posted by like_that

In other news Justin Amash is running for the LP's nomination to be their presidential candidate.  If he were to win, that would settle my vote for 2020 pretty easily.  I didn't agree with his take on Trump's impeachment, but overall I am a fan. It should be an easy choice for everyone, but unfortunately our society has been duped into thinking we only have 2 options.

If Amash wins the LP nomination, who does he hurt more?  Biden or Trump.  I see arguments for both sides.

 

It hurts the Dems way more

posted by Spock

Yep he was NEVER called a rapist, bigot, racist, homophobe, liar...until he became president.  

Well, other than how that's not true, GOOD POINT!!!!

posted by like_that

If Amash wins the LP nomination, who does he hurt more?  Biden or Trump.  I see arguments for both sides.

Getting in late and with much less press than Gary Johnson, who along with Jill Stein had 0 impact on any state race in 2016.  But Michigan was so close, I could see Amash allowing Biden to win MI (not that Trump might not lose MI, anyway).

Our elections are practically rigged against 3rd party candidates.  Amash will never get on the debate stage, which is a big blow.  And your major media outlets will barely cover him, which is an even bigger blow.  And those two together severely limit how much money you can raise, which is the nail in the coffin.

posted by gut

Getting in late and with much less press than Gary Johnson, who along with Jill Stein had 0 impact on any state race in 2016.  But Michigan was so close, I could see Amash allowing Biden to win MI (not that Trump might not lose MI, anyway).

Our elections are practically rigged against 3rd party candidates.  Amash will never get on the debate stage, which is a big blow.  And your major media outlets will barely cover him, which is an even bigger blow.  And those two together severely limit how much money you can raise, which is the nail in the coffin.

I've seen the same argument for stealing votes from Biden.   I don't think Amash will win the LP nomination, though. 

While I prefer Jacob Hornberger, Amash would definitely bring a lot more name recognition. He's significantly better than Gary Johnson, at the very least. It's funny (sad) watching both sides complain that he's going to "steal" votes from their preferred candidate and give the election to the other guy. Again. Same shit happened in 2016. Same shit happened in 2012. It's always the most important election of our lives. It's always too important to throw away your vote. It'll be the same shit in 2024. 2028. 2032. Until the end of time.

With Ranked Choice Voting Amash would win the election outright. Ranked choice voting fixes a lot of issues.

Ranked Choice Voting? Don't know that I've heard of that. Is there a quick-n-easy explanation?

posted by Heretic

Ranked Choice Voting? Don't know that I've heard of that. Is there a quick-n-easy explanation?

You rank the candidates in order of who you'd like to see in office, and each rank has a point value.  Candidate with the highest points wins.

Are the Bernie bros gonna go for Biden or another candidate?

posted by O-Trap

You rank the candidates in order of who you'd like to see in office, and each rank has a point value.  Candidate with the highest points wins.

Lol. Of course justin, the libertarian, thinks the Libertarian candidate would win that style of election. 

posted by SportsAndLady

Lol. Of course justin, the libertarian, thinks the Libertarian candidate would win that style of election. 

In a three-candidate race, he/she might.  The polarization of the major two parties would obviously result in most people putting one candidate at the top and one at the bottom, so the third-party candidate would probably get the second-place pick on a LOT of ballots.  Couple that with the first-place votes it would get from the sub-set of voters that would actually pick them, and it might end up electing a third-party candidate.

posted by SportsAndLady

Lol. Of course justin, the libertarian, thinks the Libertarian candidate would win that style of election. 

Amash would win in my completely hypothetical situation, yes. My preferred candidate would not, but Amash would.

posted by O-Trap

You rank the candidates in order of who you'd like to see in office, and each rank has a point value.  Candidate with the highest points wins.

This isn't quite right.

For a single office, like for a mayor or governor, RCV helps to elect a candidate who reflects a majority of voters in a single election even when several viable candidates are in the race. It does this by counting the votes in rounds.

Voters pick a first-choice candidate and have the option to rank backup candidates in order of their choice: second, third, and so on. If a candidate receives more than half of the first choices, that candidate wins, just like in any other election. However, if there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by an "instant runoff." The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who picked that candidate as ‘number 1’ will have their votes count for their next choice. This process continues until a candidate wins with more than half of the votes.

https://www.fairvote.org/rcv#how_rcv_works

posted by justincredible

This isn't quite right.

For a single office, like for a mayor or governor, RCV helps to elect a candidate who reflects a majority of voters in a single election even when several viable candidates are in the race. It does this by counting the votes in rounds.

Voters pick a first-choice candidate and have the option to rank backup candidates in order of their choice: second, third, and so on. If a candidate receives more than half of the first choices, that candidate wins, just like in any other election. However, if there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by an "instant runoff." The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who picked that candidate as ‘number 1’ will have their votes count for their next choice. This process continues until a candidate wins with more than half of the votes.

https://www.fairvote.org/rcv#how_rcv_works

This is a lot more specific than I was trying to be, but yeah, it probably works better, too.  The version I described would basically just result in the candidate that everyone hated the least, more than likely.

posted by justincredible

This isn't quite right.

For a single office, like for a mayor or governor, RCV helps to elect a candidate who reflects a majority of voters in a single election even when several viable candidates are in the race. It does this by counting the votes in rounds.

Voters pick a first-choice candidate and have the option to rank backup candidates in order of their choice: second, third, and so on. If a candidate receives more than half of the first choices, that candidate wins, just like in any other election. However, if there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by an "instant runoff." The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who picked that candidate as ‘number 1’ will have their votes count for their next choice. This process continues until a candidate wins with more than half of the votes.

https://www.fairvote.org/rcv#how_rcv_works

Makes sense, but two big concerns over your thought Amash would wind up winning.

1. The way elections are now, the two big parties get like 95+% of the votes, with libertarians, green party and others getting the scraps. Unless, I'm reading this totally wrong, wouldn't Amash need to get a ton of votes just to not get eliminated regardless of how many people voted him #2? Because it'd take him being close enough to the big parties in support to not wind up being eventually eliminated. To me, it sounds like he'd be like, "I got up to 6% after outlasting all the other 3rd party candidates!!! And now I'm third out of three, so, well, it was fun while it lasted..."

2. As much of a shit-show as people raise over elections now regardless of who wins (2008 JJ had a couple people up in arms over Obama winning Ohio because McCain carried far more counties, but due to dominating the big cities, Obama had the edge in votes; 2016 nationally had all sorts of libs wanting to abolish the Electoral because Hillary won the popular vote), man, it'd be pure fucking chaos if either Trump or Biden had a 47-45 lead AND would have also got the Electoral, but because of this, wound up losing because the other guy was a more popular #2.

Heh, Trump and Biden both remind me of #2. Lol.

The reason I think he would win is because ranked choice voting eliminates the need to vote defensively. So instead of voting against Trump, or against Biden, you can vote for Amash, and put Trump or Biden as your second choice, and you're still 'protected' from the other guy.

It eliminates the 'wasted vote' argument. The 'stealing votes from' argument.

posted by Heretic

it'd be pure fucking chaos if either Trump or Biden had a 47-45 lead AND would have also got the Electoral, but because of this, wound up losing because the other guy was a more popular #2.

It may be possible, but I'm having trouble coming up with a scenario where this could actually happen.

posted by justincredible

Amash would win in my completely hypothetical situation, yes. My preferred candidate would not, but Amash would.

There are only like 11 states where Amash could hope to have a run-off situation.  There is 0 chance Amash could win the electoral college in your scenario.

Even if you eliminate the electoral college, you can bet the two parties are going to ensure against your scenario by doing rank choice by state rather than just nationally.

I think a lot of people put Amash first, knowing they don't have to pick the least bad candidate for their vote to matter. 

It's too bad my completely hypothetical situation will never happen.

posted by justincredible

I think a lot of people put Amash first, knowing they don't have to pick the least bad candidate for their vote to matter. 

It's too bad my completely hypothetical situation will never happen.

Don't see it happening.  Like 80% of the country votes straight ticket - I feel like I've even seen that option a few places to expedite voting.

And most people can't name the VP on both tickets, so there's little chance Amash or any other Libertarian candidate has enough name recognition.  Plus, a lot of people would probably just vote their first choice and leave the other options blank once they realize picking a #2 and #3 can only hurt their candidate.  Because I know as a Libertarian you aren't going to suggest that people HAVE to select a second and third choice.

I either believe this or I flirt with nihilism. You're not going to change my mind.

posted by gut

Plus, a lot of people would probably just vote their first choice and leave the other options blank once they realize picking a #2 and #3 can only hurt their candidate.  Because I know as a Libertarian you aren't going to suggest that people HAVE to select a second and third choice.

Eh, I think this depends on where people land when it comes to the desire for their candidate and the fear of the other main candidate.

With the rise of sentiments reflected in things like "Blue no matter who," it seems like the priority for many is to keep the other main party's candidate out of office as opposed to putting their own person into office.

Think back to the 2016 election.  How many times did the "Hillary is worse" argument get thrown around when the whole "grab 'em by the pussy" story first broke?

When faced with a self-indulgent, infantile narcissist and a potential sexual predator with seeming age-related cognitive issues, Amash doesn't seem so implausible, since giving him the second-place marker takes votes from both in equal measure.

Amash might not win 2020 in a hypothetical ranked voting system, but he would make it close.  That would be a victory in itself to show the nation a candidate outside of the trash DNC/GOP is capable of winning. 

I say we try it out and find out!

posted by O-Trap

Eh, I think this depends on where people land when it comes to the desire for their candidate and the fear of the other main candidate.

With the rise of sentiments reflected in things like "Blue no matter who," it seems like the priority for many is to keep the other main party's candidate out of office as opposed to putting their own person into office.

Think back to the 2016 election.  How many times did the "Hillary is worse" argument get thrown around when the whole "grab 'em by the pussy" story first broke?

When faced with a self-indulgent, infantile narcissist and a potential sexual predator with seeming age-related cognitive issues, Amash doesn't seem so implausible, since giving him the second-place marker takes votes from both in equal measure.

I mean, compared to the two main choices we do have, I'd vote for a potted plant to win, so I'm open to anything! Regardless of whether I have any belief he'd have a credible chance.

posted by Heretic

I mean, compared to the two main choices we do have, I'd vote for a potted plant to win, so I'm open to anything! Regardless of whether I have any belief he'd have a credible chance.

I'd wager you're not alone.

https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2020/05/02/roger-waters-joe-biden-a-fking-slime-ball-who-cant-defeat-trump/

I know......Breibart link......but man Roger Waters laid it on Biden.