i think it’s the opposite. in FPTP system the largest minority (of voters) wins. if you vote against one candidate, it will (probably) create/be another minority. to make sure the candidate loses, the largest minority have to agree for another candidate, just voting any other candidate won’t do. related cgp grey’s video - https://yewtu.be/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo.
edited to clarify.
lets assume the election results as:
candidate A - 20%
candidate B - 35%
candidate C - 15%
candidate D - 25%
candidate E - 05%
candidate B won with only 35% voting for it while 65% voted against candidate B. clealy the majority of people voted against candidate B, but that doesn’t matter as in FPTP, not majority but largest minority (35% that voted for candidate B) wins.
thus, i think you vote for not against in FPTP voting system.
That’s an early-stage FPTP system. After a bunch of people with minority support start winning you end up with two options, and you vote against the one you hate least because there’s not really a choice anymore.
If I’m given the choice between chocolate and vanilla, choosing vanilla doesn’t make it my favorite. It’s just the least bad option because caramel isn’t available. I’m not for vanilla, I’m against chocolate.
isn’t that effectively wordplay? say, i like chocolate but vanilla more. then i choose vanilla but i’m not against chocolate. it doesn’t matter when two given choices.
but that’s doesn’t account for non-late-stage FPTP. given more than two choices i’d have to vote for a candidate. voting against other candidate may not work because largest minority wins.
i think it’s the opposite. in FPTP system the largest minority (of voters) wins. if you vote against one candidate, it will (probably) create/be another minority. to make sure the candidate loses, the largest minority have to agree for another candidate, just voting any other candidate won’t do. related cgp grey’s video - https://yewtu.be/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo.
edited to clarify. lets assume the election results as:
candidate B won with only 35% voting for it while 65% voted against candidate B. clealy the majority of people voted against candidate B, but that doesn’t matter as in FPTP, not majority but largest minority (35% that voted for candidate B) wins.
thus, i think you vote for not against in FPTP voting system.
That’s an early-stage FPTP system. After a bunch of people with minority support start winning you end up with two options, and you vote against the one you hate least because there’s not really a choice anymore.
Doesn’t against and for mean the same thing with only two choices?!
If I’m given the choice between chocolate and vanilla, choosing vanilla doesn’t make it my favorite. It’s just the least bad option because caramel isn’t available. I’m not for vanilla, I’m against chocolate.
isn’t that effectively wordplay? say, i like chocolate but vanilla more. then i choose vanilla but i’m not against chocolate. it doesn’t matter when two given choices.
but that’s doesn’t account for non-late-stage FPTP. given more than two choices i’d have to vote for a candidate. voting against other candidate may not work because largest minority wins.
you can’t prove this.
With no offense intended, I feel this could be worded a little better. It could also just be my tired brain, though.