Posted on Aug 25, 2016
Is there any value in voting for a third party candidate for President? Or is your vote "wasted"?
15K
163
112
9
9
0
Politics
Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton
Gary Johnson
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 43
1
1
0
It seems "wasted" because third party candidates never seem to do very well in the electorate - another system we need to get rid of. Let the popular vote determine the presidency, and let that be the end of it.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SGM (Join to see)
You need to define value and wasted? I think it is your right and duty to vote the way you see right. I think IF a third party is going to win an election, this would be the one they could? I do not see a third party candidate who would engender such support currently? Castle, Johnson and Stein are not really viable alternatives and what support they do have is more opposition to the two main options. My belief is that anything but Clinton would not be wasted, and especially if it helps ensure she does not win.
You need to define value and wasted? I think it is your right and duty to vote the way you see right. I think IF a third party is going to win an election, this would be the one they could? I do not see a third party candidate who would engender such support currently? Castle, Johnson and Stein are not really viable alternatives and what support they do have is more opposition to the two main options. My belief is that anything but Clinton would not be wasted, and especially if it helps ensure she does not win.
(1)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
Value = value to the country
Wasted (to me) = a vote for a candidate with an absolutely zero statistical chance to win
Wasted (to me) = a vote for a candidate with an absolutely zero statistical chance to win
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I would say if everyone voted for character and principle then the third party question wouldn't be an issue. People are so hung up on party they forget to ask themselves if the candidate is worth it. I'm sure we can all find Republicans and Democrats regardless of your party preference that are dirt bags.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Voting for who you believe is best suited is never wasted. Vote your conscience, and with your head. Not necessarily with your party affiliation. The only way to break the cycle of the completely ridiculous two party system is for third party and independents to make serious runs, and for people to vote for them. This changes how the system works, forces compromise, and that's a good thing, just like the Founding Fathers intended.
(1)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
Didn't Trump already break the cycle though? He is an insurgent-candidate that overthrew the GOP "establishment" to take the nomination, but basically an independent. Much like Bernie Sanders did within the DEM ticket. If HRC hadn't rigged the result from the start, we would be seeing a Socialist Independent vs a Capitalist Independent.
(0)
(0)
SFC Phillip Allen
SGM (Join to see) - I disagree with your Trump-ism about Clinton "rigging the system" .... The Dems have used Superdelegates for many years, and they rarely change their affiliation once they back someone. Just like Trump, if Bernie had been a 'true' Demcrat and not an Independent running on the Democrat system, he probably would've gotten more Superdelegates. I for one was hoping for O'Malley vs Kasich, but the neo-cons and party Dems kinda squashed that
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
It's not a Trump-ism. It was documented, and continues to be exposed through Wikileaks: http://observer.com/2016/07/wikileaks-proves-primary-was-rigged-dnc-undermined-democracy/
Wikileaks Proves Primary Was Rigged: DNC Undermined Democracy
20,000 freshly-leaked emails reveal resentful disdain toward Sanders, as party favored Clinton long before any votes were cast.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Vote as you please and for whatever reason. It will only matter in the tightest of races. And most diehard Libertarians would vote for their candidate or no one at all, ergo no lost votes to either major parties. The Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with parties. In fact, quite the opposite, it is rigged not to give the actual vote for president to the average citizen.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Some will say that a vote for a third party is a waste. People who say that are really saying they don't care about the voter, the voter's voice, or the voter's conscience. They are saying that the voter's views are not worth being represented. That voters should silence their voice so theirs can be louder.
Vote your conscience, SGM (Join to see).
Vote your conscience, SGM (Join to see).
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
I agree with "voting your conscience", but you have to apply the reality of the situation to every decision. The reality is that either Trump or Clinton will win this election. Any other conclusion is wishful thinking at best. If you don't vote for one of those two choices, the one that MOST aligns with your beliefs and you think will be best for the country, your vote is wasted.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SGM (Join to see)
In the last 5 elections (because 20 years is how long I've been voting) when has there been a great candidate after the primaries?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The only "wasted" vote is the one not cast. It's important as citizen to exercise the responsibility of voting. Yes, I used the word responsibility on purpose. The Constitution of the United States, as amended, only states who may NOT be denied the Right of Suffrage, not who has the right.
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
We are not talking about being denied the right to vote. We are talking about the limited options when we DO vote. Please stay on task.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
A vote is not wasted no matter who you vote for. A third party candidate may not win this election but by voting for them you can show your displeasure with the two major party selections. If enough people vote third party maybe in the next election they will have more of a chance to win since the higher their percentage of votes is the more people will be willing to vote for them in a later election. This could result in one of the two major parties turning into a third party.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Jonathan Dickey
PO3 Service Member - I also believe that either DT or HC will win but that is not necessarily the point of voting third party in this case. Because they are pretty much guaranteed to win the point is to raise awareness of other parties so that they may have a chance in a later election.
Personally, I do not see any difference between the two major party candidates. They are both lying narcissists that are part of the establishment that have made things as bad as they currently are. Unless there is a real change nothing will get better. Neither believes in true freedom of speech, both are bought and paid for by the elites, and both are hiding very important aspects of their lives from the public that could very well effect the outcome of this election if those aspects were known.
Personally, I do not see any difference between the two major party candidates. They are both lying narcissists that are part of the establishment that have made things as bad as they currently are. Unless there is a real change nothing will get better. Neither believes in true freedom of speech, both are bought and paid for by the elites, and both are hiding very important aspects of their lives from the public that could very well effect the outcome of this election if those aspects were known.
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
SSgt Jonathan Dickey - How well-known was Ross Perot after the 1992 election? What % of the vote did Bill Clinton Receive to win the presidency that year? How well have 3rd parties done in national (or state-level) elections? The answers to these questions will tell you exactly why "PO3 Service Member" is correct.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Jonathan Dickey
SGM (Join to see) - Just because DT or HC will most likely win does not mean voting for someone else is a wasted vote. Ross Perot gained a lot in popularity during the '92 elections because of press coverage plus he was allowed to partake in the Presidential debates. Fast forward four years to '96 he was excluded and did not do as well. The media determines who is the winner by excluding other choices from their discussion or portraying them as a wasted vote. If enough people broke from that mentality maybe we could enjoy a change in ruling parties like what happened in the 1850s when the Whig Party collapsed and the Republican Party was created to fill that void.
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
SSgt Jonathan Dickey - Yes, he gained a lot of popularity, but the only difference he made in the election was to upset Bush Sr's reelection campaign. The media doesn't "determine" the winner though. I think 3rd party candidates need to get representation at the State level before they have the slightest remote chance at the national level. I vote for 3rd party candidates at every single local election and most HoR candidates, but for the Senate and POTUS, they only play upset and have virtually no chance at victory. You can "poll" for them at the national level, and I would love to see more in the debates, but they just can't win... yet.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Voting is making a statement. It's not simply about winning. A vote represents what you believe. As long as you cast your vote to win, and it differs from what you truly want, there will never be any real change. There is a requirement of honesty in voting. Otherwise the system fails. It fails to represent the desires of the masses. It fails to express what changes the populous wants. It's fails to hold up hold the sanctity process of fair representation.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google