ext_133395 ([identity profile] shadowolf.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] furtech 2004-06-26 01:02 am (UTC)

I didn't come up with the argument, [livejournal.com profile] kaysho said it himself a few weeks ago (though I can't find the specific post right now...)

Essentially let's say you have 3 candidates, A, B, and C (or N, K, and B :) Some folks like A's policies best, and are good with B's, but A is the better fit for them. They do not want C because they don't like the idea of him as a leader.

Ditto for the people who like B. They admire A's stand, but B is more in line with their ideals. Again, C is not an option for them.

The C folks, they don't like B at all, and don't want A either.

Now you can do the math in however you like, but let's say that 40% of the people like C, 35% like B, and 25% like A best of all. C wins the election, even though C is the 3rd choice of the majority of people who voted in the election. You could even make that narrower by saying 49% like C, 48% like B, and only 3% like A. Exact same outcome.

Now if you don't like B or C, and really like A, then by all means, vote for A and be happy with the outcome. Maybe A will get that 5% and be on the ballot next election, too.

However, if the thought of B as your president doesn't turn your stomach, then voting for A, especially if you know A has no true chance of winning, is only going to help C win.


On a different tangent, I am curious about this whole silent-vote process people have. My mom did the same thing, she would never tell someone who she voted for. I don't quite understand it myself, could you elaborate on why?

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting