So I threw my vote to aviod the best of two evils . . .

I've met the man more than once, and one of the few natural talents I have is the ability to judge character. Believe me, what you see is what you get with Mitt Romney.

This video clip sums it up perfectly;

The Complete Interview with Mitt and Ann Romney on "LIVE! with Kelly and Michael" - YouTube

 

Don't I have a choice to who I can vote for? I don't see eye to eye with Obama and Romney. Therefore, third party candidate fits perfectly in my book.

 

I usually did not vote; I believed that my vote does not make any difference. However, I am voting this year because I feel over 6 trillions are enough to bring my generation to the darkness.

 

You have every right to waste your vote on any unelectable third party candidate you want.

 

Ted, would you call a vote for the Electoral College electors for Romney in DC or for Obama in UT wasted?

 

Not sure...

 

Why are Romney's electors unelectable in DC?

 

Because DC is the most overwhelmingly Democratic jurisdiction, for Electoral College purposes, in the US. In 2008, the Obama/Biden ticket received 92.5 % of the popular vote in DC, compared to 6.5 % for McCain/Palin. That's better than a 14-to-1 advantage.

Furthermore, DC has always given its electoral votes to the Democratic candidate. DC first received electoral votes in the 1964 election, and has gone Democratic in every one of the 12 historical elections since then.

So the chances that Romney's electors will win in DC are assumed to closely approximate zero, by both Democrats and Republicans alike.

 

For comparison, current polls indicate that the Libertarian Johnson/Gray ticket is currently pulling about 5 % in New Mexico.

So if a vote for the Libertarian party in NM is "wasted", given their statewide support is only around 5 % -- then it seems fair to ask if a vote for the Republican ticket in DC is also "wasted", because that's probably about what they are going to get too. I didn't see any current polling data for DC -- apparently it's so uncompetitive that nobody even bothers to poll there.

 

I appreciate the analogy you want to propose; yet Ted did respond in that Romney CAN win (and it’s my view he will win). Your question /argument is based upon a comparison premise that would equate polling-data focus toward major-party candidates in likeness to third-party candidate polling-data … the hypothesis is just not relative or at all compatible Steve IMO. For instance … all 2012 third-party candidates have been /are statistically eliminated (re electability) since the outset … thus a futile vote as regards any chance for a third-party candidate (i.e., like former major-party Republican turned, this election cycle, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson) whatsoever of electability.

Might one conclude per your contention that Gary Johnson is/was as well part of the two Wall Street parties you make reference to? So the LP fields its own ‘Wall Street’ (your words) candidate as an alternative to the major-party Wall Street candidates, e.g., is this the “…meaningful positive change” you are referring to? BTW, was not the LP’s 2008 presidential candidate (Bob Barr) also a former Republican Congressman; perhaps libertarian hypocrisy at-work (?).

 

Yet per historical third-party voting data (re Gallup Daily tracking) … the third-party actual vote percentage will be 50 percent or less of the pre-election polling data (e.g., NM final vote count for LP Gary Johnson will be historically no more than 2.5 percent; however, more likely less).

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/28840152.jpg

 

This may be true on a national level -- but Gary Johnson is a very prominent political figure in New Mexico, as a former two-term governor of that state. He is well known to the NM voters, much more so than the average third-party candidate. And the chances that he will match his current NM poll numbers in the NM general election are probably much better than those of the average third-party candidate.

 

Okay, I'll concede to Johnson's NM roots and trivial chance to even reach a mere 5-percent. Nonetheless as regards this election cycle ... so what so as to his zilch third-party chance to be elected POTUS?

 

Steve, we have beaten this horse to death. No matter what Johnson’s accomplishments, beliefs, character, etc; he remains a non-factor as an electable option.

 

His chances are approximately zero -- but that's not the issue I was addressing.

I was addressing the chances of the Libertarian ticket winning in NM, vs. the chances of the Republican ticket winning in DC.
I think they are probably roughly comparable, given that the Libertarian ticket is currently polling 5-6 % in NM, and given that the Republican ticket got only 6.5 % in DC in 2008.

It has been suggested that a Libertarian vote (or any other third-party vote) is "wasted".
OK, so if a Libertarian vote in NM is "wasted", then is a Republican vote in DC also "wasted" ?
Don't both votes have similarly low chances of making a difference in the Electoral College ?

 

NEITHER New Mexico nor the District of Columbia will elect the President. So we’re back to ground-zero; Gary Johnson is still a non-factor, third-party (protest vote only) candidate.

 

And Romney is a "non-factor, second-party (protest vote only) candidate" as far as DC's electoral votes are concerned. The difference is that Johnson is a non-factor in all jurisdictions, while Romney is only a non-factor in one jurisdciation.

Now, given that Romney is a non-factor in one jurisdication (DC), should Republican voters in that jurisdiction stay home ? Or should they vote anyway, even though it won't make the slightest difference to the Electoral College total (which, of course, is the only one that counts) ?

I think -- and I suspect that you would agree -- that Republicans in DC should vote, despite their pathetic minority party status and total irrelevance to the overall national outcome. But in that case, why shouldn't pathetic minority party voters in other states do exactly the same thing ?