political opponents if elected.
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      > "Clinton "rigging" the primaries didn't involve preventing people from speaking out" Some would argue that there's evidence that she is engaged in that activity: https://m.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4wa5ue/clinton_body_count_5_in_just_6_weeks/ https://m.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4wa5ue/clinton_bo... Whether you want to believe this or not is up to you, but I'd suggest doing a bit of research before dismissing it.

MBCook 10y ago

So that's the tradeoff. Would you rather that the X party might get a seat at the table next time or would you rather that you do your best NOT to elect the person you don't want by voting for their opponent.

ZenoArrow 10y ago
I'd take the first option. Look at the shitshow that's been unleashed by continuing to vote for the lesser of two evils. We'll only stop things getting worse by making politicians earn our votes, rather than winning by default by being slightly more palatable than the other candidate. Voting with your conscience means you want to hold your politicians to higher standards, and whilst that might not have an immediate impact, it is the type of action that can make a noticeable difference over time.

int_19h 10y ago

> If you vote third party in this election, you might not win this time, but you can start laying the foundation for a strong third party to emerge in future elections. Assuming that there are future (fair) elections. I have serious concerns about that if Trump is to become the president. I've heard many people on the right having the same concerns about Clinton.

MBCook 10y ago
Whoever wins I'm VERY interested to see what election/campaign/voting reform laws get proposed or passed. Do people try to make tax returns a requirement? Birth certificates? Do we move to a more federal election system so it's not 50 states + 1000s of counties deciding how elections are run? Do presidential powers get reigned in a bit? Much of that may require amendments, but I have a feeling we're going to have the discussions.
ZenoArrow 10y ago
Improvements to the fairness of elections won't come from those who benefit from the status quo, it'll come from those at the grassroots level. Boosting the electoral performance of third party candidates builds confidence that grassroots movements can make a significant political impact. As for whether Trump or Clinton would actively block fair elections, that wouldn't surprise me, but I wouldn't put it past either of them (Trump's already made it clear he wants to make it easier to manipulate the press, and Clinton was clearly willing to engage in underhand tactics to get the Democratic nomination). If you're of the same mindset then it makes no sense to vote for either of them, as it appears neither are interested in engaging in fair elections.
- int_19h 10y ago
  > rump's already made it clear he wants to make it easier to manipulate the press, and Clinton was clearly willing to engage in underhand tactics to get the Democratic nomination I would dare say that these two things aren't equivalent. Clinton "rigging" the primaries didn't involve preventing people from speaking out, or excluding them from voting. It was mostly about the system itself being "pre-rigged" by design, so to speak, and then some coordination with the DNC behind the scenes. All bad juju, but not the kind of thing that causes lasting damage compared to the current state of affairs. Compared to Democrat "machines" of the old, it's practically peanuts - and the country and its political system survived those. OTOH, Trump's talk about expanding the libel laws and otherwise targeting the press, if implemented to its logical completion, would take a lot of time to dig out of. That's not even taking into account his threats to "investigate" his political opponents if elected.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    > "Clinton "rigging" the primaries didn't involve preventing people from speaking out" Some would argue that there's evidence that she is engaged in that activity: https://m.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4wa5ue/clinton_body_count_5_in_just_6_weeks/ https://m.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4wa5ue/clinton_bo... Whether you want to believe this or not is up to you, but I'd suggest doing a bit of research before dismissing it.