The Wasted Vote Myth

[annata]

The Wasted Vote Myth: From a Libertarian Perspective

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish
the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." -- John Quincy Adams

Contact the author*. (c) 1999. Updated 2012.

Introduction

The most frequent objection to voting for a third party candidate is the "wasted vote" argument -- the idea that if you vote for someone who will not win, then your vote does not count.

Merely suggest that a friend or family member consider voting for a third party candidate and you will often hear the statement, "I don't want to waste my vote."

Before delving into the extent of the wasted vote myth, some other myths must be addressed first:

Myth #1: Third party candidates are never elected.

Ross Perot out-polled George Bush in Maine in 1992 and out-polled Bill Clinton in Utah in 1992. Perot polled
Minor parties won gubernatorial elections in Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, and Minnesota during the 1990s, and Lincoln Chafee was elected as an Independent to Rhode Island's governorship in 2010. In the 1990s, Independents were elected to Congress in Missouri, Vermont and Virginia. In the 2000s, Independents were elected to Congress in Connecticut and Vermont.

Independents are elected to state legislatures in almost every election cycle. Former Miami Mayor Manny Diaz and current New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg were both elected as Independents.

The dominant party in Mexico between 1929 and 2000 lost the presidential election there in 2000.

New things are constantly happening in the world of politics. Overwhelming evidence suggests that voters not affiliated with either major party will decide the 2012 presidential race.

Myth #2: Libertarians are never elected to public office.

The first elected Libertarian state legislator was Dick Randolph in 1978 (just seven short years after the founding of the Libertarian Party) in Alaska. Randolph was re-elected in 1980 along with Alan Fanning, another Libertarian, to the Alaska state legislature. In 1984, Andre Marrou was elected to the state legislature of Alaska to join the two other Libertarian officials.

In 1987, Libertarians were elected to every seat on the city council in Big Water, Utah. In 1991, New Hampshire state legislators Calvin Warburton and Finlay Rothhaus resigned from the Republican Party and joined the Libertarian Party. They were joined on the New Hampshire state legislature in 1992 by Don Gorman and Andy Borsa. In 1994, Jim McClarin was the next Libertarian elected to the New Hampshire state legislature. Donald Gorman, the Libertarian minority caucus leader in the New Hampshire state legislature, was re-elected in 1994 and served until 1996.

In 1992, Bonnie Flickinger won election as Mayor of Moreno Valley, California as a Libertarian. Numerous Libertarians were elected to city councils from this point on. In 1998 alone, nineteen Libertarians were elected to office, including Vermont state representative Neil Randall. Randall joined Gary Richardson, a member of the Libertarian Party of Vermont, in the legislature. In 2000, Steve Vaillancourt was elected to the New Hampshire state legislature on the Libertarian Party ticket.

The Libertarian Party is active in all 50 states and has more than 250,000 registered voters. In 2008, more than 15 million votes were cast for Libertarian candidates around the nation. Around 200 Libertarians currently serve in elected positions ranging from local councils and mayorships to sheriffs and one state legislator. In 2011, Rhode Island State Representative Daniel P. Gordon switched from Republican to Libertarian.

Myth #3: Libertarians cannot accomplish anything even if they are elected.

Libertarian Art Olivier was elected mayor of Bellflower, California (pop. 67,000) and served from 1997 to 1998. During his tenure, Bellflower privatized tree trimming, crossing guards, street sweeping and the Building Department. Olivier forced the city to place its utility tax on the ballot and outright eliminated the lighting assessment tax.

The Bellflower City Council handed themselves a lifetime medical and dental insurance package. Councilmembers were qualified to receive this package after serving part-time on the council for five years. The package was costing the taxpayers $8,000 a year for each retired councilmember. As more councilmembers were retiring, costs were getting out of hand.

Mayor Olivier introduced a motion to eliminate this costly perk. Because the council was already grandfathered into receiving the insurance package, they went along with the mayor and voted to eliminate the package for future councilmembers.

Before Olivier was on the city council, Bellflower passed a little-known ordinance that made parking a recreational vehicle (RV) in your own driveway illegal. That law was never enforced. That is until one of the "good ol' boys" finished building a large RV storage yard on the edge of town. One of the victims of the stupid law brought an angry mob with her to the city council meetings until the council overturned that silly law.

Libertarians favor real changes.

What is a Wasted Vote?

An unprincipled vote is the only wasted vote. Voting for a third party, contrary to popular belief, is not a wasted vote.What is voting?

It's a chance to tell the country what your vision of government and society really is.

But how do most of us vote? Do the majority of those who believe Gary Johnson or Ralph Nader are the best candidates -- most in tune with our own feelings -- actually vote for them? No, instead, most of us vote the "lesser of two evils" -- a defensive vote, rather than an offensive one.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

So what happens after you vote the defensive vote? You have sold out your personal beliefs; you've become a political prostitute.

If you think the Republican or the Democrat candidate really does best mirror your beliefs, by all means, vote for that candidate. But if you don't and you still vote for them, you're helping to preserve the status quo you probably despise.

Remember, You Never Decide the Winner

On statewide races (larger than city council races), there is a single important point to remember: you won't decide the winner. Therefore there is no reason to vote for the lesser evil.

Most of the time we hear the wasted vote argument most in precisely the races where it applies least.

A Presidential race will never be decided by one vote. In the U.S., we have an Electoral College. Most states are already Democrat or Republican strongeholds, and only a few states are "swing states". If you live a Democrat-leaning state, you should vote Libertarian to help that party achieve ballot access and to help them break the One Million Vote barrier.

If by some mathematical chance a presidential race was that close, it would be decided through the Courts and through lawsuits (as the 2000 election was decided).

If you go to the polls for the purpose of casting the deciding ballot in major races, you are making an irrational decision. The chances of dying en route in a car, plane, or meteor accident are far greater than the chance of casting the deciding ballot.

What's the Point of Voting?

We as individuals don't vote to select the winner. As a practical matter, we vote to tell everyone else which choice best represents the direction which we want the country to go. When you vote, you gain a certain power that a non-voter doesn't have; the power to change America through the political process.

Therefore voting lesser evil sends the wrong message; it's sending a message of compromise. In effect, a defensive vote says: "I will settle for a good America, not the best America possible." I urge you not to settle.

Remember: If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always gotten. The only constant in the world is that change never stops. In other words, if you want change, create change.

Even if once in your life you missed the chance to cast that mythical deciding ballot, the harm from selecting the wrong person in one election is more than offset by a lifetime of giving voter support to the lesser of two evils rather than standing up for what you believe.

The history of third parties in America is that they serve as the vanguard for new ideas. It is these ideas that make the world go round. If a Third Party begins to draw votes, one or both of the two big parties steal their ideas.

Socialists Can Teach Us Something

The most successful third party in the 20th Century was the Socialist Party. While never winning any significant elections, their small-but-growing vote totals were a threat to the Democrats. The Democrats, and then later the Republicans, adopted piecemeal every major tenet of the 1916 Socialist Party platform.

Libertarians are the opposite of Socialists, but Libertarians can find their successes instructive. The radical ideas about liberty that were shaped in 1971 are now being seriously debated or, in some cases, implemented by the other parties. An increasing number of Libertarian votes is continuously noted by the politicians as well as the media.

So rather than waste your vote on Democrats or Republicans, cast a meaningful ballot that clearly says what you believe.

Libertarians Are the Future

After watching both Democrats and Republicans make promises that frequently become lies, two conclusions should become evident: The lesser of two evils is still evil and the only way to waste your vote is not to use it for a candidate that sends the message (or the policies) you want to send (or that you want implemented).

In all honesty, it doesn't matter which evil you vote for if evil still wins.

If you have principles, then vote for your local or state Libertarian candidate
http://chelm.freeyellow.com/wastedvote.html

[Althea]

Nobody ever said that 3rd party voting is a bad idea on a local level. That's where we have to start.

We're about 20 years away from seeing a 3rd party candidate have a real chance in the presidential election, though.

So yes, it's a wasted vote. You're making a statement, just as I am by not voting if I decide that Obama hasn't earned my vote.

The difference being that I choose not to play their game, and you do. You're casting a vote for someone that you know has absolutely no chance of winning.

I get lumped in with the uneducated, and the lazy. But at least I didn't play the rigged game.

You got lumped in with the people who threw away a vote.

[annata]

Nobody ever said that 3rd party voting is a bad idea on a local level. That's where we have to start.

We're about 20 years away from seeing a 3rd party candidate have a real chance in the presidential election, though.

So yes, it's a wasted vote. You're making a statement, just as I am by not voting if I decide that Obama hasn't earned my vote.

The difference being that I choose not to play their game, and you do. You're casting a vote for someone that you know has absolutely no chance of winning.

I get lumped in with the uneducated, and the lazy. But at least I didn't play the rigged game.

You got lumped in with the people who threw away a vote.

I'm voting for a couple reasons.
1. refuse to vote for either man, as I don't support either of their ideas - amazing - they both suck in their own way. I wouldn't want either in the WH.

2. the better showing Johnson pulls off, just might make others think that the duopoly (gridlock/hyperpartisianship) is killing this country's ability to govern.
Enlighten the masses to the dangers of partisianship, as Washington did during his Farewell Address

3. I actually LIKE Johnson's positions on many matters, i'll never be a modern conservative, but I have little use for modern liberalism, that seeks to bury us in debt. While Bush started this, Obama has actually managed to surpass his spending levels - the gov't is approximately = to 24% of out GDP.
up from 20% 4 yearws ago.

4. I see absolutely nothing in the future but more of the same identity politics ( so called demographics) from either side. Unless the GOP becomes extinct -the Dead White Guy Party.

5. Obama lost me, his various wars, Big Pharma sellouts, and inability to articulate any ideas except "spend more to get us into prosperity" is asinine.

6. I have to live with myself - the vote is always personal choice, some vote for the goodies the Fed's can give you, some vote to keep the Fed's from getting your rich guy money. Being neither, I am not voting for a partisian position on either of these.

You not voting is your way of saying Obama hasn't earned your vote, OK fine -your choice. My voting FOR someone I think is on the right track, is my way of saying I actually support Johnson;
he's closer to federalism then either party, he wants to stop the wars both partys are addicted to, and he will severely cut the size and scope of the fed's reaching into state law. If I have any "attachments" it's towards federalism -the size and scope of the US gov't threatens to swamp everything.

So I'm voting for someone whom is closest, if not completely a set of my ideas of governing. I could give a damn about (D.) (R.) the best thing that could happen to this country long run is ending the partisan stranglehold on our Republic.

Anyways, time for some change we can believe in - and not just shout out stupid campaign lines, as such.

[leaningright]

I voted 3rd party in the last election. A protest against both choices. If something doesn't give from the Romney camp, I will again.

[Team Zimmerman 2013]

Nobody ever said that 3rd party voting is a bad idea on a local level. That's where we have to start.

We're about 20 years away from seeing a 3rd party candidate have a real chance in the presidential election, though.

So yes, it's a wasted vote. You're making a statement, just as I am by not voting if I decide that Obama hasn't earned my vote.

The difference being that I choose not to play their game, and you do. You're casting a vote for someone that you know has absolutely no chance of winning.

I get lumped in with the uneducated, and the lazy. But at least I didn't play the rigged game.

You got lumped in with the people who threw away a vote.

So it's a wasted vote because they won't win. And they won't win because voting for them is a waste....so....

[Team Zimmerman 2013]

Annata, thanks for sharing the article. I quoted it for my site (www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com).

Voting for a candidate that I actually WANT shouldn't be considered a waste.

[SmarterthanYou]

Nobody ever said that 3rd party voting is a bad idea on a local level. That's where we have to start.

We're about 20 years away from seeing a 3rd party candidate have a real chance in the presidential election, though.

So yes, it's a wasted vote. You're making a statement, just as I am by not voting if I decide that Obama hasn't earned my vote.

The difference being that I choose not to play their game, and you do. You're casting a vote for someone that you know has absolutely no chance of winning.

I get lumped in with the uneducated, and the lazy. But at least I didn't play the rigged game.

You got lumped in with the people who threw away a vote.

and yet, if more people with your mindset joined more people with our mindset, we could prove them wrong. that doesn't make you uneducated, just lazy.

[Althea]

I'm voting for a couple reasons.
1. refuse to vote for either man, as I don't support either of their ideas - amazing - they both suck in their own way. I wouldn't want either in the WH.

2. the better showing Johnson pulls off, just might make others think that the duopoly (gridlock/hyperpartisianship) is killing this country's ability to govern.
Enlighten the masses to the dangers of partisianship, as Washington did during his Farewell Address

3. I actually LIKE Johnson's positions on many matters, i'll never be a modern conservative, but I have little use for modern liberalism, that seeks to bury us in debt. While Bush started this, Obama has actually managed to surpass his spending levels - the gov't is approximately = to 24% of out GDP.
up from 20% 4 yearws ago.

4. I see absolutely nothing in the future but more of the same identity politics ( so called demographics) from either side. Unless the GOP becomes extinct -the Dead White Guy Party.

5. Obama lost me, his various wars, Big Pharma sellouts, and inability to articulate any ideas except "spend more to get us into prosperity" is asinine.

6. I have to live with myself - the vote is always personal choice, some vote for the goodies the Fed's can give you, some vote to keep the Fed's from getting your rich guy money. Being neither, I am not voting for a partisian position on either of these.

You not voting is your way of saying Obama hasn't earned your vote, OK fine -your choice. My voting FOR someone I think is on the right track, is my way of saying I actually support Johnson;
he's closer to federalism then either party, he wants to stop the wars both partys are addicted to, and he will severely cut the size and scope of the fed's reaching into state law. If I have any "attachments" it's towards federalism -the size and scope of the US gov't threatens to swamp everything.

So I'm voting for someone whom is closest, if not completely a set of my ideas of governing. I could give a damn about (D.) (R.) the best thing that could happen to this country long run is ending the partisan stranglehold on our Republic.

Anyways, time for some change we can believe in - and not just shout out stupid campaign lines, as such.

I like a lot of Johnson's ideas too, even though he's a little unrealistic if he thinks he'll ever get anything through Congress.

And that's the rub....it doesn't really matter who the pres. is.

That's why it'll be 20 years or more before a 3rd party candidate has a chance....we have to start by electing one Congressman at a time.

Of course, you get the Rand Pauls along the way, so it isn't a perfect solution.

[Althea]

and yet, if more people with your mindset joined more people with our mindset, we could prove them wrong. that doesn't make you uneducated, just lazy.

see above

[annata]

Grassroots are the usual way, and are probably the only way to build an party structure. There are some cases like Perot and Nader that changed the normal 2 party results from the top down, my hope for Johson is to be a player to facilitate 3rd party taken seriously.

I just saw Romney's Olympic remarks, he may just be obnoxious/wrong heaed on taxes, and general oaf to drive me to vote for Obama.
Romney isn't fit for dogcatcher...well maybe i should stay away from Romney and enclosed dog cages. He is one dumb schmuck.

If it's close, i'd have to seriously give up my principled vote to keep him out of the WH. Obama is severly flawed -Romney is sickenly chickhawk, insultive, and cannot engage mind before speaking. He would be a Titanic disaster anywhere near 1600 Penn Ave.

[annata]

Annata, thanks for sharing the article. I quoted it for my site (www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com).

Voting for a candidate that I actually WANT shouldn't be considered a waste.

It was a nice concise piece, Romney though -he's Insane.
I might have to actually vote for Obama -take a barf bag with me to do it, but Romney cannot be allowed to win. Do we want another war with England?

I'm in the swing part of Florida ( I-4 corrider), I WANT to vote for, and prolly will vote for Gary, not many politicians I actualy have a level of enthusiamsm for.
You know his record, it's stellar - he only caveat is "No Romney"

[China Apologist]

The concept of a wasted vote is common sense and mathematical fact.

[China Apologist]

Don't waste your votes on Libertarians. They both cannot win and are evil fascists. Fuck the right, don't vote for anyone who has any sympathy at all for the bastards on the right. The right is just waiting to take your freedom. Libertarianism is nothing but a modern reformulation of fascism.

[China Apologist]

We're about 20 years away from seeing a 3rd party candidate have a real chance in the presidential election, though.

A third party will be elected in the year X + 20, where X is the current year.

[China Apologist]

2. the better showing Johnson pulls off, just might make others think that the duopoly (gridlock/hyperpartisianship) is killing this country's ability to govern.

Because, clearly, the answer to gridlock is to make it a 3-way gridlock, instead of 2-way. Introducing a little Weimar into any system never hurt a countries ability to govern.