silence7@slrpnk.net to Political Memes@lemmy.world · 3 months agoSide by Sideslrpnk.netimagemessage-square81fedilinkarrow-up1732file-text
arrow-up1732imageSide by Sideslrpnk.netsilence7@slrpnk.net to Political Memes@lemmy.world · 3 months agomessage-square81fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareimmutable@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up9·3 months agoThe mathematics I’m speaking of is that first past the post voting mechanisms result in two dominant parties and third parties being non viable. You might not like that FPTP results in this, but that’s how math works. Formally it’s called Duverger’s Law so if you don’t like it take it up with him.
minus-squarezarkanian@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-23 months agoSo, how does that show that voting for Stein is the same as not voting? Duverger’s Law just explains how the system works. It doesn’t tell you who you should vote for. You might not like that FPTP results in this, but that’s how math works. Again, using the same logic, a vote for Harris in a blue state is the same as not voting. “The math” says that it’s impossible for my state to be anything but blue.
The mathematics I’m speaking of is that first past the post voting mechanisms result in two dominant parties and third parties being non viable.
You might not like that FPTP results in this, but that’s how math works.
Formally it’s called Duverger’s Law so if you don’t like it take it up with him.
So, how does that show that voting for Stein is the same as not voting?
Duverger’s Law just explains how the system works. It doesn’t tell you who you should vote for.
Again, using the same logic, a vote for Harris in a blue state is the same as not voting.
“The math” says that it’s impossible for my state to be anything but blue.