Pennies and Propaganda

[joeactor]

Hi all,

I got this video sent to me by a friend who wanted to know what's wrong with the assumptions:

Here's my reply (open for discussion)...

The facts in the video come from this article in the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/01/us/elections/nine-percent-of-america-selected-trump-and-clinton.html?_r=1


As stated in both the article and video:

*) The United States is home to 324 million people.

*) 103 million of them are children, noncitizens or ineligible felons, and they do not have the right to vote.

*) 88 million eligible adults do not vote at all, even in general elections.

*) An additional 73 million did not vote in the primaries this year, but will most likely vote in the general election. (* Does not include people who voted in caucuses, which have less reliable turnout numbers. A small percentage of people vote in primaries but not in general elections, and they are also not included.)

*) The remaining 60 million people voted in the primaries: about 30 million each for Republicans and Democrats.

*) But half of the primary voters chose other candidates. Just 14 percent of eligible adults — 9 percent of the whole nation — voted for either Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton.


Additional claims made by the video (my comments start with -->>):

*) 161 million did not vote for Trump or Clinton

-->> This is only in the primary voting, and he's short. 30 million voted in the primaries, but didn't vote for Trump or Clinton, so this should be 191 million.

*) blah, blah, blah... don't believe a third party vote is wasted because look! 161 million vs 30 million!!!

-->> so many assumptions. so much wrong.
-->> First, he's assuming that the 88 million who don't normally vote, somehow would... and that they would not vote for Trump or Clinton.
-->> Second, he's assuming that the 73 million who do vote will vote outside of their party (and we don't know how many are associated with a party), but I would guess that's also pretty rare. People vote like their parents or area/social class vote.
-->> Third, he's ignoring the 60 million who voted in the primaries, as if their votes are cast in stone. They're free to vote for Trump, Clinton, or anyone else.
-->> Fourth, and probably most important, he's completely missed the Electoral College in this calculation. As if the popular vote is what chooses the winner. Wrong!


From my view, a third party vote is wasted. Mainly because in this place I like to call "Reality" they have almost no chance of winning in a presidential election.

If America wants a viable third party, they're gonna have to start from the ground up. Once there are over 20% of a third party holding local, state, house and senate seats, maybe we'll be ready to elect one president. Until then, you might as well throw your "vote" in the circular file.

Filed under Propaganda,
JoeActor

[Davin]

Hi all,

I got this video sent to me by a friend who wanted to know what's wrong with the assumptions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKLA8bfZTfU

My feelings are, that as an adult, if you did not vote, then you didn't take responsibility for yourself. So if you didn't go and vote for someone else in the primaries, then you made a choice to let other people decide for you. If you made that choice, then you can't be mad at anyone but yourself if they choose someone you didn't want. What is seems like to me, is that this is trying to say that it was unfair for those two to be the party nominees, and while I know there were some shenanigans, it was not entirely unfair. They had chance, and they chose to let other people decide for them.

From my view, a third party vote is wasted. Mainly because in this place I like to call "Reality" they have almost no chance of winning in a presidential election.

If America wants a viable third party, they're gonna have to start from the ground up. Once there are over 20% of a third party holding local, state, house and senate seats, maybe we'll be ready to elect one president. Until then, you might as well throw your "vote" in the circular file.

Filed under Propaganda,
JoeActor

I have mixed feelings about this. I rarely ever make decisions for only the short term. I think most third party voters realize that they don't have much of a shot (I would say impossible), so trying to reach them with this "wasted vote" stuff isn't going to reach them. Especially if you keep phrasing it in the short term. Also, it doesn't help to misrepresent them in such a way, then try to be condescending by implying they are the ones that are not in touch with reality. I can see that a majority of people may not be able to express themselves very well, I am one of them, but since politics tends to get ugly fairly quickly, why start out a conversation with misrepresentation and condescension?

Now, if you're going to reach them, I'd probably approach it by talking about the strategy. Voting for a third party president will be heard, and may make a difference in the long term, but until something is done about all the "winner take all" states and the electoral college, a third party candidate will never have a chance no matter how far into the future you plan. In order to do something about those major roadblocks to democracy, we will have to demonstrate that it's hurting the democratic process and get people in places where they will do something about it. Which means starting from the bottom and working up. We need to get third parties into local government offices, into the house, then into the senate where they can pass laws to make the changes that I think need to have been made decades ago, but of course won't as long as the two major parties are in control of everything.

Stop misrepresenting them with the "waste of a vote" stuff and maybe you'll be able to reach them and have a meaningful dialog. But until then, you'll just be talking past them.

My current issue, and why I won't be voting for a third party, is that there is no one running that I think would do a better job than Hillary. I don't see it as voting for the lesser of two evils, I see it as voting for the best available option.

[joeactor]

Excellent view on reaching third-party voters, Davin... Thank you.

I also agree about Hillary being the most qualified of all the candidates, and that's where my vote will go as well.