Is a vote for a third party a wasted vote?

Question

Please explain why the vote is wasted or not wasted.

Answer 1

People should vote for the candidate that will best represent their personal views. A vote is never wasted! Every vote is important; of course, majority rules but it is important for every voice to be heard. Its usually the underdog who ends up changing the world.

Answer 2

In the current system, the incumbent has huge advantages over any challenger, unless there has been some misconduct by the incumbent. Any challenger usually needs the assistance of the minority party to run a viable campaign, because the party out of power (and I mean either Republicans or Democrats here) usually has more resources (financial and human) than third parties.

The question to ask is: Does the candidate I'm thinking of voting for have the resources and message to win 51% of the vote? If 20% of the likely voters are registered Independent (and are therefore persuadable?), and another 20% of the voters are registered Democrat or Republican but sometimes cross party lines, can the third party candidate rustle up the rest of the necessary votes? Could a self-funded (read: wealthy) third party candidate with a strong message win any given election? I would say yes at the state level, and probably not at the federal level, due to the strength of the two-party system and the huge amounts of money required to run a federal campaign. So your third party vote may not be wasted, but the candidate better have access to funds (or be rich) and have a great message!

Answer 3

I think I did this backward. In the last presidential election, I voted for a third party candidate, not because I thought that candidate was the best qualified to be the commander in chief of the US Armed Forces, manage the biggest economy in the world, and host foreign heads of state and promote diplomacy, but because I didn't want to waste my vote on either the Democrat or Republican that I disliked the least.

When they look at the last election, the analysts will count my vote with the millions of other Americans who are saying that it is time for more choices, and that they appreciate neither the neo-con right wing or the ultra-liberal left wing that dominate the policies of the Republican and Democratic parties. Whether you ask me to choose between Buchanan and Jesse Jackson, Hillary Clinton or Dick Cheney, or Bush and Kerry, my choice will always be 'NONE OF THE ABOVE'.

Now, on the last ballot, I did not see a box that was labelled 'NONE OF THE ABOVE'. So the best choice I could make was to select a third party candidate, not because I thought he could do the best job in getting countries to work with us in combatting terrorism (the candidate was eminently inexperienced), but because I wanted my vote to count as one more American whose vote is available should some viable third party wish to run a slate of candidates with a serious chance to win.

Answer 4

No, its not. Avote for a third party candidate serves as a reminder to the Rep. & Dem. partys that there are some people in this country who are sick and tired of the same old #$%@ from both of them.
When I'm elected king, the partys will be more realistic. We'll have : Liberal , Conservitive , Union , Moderate , and Socialist. Every thing else goes in the Independant collum.

Answer 5

Its kinda a catch 22. Most people, it seems, who vote for a third party would rather have a democrat in office than a republican, but people who usually vote republican stay with republican. But lets face it...the people we're forced to pick between lately seem like deciding which steaming bowl of manure you'd rather eat. Thus voting for the third party as tempting as it may sound, in a sence is like indirectly voting republican. But saddly enough, when it comes down to it, the electoral colleges' electors votes decide who's presedent, not ours.

Answer 6

Absolutely not! It shows your support for a candidate. Just because you aren't voting for a major party, you are giving power to the USA to become more diverse by supporting other political parties. I suggest everyone vote for a 3rd party if they like the candidate! If just ONE electoral vote went to a 3rd party, it would change politics in the USA permanently and your voice would be heard.

Answer 7

Everybody's vote is "wasted" if the Supreme Court won't allow us the election officials to count votes.

Answer 8

No - particularly if the third party garners sufficient support to gain entrance into the federal election financing system so that, in the next election, the third party has access to free federal monies to better promote its issues.

Answer 9

For the most part yes, it takes away from a viable candidate. In 2000 and 2004 I am sure that Nader took away from the democrats and in 1992 and 1996 I am sure that Perot took away from the repuke's of course that was ok with me.

Answer 10

That depends on if you place your vote based on principal or on the hopes of actually voting someone into office, and how much either means to you.