CreateDebate


Debate Info

3
5
Yes No
Debate Score:8
Arguments:7
Total Votes:8
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (3)
 
 No (4)

Debate Creator

pirateelfdog(2655) pic



Does it make sense to vote third party?

In response to their distaste of both Trump and Clinton, many voters (primarily Sanders supporters) are looking for new options, in Jill Stein and Gary Johnson. So my question is this:

In a situation where it is almost 100% guaranteed that the president will be either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, is it throwing away your vote to vote for a third party candidate? Is the political statement worth it? What are your thoughts? 

Yes

Side Score: 3
VS.

No

Side Score: 5

Your individual vote is quite meaningless in the long run and you indeed can just vote with your heart. Your words and active campaigning in public are what make ripple effects and that is where you need the dollar if you want people to holla.

Campaign ads, paying for interviews (yes not the interviewer paying but politicians paying to be interviewed) so on and so forth, you need to get into the big boy's bankroll to play the big boy campaign game.

Side: Yes
1 point

Absolutely. Both of the main parties are corrupt up to their eyeballs. Continue supporting them, and they get the message: You're ok with corruption.

Vote third party, and not only do you vote against that corruption, but hopefully for integrity, and to give a third party a small chance of someday making the American system vigorous again. With 5%, a third party qualifies for public funding - a small, but meaningful step.

Side: Yes

If you are living in a state where the chances of it swinging are virtually null, I'd say go ahead and vote on principle, since it won't have any real effect.

If you are living in a swing state, or a state that has a chance of swinging, then you have to think about if you consider either of the two candidates in the major parties to be potentially harmful. If you do, then you should do some research into their opponent, and if their proposed policies aren't harmful (or at least present a significantly smaller harm), then you should vote for them.

I hate the idea of voting against someone, rather than actually voting for a candidate, but that's the current nature of our system. Real change does need to happen, but it isn't going to come through increased third party turnout. It will require legitimate campaign finance reform, as well as seriously national regulation of state elections, some of which effectively exclude third party candidates.

Side: No
1 point

I don't think voting for a 3rd Party Candidate who has a snowball's chance in Hell of winning the election is exactly a Throwaway vote.

Oh...if you view it in terms of the candidate's chance at winning, I suppose it could be construed as such. But here'e the thing: voting for a 3rd party shows your dissatisfaction wit the two candidates who are representing the two major Parties.

So the more that people do this--vote for 3rd party guys--the more they are basically sending a message to Washington: that we are sick and tired of having to choose between the lesser of two evils. To me, that's the way these elections always seem to end-up as: having to pick the least loathsome candidate. I cannot remember the last time I was truly excited about a candidate I voted for. At least not one who was running for President.

I DID work as a staffer for a Michigan congressman a few years ago whom I truly thought was an awesome man who could do some real good for his constituency. But that is a rare case.

All change in this country over the years has been fomented from protest. And it usually begins as a small, grass-roots movement that is initially deemed by The Powers That Be as having little chance of success.

Well, to me, voting for a 3rd or 4th Party Candidate is just that: a sort of Protest Vote. A Grass-roots "more power to the people and less to The System" type of a movement. Who knows? If more people continue to vote for non GOP or DNC candidates, than maybe within a couple decades or so they won't have such a monopoly, a stranglehold, on the American Public's Freedom of Choice.

Voting for a Third Party Candidate is like Sending a big fat "Thanks, but No Thanks" message to Washington. No harm can come from this. At the worst it will do nothing to change the system, but at the best scenario, it may actually bring about Real Change.

SS

Side: No
ProLogos(2793) Disputed
1 point

Since when has trolling the government ever turned out well for the citizens? It never has.

Voting for non candidates is just puerile rebellion.

Side: Yes
1 point

Yes, I agree that it's definitely a form of political protest, and if enough people vote 3rd party, it will send a message. I just wonder...

Is the general election really the place to be sending that message? In a situation where you have the opportunity to have a say in who will run your country for the next 4 years, is it worth it to give up that influence in order to send a message to Washington about something else? I think I would argue that you can make political protest in other contexts, but you can't do the same for electing the president.

Side: No

The United States is far too corrupt fora third party candidate to win.

Given the number of businesses and labor unions that have bought and paid for politicians they alone can prevent you third party from winning so its basically a lost cause.

Side: No