Did Johnson cost Hillary the election?

[Senator-elect Spark]

It's ironic that her husband Bill won because of Ross Perot.

[Lachi]

If anything, Trump probably would have won by more if Johnson was not there.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

It's ironic that her husband Bill won because of Ross Perot.

This election has pretty much proved polls are worthless, however I would point out that Clinton was well ahead of Bush in September 1992 and Perot entering the following month actually made it closer.

[Desroko]

Bill Clinton didn't win because of Perot, and Trump didn't win because of Johnson.

[amdcpus]

No, and it is ridiculous to suggest he did. Most of Johnson's support took away from Trump not Clinton. Stein mostly took away from Clinton, but she only got .9% of the vote compared to Johnson's 3.2%.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

That's assuming the great majority of Johnson voters, if they had to pick one of the two would not:

-Vote Trump
-Stay home
-Write-in Ron Paul, Harambe, whatever.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Interesting question.

At first analysis, it looks like a possibility.

But when you analyse it carefully, and there must be Johnson voters here to provide their point of view, these two candidates were the most unattractive to US voters in living memory.

So people are not voting for Johnson because they may have voted for Hillary.

They don't like either candidate. 

[Lothal1]

I'd say no, because he took votes from people who are Republican leaning. Maybe Gary did.

[Pyro]

If anything, Trump probably would have won by more if Johnson was not there.

!!THIS!!

[Leinad]

If it's true, then it's Clinton's fault and her fault alone for not appealing to us. My vote does not belong to Clinton--it's the candidate's job to make me vote for them, and if I decide that they aren't good enough for "lesser of two evils" and I'd rather vote for the candidate I, you know, actually agree with, that's just me exercising my right to vote for who I want to vote for.

If anyone genuinely believes this and also gets upset about voter suppression, they're being a hypocrite, because they literally want to supress my vote.

[StateBoiler]

If anything, Trump probably would have won by more if Johnson was not there.

and McMullin too

Unlike Johnson and Jill Stein, McMullin's candidacy was a purely reactionary anti-Trump candidacy. His share of the vote in Virginia and Minnesota is larger than Clinton's winning margin over Trump in those two states.

I really think this is the 1948 election.

Trump is Truman.
Clinton is Dewey.
Johnson and McMullin are Strom Thurmond and Henry Wallace.

[Enduro]

If it's true, then it's Clinton's fault and her fault alone for not appealing to us. My vote does not belong to Clinton--it's the candidate's job to make me vote for them, and if I decide that they aren't good enough for "lesser of two evils" and I'd rather vote for the candidate I, you know, actually agree with, that's just me exercising my right to vote for who I want to vote for.

If anyone genuinely believes this and also gets upset about voter suppression, they're being a hypocrite, because they literally want to supress my vote.

Amen!!

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

Johnson voter here. If I (and most of my Johnson voting friends) lived in a swing state, we would've voted Clinton. I'd say that there's some Johnson people that would've gone Clinton, but I doubt that number is as high as the number who would've voted Trump. CNN's exit poll was useless. I wanted something that listed the second choice for third party voters.

[StateBoiler]

Johnson voter here. If I (and most of my Johnson voting friends) lived in a swing state, we would've voted Clinton. I'd say that there's some Johnson people that would've gone Clinton, but I doubt that number is as high as the number who would've voted Trump. CNN's exit poll was useless. I wanted something that listed the second choice for third party voters.

I voted for Johnson too. I was never going to vote for Hillary Clinton, and I voted for Johnson because I do not care for Donald Trump, Johnson was the only other candidate on my ballot, and Evan McMullin was not a registered write-in in Indiana.

[Mr. Morden]

If you believe the exit poll, then the majority of 3rd party voters said that they wouldn't have voted at all if their only choices had been Clinton and Trump.  But of those who say they would still have voted, looks like they split evenly between Clinton and Trump.  I'm assuming that Stein drew more from Clinton while Johnson drew a bit more from Trump.

[BaldEagle1991]

Libertarians share the conservative value of small government to an extreme, so no.

He basically got a lot of the Republicans who liked Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio in the primaries.

[Fargobison]

I voted for Johnson, mostly because it was the best way to protest Trump. I would never vote for Clinton, even if I lived in a swing state.

[All Along The Watchtower]

If you believe the exit poll, then the majority of 3rd party voters said that they wouldn't have voted at all if their only choices had been Clinton and Trump.  But of those who say they would still have voted, looks like they split evenly between Clinton and Trump.  I'm assuming that Stein drew more from Clinton while Johnson drew a bit more from Trump.

You'd really have to look at that on a state-by-state basis though (for example, whether Stein had much of tn effect in any of the critical states that Clinton narrowly lost i.e. Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, New Hampshire...).

[Mr. Morden]

If you believe the exit poll, then the majority of 3rd party voters said that they wouldn't have voted at all if their only choices had been Clinton and Trump.  But of those who say they would still have voted, looks like they split evenly between Clinton and Trump.  I'm assuming that Stein drew more from Clinton while Johnson drew a bit more from Trump.

You'd really have to look at that on a state-by-state basis though (for example, whether Stein had much of tn effect in any of the critical states that Clinton narrowly lost i.e. Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, New Hampshire...).

Good point.  OK, I just looked at the exit polls for the closest states and....it's complicated.  Sure, in Florida, Trump still wins even in a 2-way race.  But in both PA and WI it's a tie.  And in Michigan, the 2-way race has Clinton winning by 4(!).  But there are some anomalies.  These polls often have 1 or 2% of Clinton voters switching to Trump in the 2-way race and vice versa.  And in the Michigan exit poll, 7% of respondents said they wouldn't vote if it was just a 2-way race.  But in the actual Michigan vote, 95% voted for Clinton or Trump.  Why would a Clinton or Trump voter opt out of voting if the third parties weren't on the ballot?

Still, seems pretty unlikely that Clinton would have won PA *and* MI *and* WI (which is what she'd need) without Johnson and Stein on the ballot.  If Stein alone was off the ballot, it presumably would have helped Clinton, but there weren't enough Stein voters in PA to make up the gap.  Even if all them had voted Clinton, it wasn't enough.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

If it's true, then it's Clinton's fault and her fault alone for not appealing to us. My vote does not belong to Clinton--it's the candidate's job to make me vote for them, and if I decide that they aren't good enough for "lesser of two evils" and I'd rather vote for the candidate I, you know, actually agree with, that's just me exercising my right to vote for who I want to vote for.

If anyone genuinely believes this and also gets upset about voter suppression, they're being a hypocrite, because they literally want to supress my vote.

[jaichind]

I would argue the opposite.  I feel Johnson cost Trump NH and CO and perhaps NV.

[PresidentTRUMP]

Trump won 306 Electoral Votes LOL....NO, not even close. The person that cost her the election was....HILLARY CLINTON.

WAY WAY to much baggage.

[SWE]

Only if every single Johnson vote would've went to Clinton, so no, obviously not.

[Andrew]

No third-party candidate has ever cost a major-party candidate an election.  The votes that go to third-party candidates don't belong to the Republican or the Democrat--they belong to the voters who cast them.  So those votes aren't "coming from" the major-party candidates--they were never theirs to begin with.

[Sumner 1868]

I thought this meant Ron Johnson at first. Very common name.