4 ms·

If every person who voted for Johnson or Stein in 2016, which is what you’re advocating, had voted for Clinton, then she would’ve won the election and net neutr

If every person who voted for Johnson or Stein in 2016, which is what you’re advocating, had voted for Clinton, then she would’ve won the election and net neutrality would still be alive.

whatshisface 8y ago
That would not have happened because many people who voted for Johnson would have, if he had not been around, voted Republican. Libertarian ideals are considered acceptable, even attractive, by many Republicans, especially the financial and anti-regulation side. Admittedly there are very few who would have voted for Trump as an alternative to Stein, had she not been around.
- aaronbrethorst 8y ago
  100% of Stein voters and 24% of Johnson voters in Florida would've flipped that state. 88.6% of Stein voters in Pennsylvania would've flipped that state. 20.8% of Stein voters in Michigan would've flipped that state. 73% of Stein voters in Wisconsin would've flipped that state.
  - JoshuaDavid 8y ago
    > 100% of Stein voters and 24% of Johnson voters in Florida would've flipped that state. ... assuming that the remaining 76% of Johnson voters abstained. If 50% of libertarians and 100% of green voters voted Democrat, and the other 50% of libertarians voted Republican, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin would have gone to the Democrats, and nothing else would have changed. If 30% of libertarians and 100% of green voters voted Democrat, and the other 70% of libertarians voted Republican, New Hampshire would have gone to the Republicans, and nothing else would have changed. I suspect 30% is closer than 50% in terms of how many libertarians would have voted Republican if there was no libertarian option. Source on calculations: run the following in the console on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidentia... // What fraction of Libertarians would vote Republican if they had // to choose between Democrats and Republicans var fracLToD = 0.3, fracLToR = 1 - fracLToD; // Same for Greens var fracGToD = 1.0, fracGToR = 1 - fracGToD; // Find the table var electionResultsTable = [].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll('table.wikitable')) .filter(t => t.querySelector('thead tr th.headerSort') && t.querySelector('thead tr th.headerSort').textContent.match(/^State/))[0]; // Process [].slice.call(electionResultsTable.querySelectorAll('tr')) // Get rows .slice(2, -1) // Chop off header and footer .map(row => [].slice.call(row.querySelectorAll('td')).map(td => td.textContent)) // Get cell contents .map(cs => ({ "state":cs[0], "d":parseInt(cs[2].replace(/,/g, ''))||0, // democrats "r":parseInt(cs[5].replace(/,/g, ''))||0, // republicans "l":parseInt(cs[8].replace(/,/g, ''))||0, // libertarians "g":parseInt(cs[11].replace(/,/g, ''))||0 // greens })) // grab the cols we care about .map(({state,d,r,l,g}) => ({ state, d, r, l, g, // winnerWith3 is the winner as-is, with third parties winnerWith3:d > r ? 'd' : 'r', // winnerNo3 is the winner as-is, with third parties winnerNo3:d + l * fracLToD + g * fracGToD > r + l * fracLToR + g * fracGToR ? 'd' : 'r' })) // And grab the states where excluding third parties would have changed the results .filter(({winnerWith3, winnerNo3}) => winnerWith3 != winnerNo3)
- rchaud 8y ago
  > Libertarian ideals are considered acceptable, even attractive, by many Republicans They're attractive as stump speeches platitudes about limited government and lower taxation. The second they're in office, there's suddenly lots of cash available for increased defense spending, agricultural subsidies and funding prosecutions for non-violent drug crimes.
imron 8y ago
> and net neutrality would still be alive. Yes, I'm sure the Clinton administration would be completely free of any influence from corporate lobbyists.
- aaronbrethorst 8y ago
  Nice try on moving the goal posts! Here's Clinton's stance in March 2016: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/257569-clinton-touts-net-neutrality-and-city-owned-internet https://thehill.com/policy/technology/257569-clinton-touts-n... Here's what I wrote above: Will you have issues with the person you're voting for? Probably. Should you vote for them anyway? Yes.
  - imron 8y ago
    > Here's Clinton's stance in March 2016 Was that her public or her private stance?
Taylor_OD 8y ago
If half of the country who didnt vote at all voted for Cilton she'd be president. Don't yell at people who cast their vote for who they wanted to win. Work on getting the half of our country who didnt vote to vote.

If every person who voted for Johnson or Stein in 2016, which is what you’re advocating, had voted for Clinton, then she would’ve won the election and net neutrality would still be alive.

whatshisface 8y ago

That would not have happened because many people who voted for Johnson would have, if he had not been around, voted Republican. Libertarian ideals are considered acceptable, even attractive, by many Republicans, especially the financial and anti-regulation side. Admittedly there are very few who would have voted for Trump as an alternative to Stein, had she not been around.

aaronbrethorst 8y ago
100% of Stein voters and 24% of Johnson voters in Florida would've flipped that state. 88.6% of Stein voters in Pennsylvania would've flipped that state. 20.8% of Stein voters in Michigan would've flipped that state. 73% of Stein voters in Wisconsin would've flipped that state.
- JoshuaDavid 8y ago
  > 100% of Stein voters and 24% of Johnson voters in Florida would've flipped that state. ... assuming that the remaining 76% of Johnson voters abstained. If 50% of libertarians and 100% of green voters voted Democrat, and the other 50% of libertarians voted Republican, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin would have gone to the Democrats, and nothing else would have changed. If 30% of libertarians and 100% of green voters voted Democrat, and the other 70% of libertarians voted Republican, New Hampshire would have gone to the Republicans, and nothing else would have changed. I suspect 30% is closer than 50% in terms of how many libertarians would have voted Republican if there was no libertarian option. Source on calculations: run the following in the console on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidentia... // What fraction of Libertarians would vote Republican if they had // to choose between Democrats and Republicans var fracLToD = 0.3, fracLToR = 1 - fracLToD; // Same for Greens var fracGToD = 1.0, fracGToR = 1 - fracGToD; // Find the table var electionResultsTable = [].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll('table.wikitable')) .filter(t => t.querySelector('thead tr th.headerSort') && t.querySelector('thead tr th.headerSort').textContent.match(/^State/))[0]; // Process [].slice.call(electionResultsTable.querySelectorAll('tr')) // Get rows .slice(2, -1) // Chop off header and footer .map(row => [].slice.call(row.querySelectorAll('td')).map(td => td.textContent)) // Get cell contents .map(cs => ({ "state":cs[0], "d":parseInt(cs[2].replace(/,/g, ''))||0, // democrats "r":parseInt(cs[5].replace(/,/g, ''))||0, // republicans "l":parseInt(cs[8].replace(/,/g, ''))||0, // libertarians "g":parseInt(cs[11].replace(/,/g, ''))||0 // greens })) // grab the cols we care about .map(({state,d,r,l,g}) => ({ state, d, r, l, g, // winnerWith3 is the winner as-is, with third parties winnerWith3:d > r ? 'd' : 'r', // winnerNo3 is the winner as-is, with third parties winnerNo3:d + l * fracLToD + g * fracGToD > r + l * fracLToR + g * fracGToR ? 'd' : 'r' })) // And grab the states where excluding third parties would have changed the results .filter(({winnerWith3, winnerNo3}) => winnerWith3 != winnerNo3)
rchaud 8y ago
> Libertarian ideals are considered acceptable, even attractive, by many Republicans They're attractive as stump speeches platitudes about limited government and lower taxation. The second they're in office, there's suddenly lots of cash available for increased defense spending, agricultural subsidies and funding prosecutions for non-violent drug crimes.

imron 8y ago

> and net neutrality would still be alive. Yes, I'm sure the Clinton administration would be completely free of any influence from corporate lobbyists.

aaronbrethorst 8y ago
Nice try on moving the goal posts! Here's Clinton's stance in March 2016: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/257569-clinton-touts-net-neutrality-and-city-owned-internet https://thehill.com/policy/technology/257569-clinton-touts-n... Here's what I wrote above: Will you have issues with the person you're voting for? Probably. Should you vote for them anyway? Yes.
- imron 8y ago
  > Here's Clinton's stance in March 2016 Was that her public or her private stance?

Taylor_OD 8y ago

If half of the country who didnt vote at all voted for Cilton she'd be president. Don't yell at people who cast their vote for who they wanted to win. Work on getting the half of our country who didnt vote to vote.