Don't vote for Johnson because ISIS is Nader's fault

[Antonio the Sixth]

Meh, putting the blame on third-party candidates or their voters is obviously wrong, but it's undeniable that if a voter genuinely cares about preventing the worst outcome, then the only worthwhile course of action is choosing the lesser evil.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Meh, putting the blame on third-party candidates or their voters is obviously wrong, but it's undeniable that if a voter genuinely cares about preventing the worst outcome, then the only worthwhile course of action is choosing the lesser evil.

Because, you know, Trump is totally going to win in California if I vote for Johnson.

He might if every person who didn't like Hillary but liked Drumpf even less chose to vote for Johnson while all the voters who didn't like Drumpf but liked Hillary even less still voted for Drumpf. Of course that's not actually gonna happen, but the mere theoretical possibility is troubling to me.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Meh, putting the blame on third-party candidates or their voters is obviously wrong, but it's undeniable that if a voter genuinely cares about preventing the worst outcome, then the only worthwhile course of action is choosing the lesser evil.

Because, you know, Trump is totally going to win in California if I vote for Johnson.

He might if every person who didn't like Hillary but liked Drumpf even less chose to vote for Johnson while all the voters who didn't like Drumpf but liked Hillary even less still voted for Drumpf. Of course that's not actually gonna happen, but the mere theoretical possibility is troubling to me.

The point is, if Trump winning California is within the realm of probability, he has already won the election because of votes in other states, so it won't matter at that point anyway.

Ugh, I hate the Electoral College for making this inherently ridiculous logic actually make sense...

[Antonio the Sixth]

Meh, putting the blame on third-party candidates or their voters is obviously wrong, but it's undeniable that if a voter genuinely cares about preventing the worst outcome, then the only worthwhile course of action is choosing the lesser evil.

But lesser of two evils is still bad, because the consequence is always evil.

You say the crazy scenario that if all the Clinton > Trump voters vote for another option but all the Trump > Clinton voters vote for Trump, Trump will win, but what about the not any crazier scenario where a vast majority of voters from either camp vote for their actual favorite, regardless of party affiliation? The consequence of that is a functioning representative republic, freed from the two-party system of evil vs. evil.

That will never happen, because such is the nature of single-round FPP. Duverger's law might not be quite a law in the way the laws of gravity are, but it's pretty damn close.