Answer to the 'wasted vote' problem

Vote Buddy ^ | 02/18/2007 | Mike Renzulli

[MARenzulli]

The VoteBuddy idea: "You don't vote for that Republican and I won't vote for this Democrat; then we can help build third parties!"

[MARenzulli]

Suppose you would really like to vote for some minor party candidate but feel that you have to vote for the Republican so that the Democrat won't win. Perhaps you know someone who would also like to vote for some minor party candidate but feels like he has to vote for the Democrat so that the Republican won't win.

The VoteBuddy.org solution is that you and the other person promise to each other that neither of you will vote for a major party candidate. Both of you are now free to vote for which ever minor party candidate you prefer. If you would like to verify that the other person doesn't cheat and vote for the major party candidate, you can fill out and mail absentee ballots in each other's presence.

In 2000, the VoteBuddy.org web site provided a sort of matchmaking service for people who wanted to find a Vote Buddy. The web site is not yet offering the matchmaking service this year, mainly because the service was provided manually by the webmaster, and it took too much time. If someone has the interest and expertise to automate the process, please contact the webmaster of that site and offer your services.

[So Cal Rocket]

Oh yeah... those Donks are so trustworthy, they'll NEVER vote for a Donk just because they said so on some webpage.

[cripplecreek]

Ridiculous and disgusting means of debasing our political process more than it already is. I'll cast MY VOTE MY WAY.

[FractalMan]

This would only work if paired vote buddies are in the same state. Nevertheless, I like the idea.

[Ditter]

Hillary is that you?

[GSlob]

And how could you trust them [or they trust you], and not be taken for a sucker? The way around it would be to have votes [or valid obligations/assignments of future votes] actually tradable on, say, a stock exchange or something like that. Then a third party, having gotten enought of these, would indeed get stronger. Suffice it to say, we do not have that, and even a small Congress with only 535 members is not quite reliable in its internal and informal horsetrading. And to extend the informal system to 100+ million strong electorate?

[digger48]

T'would be interesting to know who is behind this.

Let's see, hmmmm, who stands to gain the most from a Third Party Candidate in '08?

[mysterio]

There is no such thing as a wasted vote if you vote for the candidate that most closely reflects your views.

[mysterio]

Let's see, hmmmm, who stands to gain the most from a Third Party Candidate in '08?

America?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

I PROMISE to vote for the stalking horse.

Honest!

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Sheeple who do that would not vote anyway!
***

We in America do not have government by the majority.
We have government by the majority who participate.

Thomas Jefferson

[cripplecreek]

The only vote wasted is the vote not cast.

[Chi-townChief]

That's pretty funny!

[Ditter]

Right! Perot, the little weasel, was such a huge success TWICE, you know she is going to try that again too.

Buzz off hilldabeast!

[RightWhale]

Last major national election in 2000 there were about six of these third parties.

[SteveMcKing]

A losing vote is very noble. Too bad nobility is just a scam to make us feel good.

Losing is losing, and wasted is wasted.

If your party loses, then do other things with your time. Don't be idle.

[Elyse]

Here's an idea - actually come up with a 3rd party candidate that is worth voting for and maybe a majority of the people will vote for him. It's bass-ackwards to opt out of the system to try to force an opening for just any Tom, Dick or Harry 3rd party candidate.

[finnman69]

dumbest idea ever

only a Rat could come up with an idea like this

[MARenzulli]

In order for that to happen, you would need to build a relationship with your Vote Buddy. The site can't do that for you so the responsibility is on the person willing to take this up.

You are right that the other person you partner with can agree but later break their promise. Therefore, if your state has it, the best way would be to utilize mail-in ballots, meet one day with your Vote Buddy cast your votes in front of them and then place your ballot in the envelope and mail it in in front of each other at a mailbox or have someone you both trust do it for you.

A couple of people I know do this already and it wors well for them.

[Verginius Rufus]

Assuming she is the 'Rat nominee (which looks likely), Hillary has the most to gain from a third party candidate--just as Perot in 1992 helped Bill Clinton more than Bush.

A third party candidate tipped the election of 1844 to the 'Rats and the result was the Mexican War. A third party candidate in 1912 tipped the election to the 'Rats and we wound up being dragged into WWI.

A third party candidate (Pat Buchanan) almost tipped the 2000 election to Gore. Instead of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and a War on Terror, we would have had national self-flagellation after 9/11, efforts to apologize to the Muslim world, a war on global warming, and perhaps a war on Christian "intolerance" of Islam.

So third party candidates can make a big difference even when they draw paltry numbers of votes.