From your other comments seems like you’re trolling.
But for anyone else reading this: I had seen numbers between 10-20% from Michigan and Minnesota for people who voted “uncommitted” in the primaries. There is smaller turnout for primaries than general elections, and democrats are only half or so of the turnout at the general election.
It’s extremely unlikely that a 3rd party candidate will win with a fraction of the primary voters who are a fraction of the general election voters. If people went forward with a 3rd party candidate it does seem likely it could throw the election to Trump.
I support the uncommitted campaign in so far as it alarms Biden about losing voters who want to see action protecting Palestinians and makes him change his positions.
I don’t think those same people should vote 3rd party during the general election because of the classic bullshit choice we have to keep making: the lesser of two evils.
Let’s also remember: there are many obstacles to even getting listed on the ballot, and those requirements vary state by state. Even if someone well funded decided to run today, it’s unlikely they could get their name on the ballot in every state. (So add ballot access reform to the wishlist along with ranked choice voting and eliminating the electoral college)
Why should 10% of third-party voters support the Democratic nominee when 90% of Democrat voters could simply support [third-party candidate that I can’t even name]? Surely getting 81 million voters to change their minds is a trivial task! Y’all are just dense!
If the uncommitted vote wasn’t obvious, there 100% will be a strong front-running 3rd party here in a couple of weeks or so.
Esp once those 3rd parties see the amount of dissent that exists surrounding the 2 main candidates
I’ll wager money against that considering a “strong front-running third party” takes more than two weeks to happen.
From your other comments seems like you’re trolling.
But for anyone else reading this: I had seen numbers between 10-20% from Michigan and Minnesota for people who voted “uncommitted” in the primaries. There is smaller turnout for primaries than general elections, and democrats are only half or so of the turnout at the general election.
It’s extremely unlikely that a 3rd party candidate will win with a fraction of the primary voters who are a fraction of the general election voters. If people went forward with a 3rd party candidate it does seem likely it could throw the election to Trump.
I support the uncommitted campaign in so far as it alarms Biden about losing voters who want to see action protecting Palestinians and makes him change his positions.
I don’t think those same people should vote 3rd party during the general election because of the classic bullshit choice we have to keep making: the lesser of two evils.
Let’s also remember: there are many obstacles to even getting listed on the ballot, and those requirements vary state by state. Even if someone well funded decided to run today, it’s unlikely they could get their name on the ballot in every state. (So add ballot access reform to the wishlist along with ranked choice voting and eliminating the electoral college)
If/when Biden makes those decision too late (hint: it’s too late), I fear most of you are farrrr too dense to vote for an actual candidate.
Which will result in Trump.