• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Under what circumstances is it not wasteful to vote third party in a US National election?

Absent major changes to the voting system in the US, or the collapse in support of one of the current two major parties to below about 10% of the votes cast, the effect of a third party vote is and will remain indistinguishable from the effect of not voting at all.

As the former requires that people with a vested interest in the status quo should actively seek to change things to their own detriment, it seems that the only way for a third party vote to be in any way useful is if a major party is in the process of imploding. Even after putting up the worst presidential candidate in the history of the USA, the GOP doesn't seem to be in any danger of imploding any time soon - FFS, they actually have a majority in the Reps, which (regardless of gerrymandering) is a clear indication that at least a significant minority of US voters are fucking clueless. What your system needs is both a new set of electoral rules, and a new set of voters. I don't see either coming along any time soon.
 
That's the question. And as followup, must the Democratic and Republican parties exist in unassailable perpetuity?
As long as we have first-past-the-post voting and single-member districts, yes. Unless one of the parties self-destructs, in which case another party will emerge to take its place.

 Political parties in the United States
The Party Battle in America

The US has gone through at least 5 party systems, sets of parties with distinctive constituencies and platforms. At least some of the composers of the US Constitution disliked political parties as troublesome factionalism. But despite their hopes, the politicians soon divided themselves into parties.

#1: 1792 - 1824
Federalists
Democratic-Republicans

The Federalists collapsed, and then the Democratic-Republicans split into Democrats and National Republicans.

#2: 1828 - 1854
Democrats
National Republicans, then Whigs

The Whigs collapsed, and the Republicans took their place.

#3: 1854 - 1896
#4: 1896 - 1932
#5: 1932 - ?
#6: ?
Democrats
Republicans
 
Whether or not voting for a third party candidate is a wasted vote depends on what you want to accomplish. If you want to try to build a third party up and you don't care about electing your least favorite, then you should probably vote for a third party. Or, if you want to try to send a message to one of the main parties, you should probably vote for a third party. If you are voting for a third party because your goal is to get that candidate elected, you are probably wasting your vote.

As posters have already said, the biggest problem is our vote only allows us to express an opinion on a single candidate. That is not a representative system. I think it is OK to be aggravated at third party candidates who split the vote as long as those complaining are also screaming from the rooftops to change the voting system. Unfortunately not very many of these people seem to want to do that. If nobody wants to do anything about it then a good way to protest is to help a candidate lose by splitting his/her vote with a third party.

We can change the voting system state by state. Maine is going to have ballot initiative in November to implement instant runoff voting statewide. I'm no fan of IRV, but this would be a step up and we should be trying to work to change the voting system in other states as well. Some states are working on an interstate compact for a national popular vote. We could be working on changing this so that approval voting would be used instead of plurality.
 
As long as we have first-past-the-post voting and single-member districts, yes....

As long we have top-down oligarchy we will be limited to 2 parties each supporting the oligarchy.

If we actually had bottom up democracy then more represented interests, and therefore more parties, would exist.

The rich shouldn't be shut out of the process, but mechanisms should be created to ensure that the process is not controlled by any special interest.
 
As long as we have first-past-the-post voting and single-member districts, yes....

As long we have top-down oligarchy we will be limited to 2 parties each supporting the oligarchy.

If we actually had bottom up democracy then more represented interests, and therefore more parties, would exist.

The rich shouldn't be shut out of the process, but mechanisms should be created to ensure that the process is not controlled by any special interest.

How's this - instead of electing a President, everybody just takes turns being a sort of "representative of the week". However, all decisions by that representative need to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting by a simple majority in the case of purely internal matters but by a two-thirds majority for external matters?
 
If you've managed to shun mathematics and reality in sufficient quantities to convince yourself that your vote for the Democrat or Republican has meaning, it should require only a slight additional delusion to convince yourself your vote for the Rent is too Damn High Party has meaning.
 
If you've managed to shun mathematics and reality in sufficient quantities to convince yourself that your vote for the Democrat or Republican has meaning, it should require only a slight additional delusion to convince yourself your vote for the Rent is too Damn High Party has meaning.

Depends on where you live. http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#tipping-point

Where you live might change the probability of your vote affecting a US presidential election from somewhere between the odds of being hit by a meteor to the odds of being hit by a meteor and a 1986 Ford Taurus on the same afternoon.
 
Whether or not voting for a third party candidate is a wasted vote depends on what you want to accomplish. If you want to try to build a third party up and you don't care about electing your least favorite, then you should probably vote for a third party. Or, if you want to try to send a message to one of the main parties, you should probably vote for a third party. If you are voting for a third party because your goal is to get that candidate elected, you are probably wasting your vote.

As posters have already said, the biggest problem is our vote only allows us to express an opinion on a single candidate. That is not a representative system. I think it is OK to be aggravated at third party candidates who split the vote as long as those complaining are also screaming from the rooftops to change the voting system. Unfortunately not very many of these people seem to want to do that. If nobody wants to do anything about it then a good way to protest is to help a candidate lose by splitting his/her vote with a third party.

We can change the voting system state by state. Maine is going to have ballot initiative in November to implement instant runoff voting statewide. I'm no fan of IRV, but this would be a step up and we should be trying to work to change the voting system in other states as well. Some states are working on an interstate compact for a national popular vote. We could be working on changing this so that approval voting would be used instead of plurality.

If you want to send a message to one of the main parties, drop them an email, or write them a letter.

https://www.gop.com/contact-us/

https://my.democrats.org/page/s/contact

Voting for a third party is just about the least effective possible method of communicating with the major parties, with the possible exception of attempting to use telepathy.

Seriously, emailing those two organizations is massively more effective than voting for a third party could ever be. And then you still get to vote for your choice of the least awful of the two. Win-win.
 
I wrote my senator before. He had a list of topics in a pull-down menu to pick and afterward sent the same form text to the person based on the topic chosen. So, I tried clicking "Other" and writing I did not want to talk about "health care" several times. I wrote what I wanted to talk about specifically. I got an automated email back again, claiming to be him, that talked about guess what? Health care.

Letter from Senator said:
Dear Mr. xxx*:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the need to improve our nation's health care system. I share your concern that this must be a top national priority.

As you may know, I was an original cosponsor of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which helps individuals keep health insurance when they change jobs and guarantees renewability of coverage. Over 20 million people have benefited from this law.

It is especially important that we work to strengthen health care delivery systems for the uninsured and provide affordable, quality health care coverage for everyone -- especially children, the elderly, working families, minority groups, and small businesses.

This year, I was an original cosponsor of the Small Employer Health Benefits Program legislation, which would provide health insurance to the millions of Americans working for small businesses. There are over 45 million uninsured Americans in the United States - 85 percent are in working families, and 60 percent work for small businesses employing fewer than 100 employees. This legislation would allow small businesses to band together, pool their risks, and offer their employees health coverage for much less expensive rates.

I also support legislative initiatives to protect the rights and benefits of patients who are enrolled in managed care and other types of health care plans; and I have been involved in efforts to craft a bipartisan managed care reform bill that can be enacted by the Congress. We must ensure that all Americans have decent health care plans with essential patient protections, such as guaranteed access to needed health care specialists; access to emergency room services when and where the need arises; continuity of care protections to assure patient care if a patient's health care provider is dropped; access to a timely internal and independent external appeals process with a medical necessity standard; assurance that doctors and patients can openly discuss treatment options; and an enforcement mechanism that ensures appropriate recourse for patients who have been harmed as a result of health plan actions and that holds health plans accountable for decisions that result in patient injury or death.

In addition, I am supportive of comprehensive efforts to create a better health information technology (IT) infrastructure in our country. Health IT legislation could result in cost savings for the system and an increase in the quality of care delivered around the country. I am also paying close attention to legislative initiatives to bring pay-for-performance to Medicare, which would result in payments to physicians based on delivering high-quality care to their patients. Improving the quality of care delivered to Americans is essential in decreasing medical errors and may also result in a significant cost savings for our health care system. However, these efforts must be comprehensive, well funded, and thoughtful to ensure that positive impacts are experienced by Americans.

Expanding access to health care for Americans will involve safeguarding the successful Medicaid program and improving the quality of medical care in our country which can make our health care systems more effective and efficient. I continue to fight against cuts to the Medicaid program. My FairCare legislation assures quality of care for all by setting quality standards for medical care, rewarding health professionals for practicing these standards, and increasing transparency of health care practices by creating the conditions for an electronic health record that can be analyzed for the quality of care received. By improving the quality of care in this country, we can save approximately $30 billion a year. More importantly, we can reduce suffering and save lives.

As the Senate focuses attention on health care quality, affordability, accessibility, and related matters, you can be assured that I will keep in mind your specific thoughts and suggestions; and I will continue to fight for strong patient protections and health care plan accountability and affordability to benefit all of our nation's citizens.

My official Senate web site is designed to be an on-line office that provides access to constituent services, xxx*-specific information, and an abundance of information about what I am working on in the Senate on behalf of Connecticut and the nation. I am also pleased to let you know that I have launched an email news update service through my web site. You can sign up for that service by visiting ...* and clicking on the "Subscribe Email News Updates" button at the bottom of the home page. I hope these are informative and useful.

Thank you again for letting me know your views and concerns. Please contact me if you have any additional questions or comments about our work in Congress.

Sincerely,

xxx*

* I edited these identifying info out.
 
If one doesn't live in a competitive state, then a third party vote is a productive way to say none of the above...

That's the question. And as followup, must the Democratic and Republican parties exist in unassailable perpetuity?
I don't see any L's or G's in Congress... or State Legislatures. Therefore, it is a bloody waste.


Libertarian Party members :cheeky:
Laura Ebke
State Senator District 32, Nebraska

John Moore
State Assembly District 8, Nevada

Max Abramson
State House of Representatives District 20 - Rockingham, New Hampshire

Mark Madsen
State Senate District 13, Utah
 
Democrats, vote third party in Utah. A vote for Clinton is a wasted vote. Otherwise, vote for Clinton.
 
Democrats, vote third party in Utah. A vote for Clinton is a wasted vote. Otherwise, vote for Clinton.
Nooooooooo....

Clinton has a real shot in Utah. Mormons don't care for Trump and Johnson stepped on his dick with them. Also the Never Trump candidate could factor in splitting the republicans.
 
I'm in Florida and won't be voting for either of them. I'll be voting Stein and you guys can't stop me. :p
 
Oh yeah? Let's see what you have to say at the intervention.
 
I'm in Florida and won't be voting for either of them. I'll be voting Stein and you guys can't stop me. :p

Oh boy. Yes, stein will fix everything by praying to crystals. My apologies if your post above was being sarcastic.
 
I'm in Florida and won't be voting for either of them. I'll be voting Stein and you guys can't stop me. :p

Yes we can. Those voting machines are dead easy to hack. President Putin thanks you for your support of Donald Trump.
 
Back
Top Bottom