• piccolo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 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
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      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.