“The climate movement doesn’t have a persuasion problem as much as we have a turnout problem,” says Nathaniel Stinnett of the Environmental Voter Project.
First-past-the-post does not. Let’s look at three scenarios:
Scenario 1:
Democrat: 10 votes
Repbulican: 9 votes
Green: 0 votes
Democrat wins
Scenario 2:
Democrat: 9 votes
Repbulican: 9 votes
Green: 1 vote
Tied election, decided by a coin toss
Scenario 3:
Democrat: 8 votes
Repbulican: 9 votes
Green: 2 votes
Republican wins outright
This spoiler effect is well-known, and why for any first-past-the-post election, it’s worth voting for the candidate with a large coalition who is closest to your position, rather than a tiny third party. You even see Republicans funding the US green party in order to damage Democrats.
i’ve been donating to cornel west monthly, but i might end up voting for jill stein again anyway, and it has literally nothing to do with what republicans think is in their own interest.
Polls make it very clear that they both serve as spoilers in the general election. Every bit of support they have means that Trump is more likely to be elected.
Polls make it very clear that they both serve as spoilers in the general election
not for me. i haven’t voted for a democrat for president since 2008. i don’t believe you’ll find a single person who is voting for them who would have otherwise voted for biden or trump.
the narrative of spoilers assumes that the votes belong to one party and are stolen by the other. this is wrong. the votes belong to the voters and it is up to candidates to win them.
It’s reality though; their decision to be on the ballot (and yours to provide financial support) increases the odds of a Trump win.
Changing how elections are done could change that, but under the system we have, that’s what the impact of your actions is, no matter what you tell yourself.
Cornel West is financially supported by big-time Republican donors for precisely because of this.
i have a policy of voting only for candidates who i want to win. it’s not a team sport for me. its not placing a bet for me. it’s a matter of choosing the candidate i want to win.
I’m not looking at it as a team sport; I’m looking at “Of the candidates who can actually win, who would I rather be elected if my vote was the deciding vote?”
Deciding to vote for somebody who has too small a coalition to possibly be elected is a decision to make it easier for the candidate who could win, but whom I find the least attractive, to actually win.
While not to diminish the presidency but people REALLY need to vote more in local elections. If more people want dems locally then it will help you get a more suitable president
First-past-the-post does not. Let’s look at three scenarios:
Scenario 1:
Democrat: 10 votes
Repbulican: 9 votes
Green: 0 votes
Democrat wins
Scenario 2:
Democrat: 9 votes
Repbulican: 9 votes
Green: 1 vote
Tied election, decided by a coin toss
Scenario 3:
Democrat: 8 votes
Repbulican: 9 votes
Green: 2 votes
Republican wins outright
This spoiler effect is well-known, and why for any first-past-the-post election, it’s worth voting for the candidate with a large coalition who is closest to your position, rather than a tiny third party. You even see Republicans funding the US green party in order to damage Democrats.
if republicans are funding the greens, it sounds to me like they are closer to me than democrats.
but i’m not voting for either of them.
That’s a rather naive and myopic way of looking at politics and you ought to do more research before committing your vote.
i’ve been donating to cornel west monthly, but i might end up voting for jill stein again anyway, and it has literally nothing to do with what republicans think is in their own interest.
Polls make it very clear that they both serve as spoilers in the general election. Every bit of support they have means that Trump is more likely to be elected.
not for me. i haven’t voted for a democrat for president since 2008. i don’t believe you’ll find a single person who is voting for them who would have otherwise voted for biden or trump.
the narrative of spoilers assumes that the votes belong to one party and are stolen by the other. this is wrong. the votes belong to the voters and it is up to candidates to win them.
It’s reality though; their decision to be on the ballot (and yours to provide financial support) increases the odds of a Trump win.
Changing how elections are done could change that, but under the system we have, that’s what the impact of your actions is, no matter what you tell yourself.
Cornel West is financially supported by big-time Republican donors for precisely because of this.
i have a policy of voting only for candidates who i want to win. it’s not a team sport for me. its not placing a bet for me. it’s a matter of choosing the candidate i want to win.
I’m not looking at it as a team sport; I’m looking at “Of the candidates who can actually win, who would I rather be elected if my vote was the deciding vote?”
Deciding to vote for somebody who has too small a coalition to possibly be elected is a decision to make it easier for the candidate who could win, but whom I find the least attractive, to actually win.
While not to diminish the presidency but people REALLY need to vote more in local elections. If more people want dems locally then it will help you get a more suitable president