• @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -32 months ago

    While I strongly disagree with the dogwhistles here, it’s true. If your state voted for Trump or Clinton/Biden with >10% margin in the last two elections, there’s almost zero chance the Trump/Harris election will go any differently.

    I personally dislike both major party candidates (but dislike Trump more) and since my state (Utah) voted for Trump with ~20% margin in both prior elections (even in 2016 w/ McMullin taking >20% of the vote), I feel comfortable voting my conscience. I even voted for Biden last election on the off-chance that people here hated Trump enough to matter, but no, >20% spread.

    So I’m back to voting third party. Even if every third party vote went to Harris, my state would still elect Trump with something like 15-25% spread. The only way that changes is if Kamala converts to my state’s predominant religion and Trump literally outs himself as worshipping Satan, and even then we’d probably still go with Trump for some stupid reason.

    So I vote for the next most popular third party, and in this case, that’s Chase Oliver from the Libertarian Party. I’m also registered Libertarian, mostly because I think they have the best chance to actually get a message out about voting reform, but also because I’m probably closest to their views (though I disagree with the LP on a ton of issues, especially recently, and especially the local UT LP). He’ll probably get 2-3% of the vote, perhaps less this year because he’s gay. If that instead were the Green Party, I’d vote for them (even though I have even less in common), because my goal here is to send a message that the 2-party system sucks.

    If your state is that polarized, there’s really no point in voting for the minority party candidate, go third party and make a statement.

    • @Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 months ago

      I’m glad you’re sending a message about the two-party system in a way that actually matters. Voting third party in a state that will never change is like, the one time it’s safe and effective to do that.

      • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        Exactly, yet I get so much pushback on that.

        Yes, if your state has any chance of flipping, choose the lesser of two evils. And don’t just look at the last election, look at the last 5 or so. If any of them were anywhere near close, vote for the lesser of two evils. Or if your state is trending toward being competitive, vote for the lesser of two evils. If you’re not willing to check, vote for the lesser of two evils.

        But if your state consistently votes a certain way with a huge margin, then vote your conscience. For me, that’s the most popular third party.

        • @piccolo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          72 months ago

          believing your state is hard locked in one party is exactly the mindset that makes it hard locked. My state is ‘hard red’ but it wasn’t always like that. California was a solid red state but no longer is. Until we have ranked voting, we’re stuck with two parties at the federal level. Voting 3rd is only serves to signal to the majority parties where to not waste their energy.

          • @Fox@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 months ago

            Donald Trump actually showed up to the Libertarian National Convention, I don’t think such an arrogant dickwad would have bothered if he didn’t think it was important to appeal to third party voters. They already spend less time in their ‘safe’ states.

          • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Voting 3rd is only serves to signal to the majority parties where to not waste their energy.

            No, voting 3rd shows that voters are more willing to “throw their vote away” than support either major party candidate. If the minority candidate wants to snap up some of those votes, they’ll need to adjust their policies to at least bring in some of the top third party candidate’s views. The closer they get to those third parties, the more of those votes they’ll get.

            If my state gets within a 10% spread, I’ll probably start voting for the lesser of two evils (in this case Harris). But when the spread is going to be something like 4x the total votes for all third parties combined (something like 5%; vote spread for major party candidates is typically >20%), there’s literally no value in supporting either major party candidate.