ignore mathematics existing and vote third party which is a fancy way of not voting
I live in a blue state. Using this logic, my vote for Harris is the same as not voting, because my state is going to go blue regardless. It’s mathematics.
That works until it doesn’t. Keeping your state out of play means Democrats can focus their limited resources on other states. Let it become a closer contest and Democrats may find themselves expending resources in areas that should be a slam dunk.
I live in a blue state. Using this logic, my vote for Harris is the same as not voting, because my state is going to go blue regardless. It’s mathematics.
That works until it doesn’t. Keeping your state out of play means Democrats can focus their limited resources on other states. Let it become a closer contest and Democrats may find themselves expending resources in areas that should be a slam dunk.
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.