To Voters: Spoil the Vote and Preserve Democracy
The tightening of the current Presidential Election worries many who find Trump repulsive and unfit for the office of the presidency. However in addition to justly attacking Trump, the Democratic establishment has initiated an unjust full frontal assault on voters: not only those who are voting for Trump, but voters who are choosing to vote for one of the many minor party candidates: Stein, Johnson, McMullin, among others.
“If you don’t vote, that’s a vote for Trump… If you vote for a third-party candidate who’s got no chance to win, that’s a vote for Trump.” — Barack Obama
While I do believe that people should vote for whoever best represents them (an opinion counter to the voices in concordance with the president), there are plenty of articles and opinions on the philosophy of voting or not voting for the third party candidate, I want to extend the discourse to the source of the problem: the winner take all voting system, and how the only way to fix this problem is to vote third party.
I want to extend the discourse to the source of the problem: the winner take all voting system
The winner take all voting system is how most federal and state level offices choose the winner of an election: the person with the most votes wins. Many take issue with this system in terms of the electoral college, as a candidate who wins the popular vote can still lose the presidency. An even worse problem is the spoiler vote, which makes it mathematically possible for only one of two candidates to win. This system creates the massive coalition parties we see today. When party officials tell you not to waste their vote, they are really telling you to support the system that doesn’t give you a choice. The easy solution is to allow voters to indicate what candidates they like more, and the ones they like less: by rejecting voter preference winner take all rejects democracy.
While it is tempting to play into this system (after all, the lesser of two evils is still less evil), the only way it changes is if the system itself threatens the parties’ power. They are one of two choices, as long as they’re playing their cards right, they will get ~50% of the vote, and if they don’t play their cards right it is only a temporary setback. Minor parties are labelled as a wasted vote, since they threaten to upend this system. Their success puts a party against twice as many opponents, and the party closest — ideologically — to the minor party is hurt the most. In the winner take all system, this situation would turn out negatively for those who prefer the two competing parties that are closest ideologically. If we can push the major parties to protect their power from spoilers, we can change the entire legislative process — a larger upend to the system than voting for Donald J. Trump.
If we can push the major parties to protect their power from spoilers, we can change the entire legislative process
A critique of winner take all requires thoughtful alternatives. There are three viable choices for state governments (all elections are controlled at the state level) to take up that would restore democracy: approval voting, score voting, and ranked pair voting.
Approval Voting: Only requires the voter to indicate what candidates a voter approves of. Theoretically, a candidate with the highest approval rating would win, good news for democracy! However, there are some philosophical and strategic concerns with approval voting: you can’t indicate preference — one of the problems of winner take all, and you may be better off voting just for your preferred (yet less universally approved of) candidate.
Score Voting: Similar to approval voting, but includes scale; that is, you indicate how much you approve of a candidate on a scale (0–10, 0–100, etc.). The scale is an advantage over approval voting, yet it still allows for a similar strategic vote for your preferred (yet less universally approved of) candidate.
This brings us to the final listed method:
Ranked Pair Voting: Unlike the first two, and winner take all, this voting method has the voters rank the candidates in order of preference. With this ranking, head-to-head match ups are mathematically computed, and the candidate that wins the most of the match ups wins overall. While this method sounds complicated, remember that voters are only responsible for ranking the candidates on their ballots; the mathematical system responsible for producing the outcome wouldn’t be a secret, which would allow for verification. In the end, you have a system that works best in determining the candidate that is most preferred, and doesn’t allow for strategic voting.
The fear of a wasted vote is politically constructed. Your vote cannot be wasted. The major parties have created a system that makes a vote that isn’t cast for either of them a vote that doesn’t matter: it does matter. The system that keeps them in power, can just as easily threaten that power. When you vote: use your power to change the system, and vote for the Green, Libertarian or other minor party. Even if you decide that it’s not worth the risk at the top of the ballot, perhaps it is worth it down ballot: the state decides how the elections are run. Challenge the powers that be, you can make a huge impact, and change politics only for the better.
