Already a member?
Welcome to Brazen Careerist!
Emily Ma is using Brazen Careerist to share ideas. Join now to become a member and start networking with Emily Ma and other professionals just like you. Learn more.
Brazen careerist
Where ambitious young professionals connect and grow
Email
Print
Voting is a prized civic duty. But it is also a high stakes competition with clear winners and losers. In this light, voting can be viewed as a contest of strategy. If you want to make your vote count, it is useful to learn the rules of the game.
History suggests that some votes don’t “count.” In at least five U.S. presidential elections, the most popular candidate ended up losing (more on this below in point 5). The results depended on a variety of fac
For more timely, relevant, and engaging articles,
subscribe to Brazen Careerist.
- How To Find a Writing Partner Who Can Help You Achieve Your Goals and Make More Money
- Continuing Education: Extending Learning Beyond Your Campus Years
- Why You Might Be Better Off Without a Job After College
- The Anti-Stalker’s Guide for Converting Online Contact into Real World Collaboration
- A New Kind of Business Mover and Shaker
Comments
10.08.08
Nader was responsible for Gore losing just as much as the Green Bay Packers were responsible for the New England Patriots losing last year's Super Bowl.
There were multiple third party candidates in 2000 who received enough votes to swing the election one way or the other, not just Nader. Further, over 200,000 registered Democrats voted for Bush in Florida. That's right 200,000 DEMOCRATs voted for Bush.
Gore ran a poor campaign and gave up the presidency. Instead of fighting the fraud that Florida proved to be, Gore gave up and handed Bush the presidency.
The last person we should be blaming is Nader, and it's simply part of the mainstream media and establishment's goal of discrediting one of the greatest Americans of our time.
Finally, voting third party is the only way of actually making your vote count. Otherwise you're voting for two sides of the same coin. Voting third party and helping them achieve 5% status to gain federal funding and access near guarantees your vote means something. If you live in a swing state I the "strategy" of voting D or R, but if you live in a non-swing state voting for McCain or Obama is literally throwing your vote away.
10.08.08
Our votes don't count in Florida! We tried in 2000, 2004, and we tried in the 2007-8 primary. So what makes you think they will count this time?
10.08.08
Adam is right- Nader had very little to do with Al Gore's "loss" of the election.
1. The electoral college is shit. Get rid of it.
2. The supreme court stopped the recount.
If you want to point blame for 2000, it begins and ends with the lethargic, corrupt, and disenfranchising system that Ralph Nader has been fighting against for so long.
10.08.08
Great article!!
I think point #4 is particularly important, as it highlights that the political economy functions as a result of which candidate's proposed policies will win the most blocs, or lobbies. Blocs play a pivotal role in elections.
So, this leads me to question: does the individual voter count as much as the company he or she keeps?
Historically, it has been shown candidates that can supply higher public sector output in the manner that the largest number of demanders wants, that candidate will win. The trick is for each candidate to convince the largest blocs that they have their interests in mind.
So, who is the largest lobbying group? The AARP!
Of course, there are a lot of other very powerful lobbies: education, farmers, pharma, etc. And you can't please them all...
11.04.08
"Finally, voting third party is the only way of actually making your vote count. Otherwise you're voting for two sides of the same coin. Voting third party and helping them achieve 5% status to gain federal funding and access near guarantees your vote means something." -Adam
I've heard this a lot, but where can I find this written down? I'd love to tell people I voted Libertarian for that reason, even if Barr doesn't have a chance of winning, but I wouldn't say that unless I saw it on a federal website or something authoritative...
11.04.08
Ask and ye shall receive Owen!
Via the FEC.gov site:
"Minor party candidates and new party candidates may become eligible for partial public funding of their general election campaigns. (A minor party candidate is the nominee of a party whose candidate received between 5 and 25 percent of the total popular vote in the preceding Presidential election. A new party candidate is the nominee of a party that is neither a major party nor a minor party.) The amount of public funding to which a minor party candidate is entitled is based on the ratio of the party's popular vote in the preceding Presidential election to the average popular vote of the two major party candidates in that election. A new party candidate receives partial public funding after the election if he/she receives 5 percent or more of the vote. The entitlement is based on the ratio of the new party candidate's popular vote in the current election to the average popular vote of the two major party candidates in the election."
11.05.08
Much thanks Adam - too bad it didn't happen this year :-/
Got Something To Say?
Got Something To Say?
Not a Member? Brazen Careerist is a career management tool for next-generation professionals. Set up a free account today to comment on this post and start sharing your ideas. Learn more.
Login to view your networks!
 |
|
 |
 |
|
