I just have a couple of thoughts about people voting third party, staying home, or not even voting for the election. I'm in Canada again so I couldn't vote but would have for Clinton. And I am really fond of Clinton. This may not apply to a lot of members on the board as maybe they decided even though they didn't like her they voted for her. But I'm trying to figure out the mentality of the people who decided to vote third party because they didn't like her or Trump or for whatever reasons. I just want to understand better people's thought processes on the following:
I am just trying to understand anyone who supports social / economic issues of all the different movements (Black Lives Matter, LBGTQ, Muslims rights, Syrian refugees, minimum wage, immigration, environment, women's rights, healthcare etc.,) could not vote for Clinton because she was flawed.
If you supported any of the above or other movements I did not mention that would at least be protected or expanded upon with a Clinton win why sit out or protest vote?
Like I'm not saying you have to like Clinton and that yes Clinton should have done more to wow you or convince you to get their vote or coddle (seems like rural americans wanted her to visit and not be ignored) but for this one day you get every 2 (midterms) / 4 years you can show your support to all these movements loud and clearly by voting for whoever has the best chance to win and protect these rights.
Maybe you cannot directly protest with the BLM movement because you are in a different city or area but are for it, or you already have a $15 minimum wage in a couple of years so you aren't fighting as hard for everyone to get it but believe in it, or you have good health care protection and believe it should be expanded upon, or the state has better minority protections etc., so you can't join in the movement directly. Wouldn't this vote be the most powerful way to show all the people involved in these movements that you directly stand with them and support the cause even if you had to check Clinton.
Obviously the election is over, but I'm just trying to understand the mentality of people who couldn't force themselves to vote for Clinton because she was not charismatic or perfect in their eyes. Maybe cause I'm in Canada and we have it pretty good but isn't voting for Stein or Johnson or staying home not a vote against all the movements above. I'm not saying you oppose any of the movements I mentioned above as probably more likely you actually do support them more so then a lot of the voters who voted for Clinton. And I'm not saying your vote is a vote for Trump like how others on the campaign trail or even other posters were framing or even Obama I think mentioned it in his speeches. I know people didn't like the way that was communicated how not voting for Clinton was a vote for Trump and that could have upset voters.
But isn't a vote for anyone but Clinton indirectly a vote of opposition to all the movements I mentioned because of who would be then elected Trump? I think if it was framed this way it would have gotten more people to rethink their ballot and potentially persuade more people to maybe come out and vote for Clinton or not vote third party. Reluctant voters could have used the scapegoat of I don't support Clinton but I support all these movements and not voting for Clinton would have given a Trump presidency a way to oppress these movements or remove them completely and therefore I reluctantly have to vote for Clinton and just know that I am displeased with how this turned out. So even if voting for Clinton left a sour taste in your mouth you would know you are voting to support all these movements which could be argued is even more important then the person who is president? I know the election is over so it's too late but maybe something to consider in the future.
I'm not trying to place blame on anyone but trying to figure out a better message to perhaps get more people to come out and vote in the future. Instead of telling people if you don't vote for this candidate then you are for the opponent. I think that message is too aggressive cause it puts a gun to their head. But by asking the voter if they support these movements and that the only way to protect these rights and movements is to vote for this candidate because if you don't then the alternative will strip these rights and movements. I know it's similar to having a gun to their head analogy I just mentioned but this way it's asking the voter do you care about these issues then you cannot stay home or vote third party as this is more important then a candidates likability. I just think people didn't like being told to vote for Clinton and that annoyed them especially Bernie or Bust people but if you perhaps framed it the way I did it would click / resonate them better as you aren't directly asking them to vote for a candidate but on social issues that they might really care about.
I don't know I just thought I would write it down as it was bugging me. I could be totally wrong what I just mentioned is dumb. I would just like to see if there's anyway to get the 46%+ people who didn't vote who probably cares a lot about these issues but stayed home or voted third party we would need them come 2018 / 2020.
