Quote from: Verbatim on July 25, 2016, 09:25:09 PM

I understand this. It would be more logical, then, to say that you're taking away votes from Hillary, and not giving votes to Trump.

Yeah if you're a pedantic jackass who doesn't understand hyperbole.

That's not what hyperbole is. A hyperbole is an extreme exaggeration. What you made was just a false statement.

Quote from: Verbatim on July 25, 2016, 08:59:54 PM

Quote from: Kalusta on July 25, 2016, 08:55:05 PM

Than you don't understand what I'm saying.

Because none of what you're saying is making any sense.

If you vote for a third party, then that vote that could have gone to say, Hillary, won't

Therefore Trump may still have 99 votes, but Hillary will only have 98

Voting third party takes votes away from the two parties that actually are capable of winning, which is one of the huge issues with two party systems

This would only make sense if it was only Democrats that vote for third parties. Gary Johnson will probably hurt Trump much more than Hillary.

Quote from: Kiwicake on July 25, 2016, 09:22:39 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on July 25, 2016, 08:59:54 PM

Quote from: Kalusta on July 25, 2016, 08:55:05 PM

Than you don't understand what I'm saying.

Because none of what you're saying is making any sense.

If you vote for a third party, then that vote that could have gone to say, Hillary, won't

Therefore Trump may still have 99 votes, but Hillary will only have 98

Voting third party takes votes away from the two parties that actually are capable of winning, which is one of the huge issues with two party systems

This would only make sense if it was only Democrats that vote for third parties. Gary Johnson will probably hurt Trump much more than Hillary.

I was just describing it in terms of what they were currently talking about, naturally I'd expect what you said to be the case

No, it doesn't.

If Trump has 99 votes, and you vote for a third party, Trump still has 99 votes.

Except winners are determined by having a plurality of the total votes, not the absolute number of votes. . .

It's well established that third-parties tend to take votes away from the two main parties, harming their chance of being elected. The question is whether or not you hate them both enough to vote third party, or whether you think Johnson will be strong enough to take a significant amount of votes from Trump.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on July 26, 2016, 03:15:48 AM

It's well established that third-parties tend to take votes away from the two main parties

Right, they take away from the other candidate. They don't give anyone anything.

It's just a bad use of language.

Not really.

If you take away one runner's shoe, you're contributing to the win of the other runner. Either way you're at somewhat responsible for the outcome of the race.

Quote

Quote from: Verbatim on July 26, 2016, 07:50:08 AM

Quote

It's well established that third-parties tend to take votes away from the two main parties

Right, they take away from the other candidate. They don't give anyone anything.

It's just a bad use of language.

Not really.

If you take away one runner's shoe, you're contributing to the win of the other runner. Either way you're at somewhat responsible for the outcome of the race.

Gotta agree with Meta here. Two sides of the same coin. Taking away an advantage of one participant translates into contributing to his or her opponent. Sure, you can say that putting one at a disadvantage isn't the exact same thing as giving the other an advantage, but seeing how it's guaranteed to be either Trump or Hillary, any potential support for Hillary you now give to a third party does directly contribute to Trump's side.

But do notice how neither of you have used the word "give."

"Contribute" is a much smarter word to use, because it's less misleading. "Give" would equate the act of consciously voting for a third party with the stupidity of consciously voting for Trump, which is unfair.

It's much more reasonable and fair to say that third-party voters who would have voted for Clinton (note the specificity) are contributing a little to Trump's bid. If a Gary Johnson supporter would've voted for Trump, they're contributing to Hillary's bid.

They're not physically "giving" a vote to anybody but who they voted for, and that's my contention.