Voters want change, but still remain unsatisfied with their options

  • holo_nexus
    link
    fedilink
    201 year ago

    There has not been a time for ripe in modern times for a strong 3rd party candidate. To bad the whole system is rigged against it.

    • CoWizard
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      3rd party, on a national scale, is guaranteed to fail in fptp. The only one who wins in fptp is the least hated (of 2) candidate. 3rd party votes just suck votes that could be voted against that most hated candidate

      • iAmTheTot
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        This isn’t inherently a failure of first past the post, this is a failure of human psychology.

        • CoderKat
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          No, it’s definitely a FPTP failure. If you have progressive third party candidate who mostly attracts voters who would otherwise have voted Democrat, it splits the vote. Even if the majority of people voted for either the third party or the Democrat candidate (let’s say 30% each), the Republican candidate would get win even with 60% of people not wanting them.

          I suspect you’re thinking of people being afraid to vote third party and thus dooming the third party to lose, but the fallacy of that is assuming that everyone would genuinely vote for the third party over other candidates, which isn’t the case. Articles like the one we’re commenting on are only pointing out the most common belief.

        • DH Clapp
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          First past the post voting systems prevent viable third parties because of human psychology. Why are we pretending to argue about how we phrase this?

      • Maeve
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        If everyone do preferred a third party candidate actually voted third party, that would change. That’s just another establishment talking point.