Letters to the Editor: Your 'protest vote' for Jill Stein is really a vote for Donald Trump
Letters to the Editor: Your 'protest vote' for Jill Stein is really a vote for Donald Trump
Don't like Kamala Harris' recent comment on guns? The solution is to support gun control, not vote for a Trump-enabling third-party spoiler.
You're viewing a single thread.
If you think casting any ballot is a form of protest you need to learn what real protest looks like.
Hint: It doesn’t involve participating in the system you’re protesting.
28 11 ReplyNot voting indirectly also is a vote for Trump.
22 10 ReplyNot voting isn't a protest either. Disrupting the voting? That would be a protest. But the Greens and Stein don't have the balls for that.
15 1 Replyno, it's not
11 13 ReplyYes, it is
12 6 Replyif that were true, you could prove it. there is no world in which non votes are counted for Trump
7 15 Replyindirectly
Say there are 9 voters. Four vote for Trump. Five heavily disagree with Trump (more than Trump's four supporters). Three of them vote for Harris, two refuse to vote. Then these two people helped Trump since he's winning now.
It works exactly the same on a much larger scale.
13 3 ReplyThe only votes that help a candidate are votes for that candidate. A non-vote doesn't help any candidate.
6 12 ReplyIf you're using a FPTP system: it absolutely and directly affects the outcome you fucking dolt.
You can just say that you don't understand the systems in place and move on, you don't have to die on this hill.
2 2 Reply
In the actual world, governed by actual mathematics, you are incorrect. This has been repeatedly pointed out to you, with illustrative examples, by many people. Your stubborn, willful ignorance cannot change the fabric of reality.
11 5 ReplyStill no proof, friend.
2 9 Replythis is just hand waving. it's not proof.
6 12 Reply
Good point!
3 9 Reply