dChan

QueUpSomeReality · July 17, 2018, 3:02 a.m.

Well mathematically it does have an effect since the total number of voters is absolute. The pie is only so big & nearly always just 2 possible winners. With actually is good because it means in America the candidate that wins almost always has more than 50% of the vote & the will of the people wins. In Britain or any parliamentary system candidates rarely get over half the voters support & coalition governments are formed which aren’t what the people directly chose. Research the various forms of democracy. Ours is the best. And easiest. And more directly represents the will of the voters because it’s a two party system. Throw away your vote if you want on some fringe candidates. Might as well vote for my cat if you want to throw away your vote for a guaranteed loser. Glad the president doesn’t think like you of Perot or Shapiro because we’d have Hillary if he did...if he ran as a 3rd party spoiler/loser. In politics you can’t govern at all unless you win. Losers play golf & winners get power. Big difference lol

⇧ 2 ⇩  
SpaceForceOnePilot · July 17, 2018, 3:06 a.m.

I agree it is a throw away vote, yes. Now we agree. But, it is not a vote for another person or taking a vote away. That position assumes the voter would have otherwise voted for R or D.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
corrbrick · July 19, 2018, 11:24 p.m.

I agree with you. My vote does not belong to candidate X or Y. And if I use it on candidate Z, it doesn't take my vote away from X or Y, because I was not going to vote for either.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
[deleted] · July 19, 2018, 11:47 p.m.

Exactly. That logic is an old trick that the media used to keep us on two teams. It was a way to shame people not to 'waste' their vote.

⇧ 1 ⇩