Obama had what, at least 45 Senators that he could work with? How many would a Libertarian have, zero? I just don’t think a president who has zero allies in either chamber could be an effective leader.
And it’s kind of a silly argument anyway. Anyone popular enough to start winning states is going to start picking up supporters in Congress.
No unicorn is going to magically appear with no partisan ties and no allies in Congress.
Driving drunk is not the only thing drivers do that increase the chance of hurting others, but it increases the chance so much that it is one of the few things that is criminalized.
There is a chance that voting third party might throw the election to someone you find acceptable, but that chance is vanishingly small. Greater than the chance of the third party candidate winning but the difference is between a one in ten billion chance and a one in a hundred billion chance. Chances for both are practically zero, so there is no moral difference in choosing between them.
If we’re just talking about a single person, with zero chance at influencing others, maybe. But when we’re including the kind of messaging someone sends out, saying that it’s okay to vote third party and increase the chance of a monster being elected could, depending on one’s influence with other people, raise the chances much higher than infinitesimal.
So maybe silently voting third party isn’t “wrong enough” to register, but insisting that this is okay and potentially influencing lots of others could be enough, and therefore is morally “wrong enough” to register.
The way the senate has been working under McConnell 45 may as well be zero.
Further, at the very least, congresscritters have moneyed interests who gave them a lot of money and want to see certain things done. Things that they almost certainly will need the president to go along with. If they want that tax break or national park opened for mining they will have to horse-trade with the president.
Also, executive orders. Trump has shown the way.
That’s largely a response to the more rapid lefty posters here that argue failing to vote for their anointed champion is somehow disloyal, evil, enabling Trump, and likely evidence of closeted Trumperism. Yes, i despise Trump. No, I’m not going to support a candidate I find unacceptable. Yes, Biden is unacceptable. Not only did he announce support for an assault weapons ban, he publicly fellated Beto “I’m coming for your AR-15” O’Rourke and promised to make him the Czar of Gun Grabbing or some such bullshit. The reason the Dems won’t get my vote this year is because they nominated an unacceptable candidate. Give me a good one, and I’ll be glad to vote for them. Otherwise, it’s third party all the way.
Bottom line is there are only two meaningful choices in any US presidential general election.
Sucks (I really, really, really do not like Biden either), I wish it were different, but here we are.
Not voting for Biden (assuming he is the Dem nominee which is 99.9999% likely) is only helping Trump.
It is as simple as that. Hate it all you want. Rant and rave how you will never lower yourself to voting for evil, gun grabbing Biden even though you despise Trump (funny how you put a lot of stock in what Biden has said about guns but not what Trump has said about guns).
You do you, but don’t pretend to some superior philosophy. You’re only making excuses for yourself as you help Trump to a second term.
Substitute L. Neil Smith for Nader and you have my reasoning in the 2000 election. As other have stated, it is not my position to hold my nose and vote for the ‘lesser of two evils’ that either of the mainstream parties decide to serve up but rather vote for the candidate who I believe will best fit my political stance. Yes, there were differences between Bush and Gore but not sufficient differences to make me particularly care which one won.
However…
The Republic survived eight years of Bush. It would have survived eight years of Gore as well, had he been elected. The evilness of Trump is several orders of magnitude worse than anything Bush cooked up. I am not so sanguine that the US would survive as what we once were under another Trump term. Accordingly I will be voting for Biden come November. It won’t be with a great deal of enthusiasm but I won’t be holding my nose, either. If I were living in California, New York, or another of the bluest of blue states I still would be voting for Biden.
There’s about a million Iraqi widows and orphans who’d likely disagree with you on that.
That’s just it. I have all the respect in the world for third parties. They can advocate for things that the other parties do not. I even have supported a third party run for county level positions (she didn’t win, unfortunately).
If a third party wants to be taken seriously, it needs to put in the work. They need to build from the ground up the local officials, the state officials, and then some national level seats. They need the infrastructure, not only politically but in terms of the party. The Ohio DNC is a behemoth of a machine. The Ohio Green party is not going to even compare, much less compete.
The most a green party candidate got for Governor in the last couple decades was 3%, and that was because most of the democrats didn’t really want to vote for FitzGerald.
If your candidate cannot get double percentage points for state level offices, why do you think that anyone should take them seriously at the national level. (Not you, you)
Voting is not as important as advocacy. In 2016, I was annoyed at people who would say that they were going to hold their nose and vote for Clinton, as it was my impression that they probably cost more than one vote for Clinton by saying that. We would have been better off if they had not voted, and kept their mouth shut.
Same with advocating third party votes. The fringies have always been voting third party, it’s always gotten around a percent of the vote. However, as it becomes more “acceptable” to vote for a third party, then those numbers start to add up. Your voting third party may not swing the election, but you bragging about it may cause others to follow suit, which may end up costing the election.
If there is one candidate that is closer to your ideal than the other, and you vote for neither of them, then you are supporting the person that is further from your ideal. That’s just how the math works.
My parents were Trump supporters, but recently, my mother has said that she will not be voting for Trump (my dad probably will.) She will not vote for Biden, but by not voting for Trump, who represents Republican ideology, she is supporting Biden.
Oh, come on, give Trump a chance. Bush had only been in Iraq for a year at this time in his presidency. 5 more years of Trump could give those grieving widows and orphans a run for their money.
(don’t give Trump a chance.)
That’s ridiculous. Did you miss the part about how my state is going Trump no matter what? My vote is irrelevant. Trump is getting all the electoral votes from my state. That is true whether I vote for Biden, myself, whoever the Libertarians nominate, or don’t vote at all. Trump gets no benefit from me.
In that case, everyone’s vote is irrelevant. We’ve had one time when the vote came down to a few hundred, but the next closest is tens of thousands.
The idea of democracy is that we have to treat it as though we actually care about the outcomes. Part of suffrage is vigilance. Democracy cannot survive an apathetic electorate.
Do you not understand the way the electoral college works?
And Clinton was a shoe-in in 2016.
You never know.
Recent elections have literally come down to a coin toss.
Trump losing the popular vote even though he won the EC also sends an important message or, at the very least, annoys the ever loving shit out of him.
And if your vote truly does not matter then why vote at all?
Because I have friends running in down ballot races most years.
And if you knew what state I’m in, you’d know there is no chance whatsoever that
any Dem beats Trump here. I’m not entirely convinced Jesus would beat Trump here. If Trump only wins one state in the whole election, it would be this one.
The popular vote may not mean anything for who becomes president but if people keep getting elected who lose the popular vote that lends pressure to changing the system.
And again, it will annoy Trump which is worthwhile all on its own.
Biden knew full well he was writing off some votes when he praised Beto like that. Mine was one of them.
Single issue voter.
I’ll remind you of this any time you express any political opinion unrelated to gun rights.
Aren’t most Democrats single issue voters this year? Every issue, from UHC to Wall Street reform, to education, to electoral reform, to climate change, to criminal justice reform, to anything else you can think of, has been subordinated to the simple imperative; “Get! Trump! Out!”
I think what’s annoying you isn’t that Oakminster is a single issue voter, but that the single issue he cares about is one you deem unimportant. Well… I’m guessing he probably feels similarly about you.
A politician is not an issue. That’s a silly comparison. Most people who oppose Trump do so due to multiple issues. It’s certainly dozens for me. Almost every issue I can think of.