-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt about voting for lesser of two evils (AMA)
- Thread starter Renekton
- Start date
- Status
It's not that alternative candidates are best voted for outside of the presidency, but that the presidential election -- especially this one, less than two months away -- is too late to meaningfully vote for a third-party candidate. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein have no chance of becoming president this year, and every single one of their voters knows it.
If you want to see a truly viable third-party candidate for president, you have to start from the ground up, which means electing libertarians, independents, et al. to local elections and state elections for years and years between presidential cycles. Build up your third party through the ranks, until they become big enough to actually be viable for a run at the White House.
Literally what the op quote is talking about. A Gary vote is a wasted vote. A statement that won't be heard. Only do that if you literally don't care about anything
And it's ok to not care about anything. But it's silly when people pretend to care about what's going on and then exclaim with pride that they are making a vote that won't make a shred of difference in the world
I honestly feel like we say that every week.
balladofwindfishes
Member
It's hard to get incumbents voted out, especially in house races.
Who's they/them?
he learned the True Way of Voting
dave is ok
aztek is ok
The only two parties that exist in this country in any meaningful way.
I voted Nader in 2000 too, and I feel no regret over it. I live in a state that doesn't swing.
excelsiorlef
Member
Nevermind
It's amazing to me how Americans just accept that they get no legally mandated annual leave and so few guaranteed public holidays. It's like a third world country in that regard.
Zoe
Member
The people who can't afford to take off the time that's already given them to go vote are the same people who would still be working on a national holiday. You would also lose essential public services that would get people to the polling stations.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
Voting third party is just as irrelevant as not voting.
It says there are Republicans who don't want Trump destroying the economy with protectionism and massive spending increases, or having a mentally unstable person getting control over nuclear weapons.
Brutalitops
Banned
I'm Australian and know tons of people who don't vote.
This recent on a ballot I wrote a poem using all the names on it while also voting Liberal. Some people are unoriginal and draw dicks though without filling out the form.
This recent on a ballot I wrote a poem using all the names on it while also voting Liberal. Some people are unoriginal and draw dicks though without filling out the form.
Puck Beaverton
Banned
I became happier when I realized you don't have a choice when it comes to presidential elections. Voting third party may make you feel good, but it is throwing a vote away.
It helps I also live in Texas, where me voting for any democrat might as well be throwing a vote away.
It helps I also live in Texas, where me voting for any democrat might as well be throwing a vote away.
Garrett Hawke
Member
But at least you try!
Texas is a purple state in the making. Your Democrat vote will, perhaps sooner than later, not be irrelevant.
plagiarize
Banned
I really hope everyone voting Libertarian or Green party has done their due diligence on those candidates too, and isn't just going 'oh they aren't Trump or Clinton'.
Cause sure as shit the people on my facebook haven't done that.
On of the most vocal Stein supporters today was saying 'Vote for Stein not Killary, her running mate is female too!'
Like... wait... you don't even know who her running mate is and you expect me to believe that you've taken more than a cursory look at the green party ticket?
Whatever your feelings on Clinton as a person (oh she's a liar, oh she's corrupt), there is no way that she isn't clearly the lesser evil here.
And if you're not going to essentially do a protest vote instead, you don't get to bitch when either Trump or Clinton gets elected in my mind, because you didn't do anything to stop either.
Cause sure as shit the people on my facebook haven't done that.
On of the most vocal Stein supporters today was saying 'Vote for Stein not Killary, her running mate is female too!'
Like... wait... you don't even know who her running mate is and you expect me to believe that you've taken more than a cursory look at the green party ticket?
Whatever your feelings on Clinton as a person (oh she's a liar, oh she's corrupt), there is no way that she isn't clearly the lesser evil here.
And if you're not going to essentially do a protest vote instead, you don't get to bitch when either Trump or Clinton gets elected in my mind, because you didn't do anything to stop either.
There's a story about that nearly once a week on the radio here. Texas Standard had a story related to that yesterday.
i would assume that most people voting third party don't actually believe their chosen candidate has any chance at becoming president, which makes deep familiarity with any 3rd party candidates platform kind of unnecessary. most people who do it think of it as a protest vote against the two major candidates in any given election.
RustyNails
Member
I dont like how both candidates are teh saaaame driveby posters disappear never to make a real, decisive case for sitting it out.
Airola
Member
Yes! This!
Which would be better? All of the third party votes changing into votes for the two major parties, or ALL of the compromised votes for the major parties changing into votes for third parties? I bet the election would be way different if each and every person who don't like Trump or Clinton would vote for someone else. But now as people keep on worshipping this strategic vote system we can never witness that to happen.
Now, some would argue that "yeah, but THIS time it's DIFFERENT - this time you just HAVE to compromise", but that's bullshit. People say that in every election and every election just keeps on being anti-democracy bullshit and nothing ever changes. Every election you have people using blame and shame tactics to try to turn you into a strategic voter. Don't ever fall into that.
If you vote for Clinton or Trump you are letting one of them in. If you are advocating that people should vote for "the lesser of two evils" you are advocating for evil nevertheless. This mentality keeps this garbage of a system running till the end of time. Year after year, the people who could've made a difference will continue pressing democracy down by falling into this strategy deception.
LegendofJoe
Member
They're lazy, that's the crux of it.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Pretty much why I simply roll my eyes laugh at the "my conscience won't let me! My beliefs! My convictions! They dun represent me 100%!!" people who say they're not voting.
Garrett Hawke
Member
So what's your solution? Surely if sitting out the vote as protest worked the golden candidate on a unicorn would've already revealed themselves by now?
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
If you are arguing that Hillary is the "lesser evil" you are delusional that she is evil at all when you've got a candidate who kept Mein Kampf at his bedside.
But no, keep up the bullshit that "both sides are the same" or "the answer is in the middle". Just watch as 2 to 3 SCOTUS justices are replaced by ultraconservatives and the social progress and economic recovery made in the last 8 years is undone.
But no, keep up the bullshit that "both sides are the same" or "the answer is in the middle". Just watch as 2 to 3 SCOTUS justices are replaced by ultraconservatives and the social progress and economic recovery made in the last 8 years is undone.
Mr. Giggles
Member
*nods in agreement*
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
I am probably JGL's age and also voted for Nader in 2000 (caveat: it was NY and I would have voted for Gore in a swing state). My thinking was the same as JGL's and probably the same as yours now.
I was close to the 9/11 attacks but was not involved or injured nor was anyone I know hurt or killed. I never served in the military and don't even personally know a veteran among my close friends. I kept my job through the entirety of the Bush years. In short, the 2000 election arguably had no material effect on me.
My vote in 2000 is still one of my biggest embarrassments and shames and I wish every day that Gore had been elected President.
Tldr: Who gives a fuck what you get out of it. That's how an asshole decides to vote. What happens to other people still matters.
SuperBanana
Banned
I agree with him. In the Australian election when Tony Abbott got in. A global warming denying, gay and immigrant hating, coal loving leader who right-wing Americans would post about on their facebooks saying "Why can't WE get a great president like this?!". He was abysmal and kicked out by his own party. Both candidates sucked but sometimes you have to pick the lesser and fight another day.
Change comes over time and on a society level. By constantly pushing for it, for more to accept it, and to teach people so they're more educated on what needs fixing. By demanding new laws be put in to stop corruption and stop money flowing in. It doesn't come over night and you won't redefine and entire electoral system in one election. Even if someone like a third party or Bernie got in do you really think they'd fix it all? It would be minimal in the ways people think but just not going backwards.
Change comes over time and on a society level. By constantly pushing for it, for more to accept it, and to teach people so they're more educated on what needs fixing. By demanding new laws be put in to stop corruption and stop money flowing in. It doesn't come over night and you won't redefine and entire electoral system in one election. Even if someone like a third party or Bernie got in do you really think they'd fix it all? It would be minimal in the ways people think but just not going backwards.
Airola
Member
No, I don't tell anyone to sit out the vote.
I'm telling everyone to not let this strategy bullshit make people sell their votes for people they don't like. The illusion of "two major parties" will stay alive as long as people continue selling their votes for them. Year after year people can say how many people are voting for those two parties, but that's only because there are too many people who only vote for the other because they don't like the other.
This year there are so many people voting for Trump because they don't like Clinton, and people voting for Clinton because they don't like Trump. Imagine ALL of those votes going somewhere else. ALL of them.
Both parties are using this gullibility to their advance.
The "Alternative Vote" system would be great.
This is not a protest. This is just trying to make democracy a democracy.
jack_package_200
Banned
This
There are rights and civil liberties of many americans on the line this election. Even if you as a white man won't deal with much adversity during a Trump presidency, they will.
Airola
Member
This. Quoted for truth.
I've never had the chance to vote for a candidate who perfectly "represents my values" and probably never will in my life. It doesn't work like that. It's exactly about compromise.
If you honestly think Gary Johnson is the best candidate to improve the life of Americans, vote for him. If you don't think so but vote for him to stick it to the "establishment", you're wasting your time. No one cares about your "anti-establishment-vote". The Democratic Party won't think "Oh, Johnson got 15%, I guess we should change our stances to match his". So make sure you really evaluate the possible consequences of that vote.
If you honestly think Gary Johnson is the best candidate to improve the life of Americans, vote for him. If you don't think so but vote for him to stick it to the "establishment", you're wasting your time. No one cares about your "anti-establishment-vote". The Democratic Party won't think "Oh, Johnson got 15%, I guess we should change our stances to match his". So make sure you really evaluate the possible consequences of that vote.
Messofanego
Banned
They haven't thought it through so when they catch flack, it's the first time they've had to check if they can solidly back up their position rather than just throwing their opinion out there like a protest post.
The problem with this thinking is that "two major parties" isn't an illusion, it's the reality. When you vote for one or the other, you aren't "selling" your vote, you have chosen one or the other. Two very obviously different choices is a decision, it is democracy regardless of whether you think it is or isn't.
What you should be irritated about is the inability of third parties to effectively organize and build enough support to impact national elections. And don't be lazy and complain that all the big interests prevent them from being able to; previous third parties have clambered on about big interests throughout US history and they built organizations that claimed electoral votes. But they didn't do this during presidential elections nor did they do it in just one year or four years.
QuantumBro
Banned
Well if he was concerned about that, he should've decided not to run for reelection after this shit.
CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls
Banned
1) He's dead and the damage is already done.
2) ISIS benefits irregardless of candidate, but sure, Trump's hate and fear-mongering will benefit them more in some intangible way.
Oh, and I don't drive-by post. I actually have to work every now and then.
I stated earlier that I'd likely vote in the local elections as that is something of value to me. I'll amend my 1st post to reflect that.
If everyone voted for a candidate closest to them, we'd end up with 10 candidates and the "winner" getting in with like 20 percent of the vote. In a proportional or ranked voting system this would work ok, but in our current system it would be a disaster. Fight for the constitutional amendments necessary to get a better electoral system if that's what you want (and good luck getting it) but until then voting third-party just means increasing odds of a candidate winning with a minority share of the vote, and increasing odds that that candidate will be the one furthest from the party you actually support.
Right now the truth is you have two minor, protest parties that believe batshit insane things (Libertarians and Greens), one major party that believes batshit insane things (Republicans), and one major party that is seriously compromised and corrupted by the realities of our current politics, but is at least ultimately sensible (Democrats).
This relies on the assumption that all of them could agree on someone else. They couldn't. They're a diverse group of people with radically different interests, and the nature of represenatative government is that diverse groups of people have to rally behind compromise candidates. There's also this delusion that the typical reluctant Hillary supporter (or reluctant Trump supporter) would be so much happier if they'd just look into Stein or Johnson or whomever, when really most of those people have looked into those options and rejected them as worse than than the candidate they're reluctantly supporting, because in the view of most of those people Johnson and Stein believe crazy things.
Leatherface
Member
he brings up a good point. There is no way I can ignore this election. Even though I don't want either candidate for president I have to side with Hillary. It hurts my soul a little but I will do it. :'(
Vigilant Walrus
Member
You can blame culture; the media and the education system for framing the president has the one who makes all the decisions. With all the gridlock that has happened in congress, the importance of state legislatures have become incredible important, and the vast vast amount of the population have no idea that they have a big shot of impacting ground breaking laws in their state. you state legislatures who get to pass sweeping important bills who get into office running with little resistance and under the nose of everybody because people are not tuned in.
But this is the most perverted warped sense of democracy, because it is in your community where you are able to influence things. as a person your reach and influence and ability to empower is much greater. But so many people are under a spell that only the president matters.
People who say they won't choose between the lesser of two evils - they do that every day in all circumstances of their lives. rarely do you get the thing you want in anything, but have to choose between two lesser options.
But there is no doubt that what it means- what lesser of two evils actually means is that they want to coalition parties. because then your vote will matter even if you vote for the jedi party or the party of the christian fundamentalists or the jihadists or whatever. But for reasons we have discussed neither the democrats or the republicans overall seem particularly intent on wanting to usurp that two party structure.
This election more than anything has proven through Bernie and Trump that there really needs to be made changes.
America has an incredible history with third parties. Third parties in America have championed many of the most important ideas in America history which eventually were picked up by the two big parties. And its due to the fact that important voices are often the unspoken who are not represented by the establishment. Third parties have influenced a lot throughout American history even though they've not been the ones carrying those opinions through the dirt from their humbling beginnings.
This is not unique to American politics or even politics in general. You see it in business and almost all areas of capitalism. Established institutions with resources soak up the ideas even though they did not have the original desire for it. Parties change to reflect the moving tides of society. In that sense, not having third parties properly represented is very un-American and I think the "fuck the system" mentality reflects that.
Angry Chair
Member
This is a dumb as fuck idea and is the definition of a protest vote. Who is this magical 3rd candidate that both people on opposite sides of the aisle are going to feel great about anyway? I have a much better idea: people who value their "sensibilities" over the lives of other people develop a thing called empathy and quit being so selfish. I never liked Bernie but would have had no problem voting for him for this reason.
pretty done
Member
Rare footage of a terrible first post on GAF
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I find the entire argument annoying because the unqualified racist guy who has no actual concrete policy aims isn't comparable to a competent, qualified candidate with well-defined policy aims who kinda rubs you the wrong way.
I'm not going to say both are the same, because I don't agree, but I will say that I'm not enthused about either candidate. I will be voting for Hillary because Donald Trump being president is beyond ridiculous (for many reasons), and I need to do what I can come voting day to hopefully make that not a reality.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked