The two party problem as a result of first past the post means that not voting against the party you dislike more can result in a spoiler effect, and reduce the chances of the not-as-bad mainstream party winning the election. But, I reject that that spoiler effect is necessarily as bad as voting directly for the worse candidate, it is mathematically untrue. Many people try to insist they are equivalent to try and motivate voting, but I think it has the opposite effect, making people feel apathetic about the entire voting process.
Under first past the post we cannot be free of the biases of the system that enforces two parties, BUT it is possible to rarely, with a big movement of people, swap a third party with on of the major parties to replace it as a major party. The way I see voting 3rd party in situations like this is like the prisonor’s dilemma. People are motivated individually to cast their votes strategically for the major party they prefer by the spoiler effect, but if enough people collectively vote 3rd party then the outcome would be better for everyone. Thus, I cannot agree with or accept people claiming voting third party is unacceptable. It might not be likely to be effective, but it is hopeful and not nearly as musguided as people try to insist it is.
Also, Idk if this even applies to me, I’ll probably be using my vote strategically. I just support people’s right to vote 3rd party.
Sadly the reality of a two party state system makes it so.
The two party problem as a result of first past the post means that not voting against the party you dislike more can result in a spoiler effect, and reduce the chances of the not-as-bad mainstream party winning the election. But, I reject that that spoiler effect is necessarily as bad as voting directly for the worse candidate, it is mathematically untrue. Many people try to insist they are equivalent to try and motivate voting, but I think it has the opposite effect, making people feel apathetic about the entire voting process.
Under first past the post we cannot be free of the biases of the system that enforces two parties, BUT it is possible to rarely, with a big movement of people, swap a third party with on of the major parties to replace it as a major party. The way I see voting 3rd party in situations like this is like the prisonor’s dilemma. People are motivated individually to cast their votes strategically for the major party they prefer by the spoiler effect, but if enough people collectively vote 3rd party then the outcome would be better for everyone. Thus, I cannot agree with or accept people claiming voting third party is unacceptable. It might not be likely to be effective, but it is hopeful and not nearly as musguided as people try to insist it is.
Also, Idk if this even applies to me, I’ll probably be using my vote strategically. I just support people’s right to vote 3rd party.
I think you’re right.