Just a few weeks ago I was at a local bar with a few friends; we were enjoying the weather, a few beers, and conversation that eventually focused in on our current state of politics. Great.
Let me hear about how you’re choosing the “lesser of two evils,” tell me what you define as evil, say how economically you’re more conservative but socially you’re liberal, tell me how you can’t trust either party, and, consequently, when I bring up the very evident fact that there IS a third party candidate who is NOT evil, who has never been a part of any political scandal, which HAS the resume needed to run the country, tell me I’m tossing away my vote by supporting a third party candidate.
But why? What is this misconception that voting for a third-party candidate is a wasted vote? Voting at its core is being able to tell your country what you believe in, voicing an opinion, and sharing your vision on how government and society should be structured. We know this, we as a country know that this is what voting is, yet we choose to play the defensive. Do we opt to vote for the “lesser of two evils” rather than actually vote for who we want? That’s not right. Correct me if I’m wrong, but unless the Republican or Democratic candidates do accurately mirror your beliefs, you are falling into this political hierarchy, a media importance, a status quo that we have all internally come to despise.
It is 2016, and we remain unaware of the weight that the Electoral College has in our presidential campaigns. Mainly, you vote for a group of people known as “electors.” There is a total of 538 electors, and a candidate needs the vote of more than half (270) to win the presidential elections. With that said, it is possible for a candidate to receive the majority of the popular vote, but not the electoral vote, and lose the presidential election.
So what’s the purpose of voting when our vote may not even matter? A vote allows you to express the direction you want the country to go in. The popular vote communicates with elected officials and future candidates about public attitudes. Voting for the lesser evil is virtually compromising your voice. I urge you not to settle for a candidate you don’t believe in, one who doesn’t mirror your beliefs or one you refer to as evil (even if it’s the lesser of the two). Be aware that there is a candidate, a third party candidate, who deserves more recognition, more media, more attention, and does not fall into a category we label as “evil.”
If you’re still hesitant on third party candidates, let us refer to the history of U.S. politics--history shows us how important third-party candidates have been. When a third party candidate receives enough attention where it begins to threaten the outcome of an election, political leaders understand that these ideas are worth considering.
Third party candidates have served to “refocus” the two primary political parties on issues they ignore or ineffectively handle. Rarely, do we see a third party emerge as a major player, until now. Right now, we are witnessing a shift in our election where a third party candidate, a Libertarian, has risen so high up in the polls; he is 2% away from finally being looked at as a legitimate candidate and being invited onto the debate stage with Trump and Clinton.
Currently, 145 Libertarians are holding elected offices and despite the fact that every election year the Libertarian Party continues to run more candidates. In better-funded campaigns, we still look at a third party vote as a wasted vote. The Libertarian party ticket is composed of two former Republican governors, and it could profoundly impact the GOP if it continues to do well. During our election year, being urged to believe in the false claims by both the Democratic and Republican party, it has become evident that the only way to waste your vote is to use it on a candidate who fails to convey the message you want to send to America.
