I like this and of course agree

The author thinks people who vote for Stein or write in Sanders’ name think they can win. That may be true for a few people but I think most don’t hold such grand illusions. The vast majority of Stein and Sanders supporters know their candidates can’t and won’t win. They are voting for Stein and Sanders for a variety of reasons (tired of voting for the lesser of two evils, want to send a message, etc). What the author fails to grasp is not everyone thinks Trump would be that much worse than Hillary. That’s not a ‘given’ among a great number of people.

Personally, I reject that kind of vote-shaming entirely. It’s lame. It’s false. It’s tiresome. It’s also reminiscent of the illogical framing of the 2000 election as “Nader handed the election to Bush,” which did not happen. Since our presidents win via the electoral college, and it’s cumulative, no one state can be decisive. They all count. And people don’t get to narrow down their counterfactuals like that. If you say, “Well, if only they had voted for Gore in Florida,” you also have to go back and look at all the other variables there, and in every other state.

For instance, Gore lost his own state of Tennessee. If he had won it, even with the loss in Florida, he gains the presidency.

Another counterfactual? 308,000 Dems voted for Bush in Florida. How does it make sense to blame the 24,000 Nader voters who were potential Gore voters, when 308,000 Dems voted for Bush?

___

Beyond all of that: One could just as easily say that any vote for Clinton is a vote for Trump. No one owes their vote to the Dems. Clinton isn’t entitled to them. And because she has so much baggage, she may well lose to Trump.

Stein wouldn’t, if every person who votes for Clinton voted for her instead. She’d defeat Trump. Why? Because she’d get both the Dem vote and independent lefties. Clinton will only get the Dem vote.

Best way to convince voters to vote for your candidate? Show she’s actually the best possible choice. Vote-shaming just turns people off and likely pushes them to stay home.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 3 months ago by Billy_T.

zn wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

not everyone thinks Trump would be that much worse than Hillary.

IMO? Yes he would be THAT much worse.

That’s my honest opinion of it.

ZN,

I can see that. I think Trump is a terrible candidate. But, to me, the thing that tips it all over is that he’ll be a Republican president, with Pence likely running the show, and the Dems are the lesser of two evils between the two parties.

I don’t want either of them. But if forced to choose between just the two of them — and I’m not, luckily; I’ll be voting for Stein — I’d go with HRC.

nittany ram wrote:

zn wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

not everyone thinks Trump would be that much worse than Hillary.

IMO? Yes he would be THAT much worse.

That’s my honest opinion of it.

FWIW I don’t disagree with you. But I think a lot of leftists, Greens and ‘anti-insider’ types don’t see it that way.

Then to me? Many of those…not all because I know a lot of people who are wrestling with that…are just a different kind of party purist. That’s what I believe (and I may draw flack for it too.)

DT = a lot worse.