“Maybe.”

absolutely.

3rd party voters don’t consider…

neither do primary color voters.

3rd party voters are ignoring…

so are primary color voters.

“with the system in place a vote for a third-party candidate is effectively an abstention.”

no.

they are probably not going to win an election, but actively voting is the opposite of abstaining.

“It’s the desire to make a difference and effectively abstaining that seems incongruous.”

they are making a difference by voting for what they believe in, for the policies they consider most impactful on their lives(aka “voting” in most countries).

you see voting as an abstention even though it’s definitively the opposite of an abstention, implicitly based on consideration and values.

they probably see voting differently, maybe as an extension of their political will, or a form of activism, or a civic duty to be performed honestly.

I know I do.

“Would your treatise allow this to work if he’s not a sith, but instead an incredibly powerful by oblivious force user?”

yeah, it’s as good as any other theory, maybe better than the sith one because there are less obvious things to point out that don’t work.

it kind of sounds like a xanth premise, if you ever read those books.

I don’t think there are strong enough foundations to hold the assumptions together myself, most binks theories I’ve read rely on a passive series of events and assumptions occurring in the background.

and I like them all.

i like the Darth Darth Binks theory and other theories, but taken in context with what is depicted on screen, how straightforward Star wars is, and what the actors and production team and scripts say about the character, there’s no cohesive or convincing supporting evidence that Jar Jar was anything other than comic relief and then a hastily minimized plot device after audiences rebelled against him.

“If a vote for the candidate you believe in results in your least preferred candidate getting ahead, shouldn’t you consider a compromise vote to get a candidate closer to your values in power?”

sure, and they probably do.

your statement implies that third party voters are politically illiterate and aren’t considering their vote, which doesn’t hold any water.

do you think all Harris or Trump voters are carefully considering their options?

many are voting according to a familiar primary color.

from simple logic, third-party voters are likely more politically considerate than primary color voters.

a lot of the arguments against third-party voting are arguments against voting in general.

that is usually my problem, as it is here, with complaining about third-party voting.

it is completely predicated on the assumption that 3rd party voters are making the “wrong” decision in some fundamental way that primary color voters are not, although the hypothetical flaws that could apply to a third- party voter already apply to primary color voters.

If you don’t assume that the right to vote is “wrong” for people who don’t agree with you in the first place, then your complaints about third party voting fall apart.

third party voters like a different candidate.

and that’s good and they should vote for them if they want to.

meesa?

this shocked a lot of people, but the frog guy jumping didn’t convince me he was sith!

I wrote like a 30,000 word treatise refuting every point of the Darth Jar jar with the help of an advocate.

for fun.

it would be great, but it seems unlikely and extremely lacking in evidence when you look at each point one by one and put everything back together.

it sucks that Trump won, but your vote was valid and no third party voter was throwing their vote away.

they just lost.

Trump won for many other reasons besides third party voters.

there were a lot of bullshit tactics in 2016 that added up to way more votes lost that had a stronger impact on the election result than third-party voters sticking to their values.

shit, gerrymandering is still legal in the US and your voter registrations have practically no protection from interference. That’s insane.

If you voted according to your values, you voted well.

If it is a protest vote, as goes your assumption without evidence? it’s dumb, but it’s their right.

most people vote on policy, so they’re voting for third party candidates that have a stronger stance on whatever policy there is.

in this particular election, Harris already achieved more effective policy change than third candidate platforms in terms of environmentalism, minority rights, and so on, so it makes logical sense to vote for her if you’re a political liberal, but if somebody wants to vote for Stein or anybody else because that candidate is more aligned with their views, that is just as valid as voting for Harris.

they are voting as they should, not as some are hoping they will be scared into voting.

voting sincerely is not “stupid”.

nope.

tldr: If you vote for Trump, you hate America.

longer:

If you vote for Trump, you’re selfish, psychopathic, and are trying to damage the US more than it already is.

If you vote for anyone who isn’t Trump, you are helping the US take a step in the right direction.