5 ms·

I love the "throwing your vote away" argument. Sorry guys, by voting for the big two, YOU are the one throwing it away. Third party support growth is a great in

by 5ilv3r 9y ago

I love the "throwing your vote away" argument. Sorry guys, by voting for the big two, YOU are the one throwing it away. Third party support growth is a great indicator of the public's desire for real change. So what if you lose? You're voting to express your opinion, not to win.

PhasmaFelis 9y ago
> So what if you lose? You're voting to express your opinion, not to win. It sounds like you don't actually have much at stake here. If you're poor, or queer, or Muslim, and you're choosing between a high-minded protest vote vs. keeping out the guy who will spend the next four years trying to destroy your family's safety, you sure as hell are voting to win.
- 5ilv3r 9y ago
  A poll showing huge support for a candidate from the poor queer Muslims would be a hell of a thing, wouldn't it? I grew up poor. I am queer. Winning isn't everything. Sometimes enough people need to care for things to change, and sacrificing what you care about to win will NEVER get you there.
scrollaway 9y ago
> You're voting to express your opinion, not to win. No, that's not why most people vote. And to be clear, I have nothing against anyone voting to express their opinion (vote is speech, after all), but most people actually use their vote to make their next few years as least shit as possible. That often means voting for someone you disagree with, because they're more likely to win. (This is, by the way, one of the reasons that Emmanuel Macron managed to finish first in the first french election round).
- 5ilv3r 9y ago
  You can choose to play politics, but nothing says you have to. I think we've done it too much already. If you have to sacrifice most of what you care about to win, you lose yourself, and that is heart breaking.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> So what if you lose? You're voting to express your opinion, not to win. If I want to "express my opinion", I'll write an essay. Voting—which is by secret ballot—is poor for expressing opinions. It's to participate in choice of political leadership or (in the case of initiatives and referenda) concrete policy. In that light, winning—that is, getting the best outcome attainable in terms of leader or policy chosen—is more important than expressing opinion. Now, ideally, the electoral system would aggregate opinions well such that there would be nomdofferenve between optimizing for outcome and optimizing for accurate expression of opinion. But you go into the ballot box with the voting system you have, not the voting system you wish you had.
- 5ilv3r 9y ago
  That's trying to influence people, not express an opinion on policy or candidates up for consideration. Winning isn't as important is being right, in my opinion.
mikeash 9y ago
I vote because of the practical consequences it has. Voting for a candidate who can win can have practical consequences. Voting for someone with no chance of winning has no practical consequences. Voting to express your opinion is ridiculous. Expressing your opinion by voting has as much effect as expressing your opinion by shouting at a cloud. If you want viable third parties you have to change the system. The way it's designed now, viable third parties are impossible. Doesn't matter how much you vote for them. If by some chance you manage to make a third party into a viable national force, they will just displace one of the current major parties and you'll be back to a two-party system with slightly different labels.
- 5ilv3r 9y ago
  You said impossible. I don't even need to come up with something clever here.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ghigufufyfufu 9y ago
In MA, we are pushing for instant runoff and Democrats just added it to the state platform. Stop complaining and help make it happen around America! Then other political parties will be viable.
- 5ilv3r 9y ago
  That sounds more complicated...
  - ghigufufyfufu 9y ago
    It has the virtue of actually working. The mathematics of first past the post means the spoiler critique is literally true even as it undermines Democratic ideals. This tension can only be resolved by structural change.

by 5ilv3r 9y ago

PhasmaFelis 9y ago

> So what if you lose? You're voting to express your opinion, not to win. It sounds like you don't actually have much at stake here. If you're poor, or queer, or Muslim, and you're choosing between a high-minded protest vote vs. keeping out the guy who will spend the next four years trying to destroy your family's safety, you sure as hell are voting to win.

5ilv3r 9y ago
A poll showing huge support for a candidate from the poor queer Muslims would be a hell of a thing, wouldn't it? I grew up poor. I am queer. Winning isn't everything. Sometimes enough people need to care for things to change, and sacrificing what you care about to win will NEVER get you there.

scrollaway 9y ago

> You're voting to express your opinion, not to win. No, that's not why most people vote. And to be clear, I have nothing against anyone voting to express their opinion (vote is speech, after all), but most people actually use their vote to make their next few years as least shit as possible. That often means voting for someone you disagree with, because they're more likely to win. (This is, by the way, one of the reasons that Emmanuel Macron managed to finish first in the first french election round).

5ilv3r 9y ago
You can choose to play politics, but nothing says you have to. I think we've done it too much already. If you have to sacrifice most of what you care about to win, you lose yourself, and that is heart breaking.

dragonwriter 9y ago

> So what if you lose? You're voting to express your opinion, not to win. If I want to "express my opinion", I'll write an essay. Voting—which is by secret ballot—is poor for expressing opinions. It's to participate in choice of political leadership or (in the case of initiatives and referenda) concrete policy. In that light, winning—that is, getting the best outcome attainable in terms of leader or policy chosen—is more important than expressing opinion. Now, ideally, the electoral system would aggregate opinions well such that there would be nomdofferenve between optimizing for outcome and optimizing for accurate expression of opinion. But you go into the ballot box with the voting system you have, not the voting system you wish you had.

5ilv3r 9y ago
That's trying to influence people, not express an opinion on policy or candidates up for consideration. Winning isn't as important is being right, in my opinion.

mikeash 9y ago

I vote because of the practical consequences it has. Voting for a candidate who can win can have practical consequences. Voting for someone with no chance of winning has no practical consequences. Voting to express your opinion is ridiculous. Expressing your opinion by voting has as much effect as expressing your opinion by shouting at a cloud. If you want viable third parties you have to change the system. The way it's designed now, viable third parties are impossible. Doesn't matter how much you vote for them. If by some chance you manage to make a third party into a viable national force, they will just displace one of the current major parties and you'll be back to a two-party system with slightly different labels.

5ilv3r 9y ago
You said impossible. I don't even need to come up with something clever here.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

ghigufufyfufu 9y ago

In MA, we are pushing for instant runoff and Democrats just added it to the state platform. Stop complaining and help make it happen around America! Then other political parties will be viable.

5ilv3r 9y ago
That sounds more complicated...
- ghigufufyfufu 9y ago
  It has the virtue of actually working. The mathematics of first past the post means the spoiler critique is literally true even as it undermines Democratic ideals. This tension can only be resolved by structural change.