LogFAQs > #978634952

bfslick50 posted...

A 3rd party making a difference would be splitting the vote so there's only a plurality in the electoral college meaning the House gets to pick the election exactly like what happened in 1824.

And that ends up being extremely unbalanced due to being 1 vote per state. California, 1 vote. Wyoming, 1 vote.

Trumble posted...

Because so many people refuse to consider them. Like, you do realise literally nothing besides the very kind of two-party propaganda people like you are pushing, actually prevents a third party win, right? They're not going to go "oh, this third party candidate won the popular vote and EC, but nevermind, Trump wins instead because Biden didn't win and Trump is the other major party candidate".

For any given individual, voting 3rd party makes it less likely they get a result they want. While sure, if enough people voted for a 3rd party things could chance, you have a massive range between where it just makes things worse. We do not have any way to cast conditional votes, and so rational voters will not vote for a 3rd party candidate.

Additionally, there's an expectation that if a majority of a party's voters would prefer some Candidate C, then that candidate could have ran for that nomination instead of running as an independent or 3rd party candidate.

In order to make 3rd party candidates more viable, you need to change the voting system so that the voters feel like it is a reasonable option.