Why votes for Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein won't count in Ohio
Why votes for Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein won't count in Ohio
Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein is on Ohio's ballot, but votes for her won't count.
You're viewing part of a thread.
I didn't especially "want" to brush my teeth last night, but I did anyway. Because I know that the alternative is opening up the door to things I don't want, even more than I don't want to brush my teeth.
If someone woke up and said, I'm proud I didn't brush my teeth, because I didn't want to, I would have trouble looking at them as a source of wisdom about how to accomplish the goals they're trying to pursue.
Cute analogy, But that doesn’t apply to voting because voting isn’t a routine obligation—it’s an opportunity to choose what you believe in.
Just like choosing not to brush your teeth doesn’t change the necessity of dental hygiene, choosing to vote third party isn’t ignoring reality, it’s actively rejecting a system that fails to represent true change. Thanks! :)
Just like choosing not to brush your teeth doesn't change the necessity of dental hygiene
choosing to vote third party isn’t ignoring reality
You're so close to getting it. Millimeters away.
And yet I already voted. For exactly who I wanted to vote for. Thank you! :)
Yeah, for Trump. Because that’s what a vote for Jill Stein is.
Your refusal to accept reality in circular logic does not make you correct.
No, they're voting for Pro-Israel candidate Rachele Fruit. Quoted earlier this year:
And anyone who is interested in reading and learning about the history of Hamas will be convinced that it’s not about liberation. It’s about genocide against the Jews.
No, a vote for Trump is a vote for Trump. A vote for Stein is a vote for Stein.
I've already voted. And I didn't vote for Stein. Or Trump. Or Harris. Thank you! :)
That’s obviously not how it works. You refusal to accept that reality does not make you correct.
https://www.axios.com/2024/09/27/jill-stein-democrats-2024-republicans
It appears lots of people disagree with you. Which is why Democrats are so afraid. Thank you! :)
Argumentum ad populum logical fallacy: being popular doesn’t make you correct. And obviously not many really think that, or Stein would actually be a viable candidate.
Once again, Your refusal to accept reality does not make you correct. And, by the numbers, it doesn’t make you popular either.
And obviously not many really think that, or Stein would actually be a viable candidate.
Well then you guys and the Democratic Party have nothing to worry about! Right? So no stress. Thank you! :)
You are simply wrong about this. Completely wrong, and blindly pretending you’re right. I pride myself on giving people as much benefit of the doubt as possible, but you appear to be willingly trolling now, or you are incapable of learning new concepts and ideas and understanding the consequences of your actions. It’s quite selfish and concerning actually. In any case, I’m done trying. If that was your plan, to tire us out of arguing against your complete lack of logic or willingness to understand reality, then you win. Just know, you’re still wrong about some very fundamental concepts of our society.
I gave my opinion. I voted for who I wanted to vote for. And I think everyone has the right to vote for whoever they want to vote for. Thanks! :)
You are boring and since you don’t reply to me anymore you apparently know when you are beat.
Unlike the candidates you choose.
But that doesn’t apply to voting because voting isn’t a routine obligation
Voting is routine and an obligation. Brushing those one’s teeth is not “a moral or legal duty”. Your reasoning is flawed.
No one has to vote either. Not everyone has the same morals as you. Thanks! :)
Nobody claimed that voting was compulsory. Just an obligation. Those aren’t the same thing.
So you know that what you said was false. Then why did you say that?
Not everyone feels it's an obligation. Plenty of people don't vote. I did though. Thank you! :)
Not everyone feels it's an obligation. Plenty of people don't vote
So? That doesn’t address the question— it’s just a non-sequitur. And clearly you do believe it’s an obligation, because you did vote.
Now that you’ve acknowledged that your claims were false, why did you say them?
You gave me a definition of obligation. I point out that not everyone feels voting is an obligation. Thank you! :)
So? Peoples feelings, don’t change the meaning of a word, and you are still avoiding the question. Why are you too scared to answer?
Rejecting the system by participating in it? And how does a candidate that will definitely never win “represent change“?