You may have heard about the presidential election coming up on November 6th, 2012. According to the news it’s Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney.
In reality, it’s Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney vs. Gary Johnson vs. Jill Stein vs. a number of other candidates with access to less than 270 electoral votes (and thus, truly ineligible to win the presidency).
Many people will tell you that a vote for a third party candidate is a “wasted” vote. Others (like my Republican aunt, for example) will say that a vote for Gary Johnson or anyone else not named Mitt Romney is actually a vote for Barack Obama.
These people are idiots (but I still love you Aunt M!).
Find Out Who You Really Side With
I was doing some research for this post and I found a really incredible site: I Side With. The site asks you a bunch of questions and you tell them how you feel about the issues. You can give cookie cutter answers or get really specific, which I love!
For example, they ask “Should gay marriage be allowed in the U.S.?” You can choose “yes” or “no”, but if you select “Choose another stance” then you can pick “Take the government out of marriage and instead make it a religious decision.” PERFECT!!!
As comedian Doug Stanhope says, “If [government involvement in] marriage didn’t exist, would you invent it? Would you go, ‘Baby, this s**t we got together, it’s so good we gotta get the government in on this s**t…'”
I encourage you to take a few minutes to really answer these questions on I Side With and find out who you really agree with. Here are my results:
I was certain I’d agree with Gary Johnson, but even I was surprised it was 99%. It’s also interesting to see that Mitt Romney is only 41% and Barack Obama is 4%. If those two are my only options I’m pretty much screwed.
If you do take the quiz, definitely use “Choose another stance” as much as possible. I went back and took the quiz using only the generic Yes/No answers and while Gary Johnson was still 99%, Obama moved up to 62%. The more specific you get, the better your results will be.
How to Defend Yourself Against “Vote Waster” Idiots
If you decide to vote for a candidate other than Barack Obama or Mitt Romney, someone will inevitably tell you that you’re wasting your vote or you’re “essentially voting for [insert bad guy, Obama or Romney depending on their point of view]”.
Step 1: Figure out this person’s political party — Democrat or Republican. If you’re having this conversation then you probably already know.
Step 2a: If they are a Republican then say: “If the two options were Barack Obama or Joe Biden, would you pick the lesser of two evils or would you show your disgust with your options by voting third party?”
Step 2b: If they are a Democrat, change “Barack Obama or Joe Biden” with “Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan”.
Step 3: This idiot will not answer the question and say something like, “But that’s not a real choice because they have the same policies. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are very different.” You can laugh on the inside because you knew what they were going to say before they did.
Step 4: Now you’ve got them. Share the following information.
Barack Obama and Mitt Romney Aren’t Very Different
If you just watch the news you’d think Barack Obama is FDR and Mitt Romney is Ronald Reagan. In reality they are very, very similar. Both of them:
- Support huge deficit spending (see Democrat and Republican budgets for proof)
- Support an interventionist foreign policy (see Obama’s record in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. and anything Romney says about foreign military policy)
- Support the IRS and the income tax (with slight differences in how much to tax whom)
- Support a massive federal Department of Education
- Support the NDAA, allowing US citizens to be indefinitely detained without being charged with anything or having representation from a lawyer
- Support the precedent set by Obama that the president can assassinate anyone (including American citizens) if they are believed to be terrorists
- Support the PATRIOT Act and the intrusion of privacy that comes with it
- Support the TSA and your scans/pat downs at major airports
- Support the war on drugs like marijuana, even for medical purposes
- Support government intervention in healthcare (Romney wants to repeal parts of Obamacare, but still likes some of it along with Medicare, Medicaid, Prescription Drug Program, etc)
So when these idiots tell you that you’re wasting your vote on a third party, you know how to educate them and let them know that a vote for Obama is about the same as a vote for Romney. Hopefully you can convince them to consider actually voting for the person they agree with instead of blindly picking their favorite political party.
A vote is an endorsement of a person and his or her ideology. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still endorsing evil (even if it’s less evil than the other guy). If you believe both Obama and Romney are bad and that one of the other people on the ballot is good, the only logical decision is to endorse (vote for) the good guy or gal.
In 2006 there was a poll that asked “Would you describe yourself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal?” 59% of respondents said “yes.” It makes sense. People don’t care what their neighbor is doing as long as it doesn’t harm them or others, and they realize no one should spend more money than they make. These 59% of Americans might be libertarian without even knowing it!
The bottom line: I’m voting for Gary Johnson in November and I most certainly am not “wasting my vote”.
Readers: Now that I’ve completely disregarded any semblance of political correctness, let’s take it a step further. What were your results on the quiz and who are you voting for this November?
Join the Thousandaire newsletter
Subscribe to get our latest content by email.
Agree 100% and the thing is even if your candidate doesn’t get a single electoral vote, if enough people vote third party, it can send the message that maybe a third party could potentially win, and the 2016 election could either see a viable third party or see the two major party candidates step up their game. Romney and Obama both disappoint me. I will have to take this and see where I land.
It sends a message that people are dissatisfied with the two party system and specifically with the choices we are being given in this system.
But again, I’m not voting to send a message. I’m voting on my principles.
I was 97% aligned with Mitt Romney and will definitely be voting for him in November.
97% is pretty good. Looks like you’ve found your candidate. I wish you came to the same conclusion as me, but I’m just glad you were engaged enough to take the quiz, think about the questions and figure out who you really support.
The single deal breaker for any libertarian candidate is foreign policy. I absolutely disagree with everything Ron Paul or Gary Johnson says on foreign policy. That is a very important issue for me so I can’t bring myself to vote that way. I agree with pretty much everything else. Also, I don’t think Gary Johnson is a very good leader. I would have been much more inclined to vote for Dr. Paul if he had ran libertarian.
I liked the quiz but, of course, I wish I could’ve been EVEN MORE specific. Like this question:
Should the U.S. intervene in the affairs of other countries?
I would’ve liked to answer:
Yes, Only if it is a direct threat to our (or ally’s) national security.
My results were no big surprise though.
Gary Johnson – 96%
Mitt Romney – 89%
Virgil Goode – 53% (I don’t know who this man is.)
Barack Obama – 33% (On environmental issues?? Not likely.)
New Mexico Voters – 58% (This surprises me because the majority of our population is very liberal.)
American Voters – 57% (Well look at that…maybe I’ll pick a winner.)
I would also like to comment on the “Mitt Romney Gaffe” that has been buzzing all over the news today. As controversial as it is, I’m kind of relieved Mitt Romney isn’t a robot. The “gaff” is basically him being completely blunt about what he thinks. I think it should be included in the “top 10 personal responsibility quotes of the year” haha.
I used to feel the same way you did about foreign policy. Then I did a little more reading and came to a new conclusion. By sending our military all over the world and spending trillions of dollars, we are letting the bad guys win. Here’s a quote from Osama bin Laden:
“We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah,” bin Laden said in the transcript.
“All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations,” bin Laden said.
It is extremely difficult for them to attack us here, so they’ve baited us to go over there where it’s very easy for them to us harm. Furthermore, the more bombs we drop and the more boots we have on the ground in the middle east, the more the average middle eastern civilian hates us for not minding our own business.
The bottom line is that we can’t afford 700 military bases in over 150 countries. That’s a fact. I also believe reducing our military footprint will make fewer people hate us and make our country safer. That point is debatable, but I believe it to be true.
As far as Romney’s quote, I think it’s disingenuous to suggest 47% don’t pay taxes. There is a difference between “taxes” and “federal income tax”. People pay medicare and social security taxes along with sales tax, property tax (directly or indirectly), potentially state or local income tax, etc. Yes there are people who suck at the federal government’s teet, but the number is far less than 47%.
Well we will have to agree to disagree about the 47%. I know very few people who don’t depend on the government for something. I get the luxury of seeing people cash in their “refund checks” from the fed. Some of these people are getting up to $9,000.00 in refunds. They make no more than minimum wage. Then they blow that money at Wal Mart to buy flat screen tvs and whatnot. I’m just saying that I basically agree with Romney on his statement.
I think the argument concerning al Qaeda is completely true. I agree that we are chasing ghosts out in the middle east. That is a strategy issue though, not a policy issue. That is something the fellas at The Pentagon need to work out. I disagree with the “isolationism” of America though. I believe that even though we have plenty of problems here at home, just retracting our head into the turtle shell isn’t the answer.
When it really comes down to it though, I just want someone who will make the tough desicions and help America get back on track. Whether it be Romney, Johnson, or hell even Obama. I guess we’ll find out in a couple weeks.
“Well we will have to agree to disagree about the 47%. I know very few people who don’t depend on the government for something.”
-I know of no one who does not depend on the fed for something. Those highways you drive on, the ability for the US Dollar to be used as currency in mom and pop stores, the (albeit poorly done) securing of our nations ports for trade, food supply, etc. These are just a few examples of government spending that every citizen relies on. It is not all welfare checks…
“I get the luxury of seeing people cash in their “refund checks” from the fed. Some of these people are getting up to $9,000.00 in refunds.”
I take offense to this statement in some way. My situation is not unique. I am a single, white, middle class, employed, non-student male with no property and no children – translation no deductions. I am taxed a total of approximately 44% (local, state, and fed combined). My gross income will hopefully high $80k so I am definitely not a 1%er. My employer errs on the side of caution and take more than they probably should, that being said I get a large tax refund back. Side note: the only deduction I use/am eligible for is the standard deduction.
———–
My own stance is that social issues are vastly more important to me in this election. I have little to no faith in the overwhelming majority of politicians in office currently, and do no believe they can reduce the deficit or disengage from the Muslim/Arabic-American conflicts all over the world.
I mean no offense. It’s just frustrating to watch people get such large refunds when I worked my ass off to get where I am (same as you but about 1/2 gross), and I have never since I was 15 years old and started paying taxes have received a refund. To me, it’s the same as watching a freshman get $2k back from the school because they got so much in pell grants and spend everyday drinking and skipping class. Or a welfare recipient try to quit smoking and not even look for work. I basically just hate that personal responsibility and common sense has gone the way of the Dodo in America. Again, sorry if I offend it isn’t my intention.
My husband and I have jokingly started referring to this year’s election as the Obamney vs. Obamney election. So it comes as no surprise that I am 92% Gary Johnson.
It’s Obamney vs. Robama! 🙂
Don’t forget SOPA/PIPA… as the two parties argued about debt and spending they introduced those monstrosities behind the scenes. It took a popular revolution to get them to turn against it. The perfect example of the parties aligned behind the scenes!
Yep, there’s another great example of how there is no difference between the two parties and how they just want to make government bigger and bigger.
I wish I could say Gary Johnson has a legitimate shot, but I guess I’ll just have to keep hoping for someone better in 2016.
I agree both parties flopped on SOPA / PIPA in general. But there is at least one notable exception:
From the Washington Post : “Perhaps no single member of Congress deserves as much credit for slowing the advance of the aggressive online-piracy bills SOPA and PIPA as Sen. Ron Wyden, who for much of last year fought a one-man battle to keep the Senate version of the legislation from moving through on a unanimous vote.”
Kevin –
I was dissapointed I didnt get a chance to sit down with you and talk about this stuff at all at fincon, but It’s nice to see it on your blog.
I took the isidewith quiz as well, and while my results were slightly different, I did get gary johnson pretty high (97% or so) and next was someone that I had never heard of until then (Jill stein). I think that if people our age (Under 35) would take the quiz, they would probably get a lot of the same results.
One quick note – lots of people are against the citizens united decision for one reason or another, but I think that it could really be a boon for the 3rd parties. If someone in a 3rd party position had a few wealthy backers (most likely would need more than 1) they could really make some noise and get a message out. In the republican primaries, there was basically 1 super rich person for each candidate (gingrich had adelson, santorum had friess) and they were able to move pretty far with donations from that 1 person. Perhaps someone from a 3rd party could snare in a few big donors and make some noise.
As far as who I’m voting for, i’ll go vote but it wont matter – the electoral college in my state is going to go the way it’s gone for years and years, and there’s not much I can do about it.
Well to be fair Ron Paul had Peter Thiel (founder of Paypal, Facebook investor). He gave $2.6 million to Ron Paul Super PACs. That’s obviously not as much as he could have given, but it was substantial. A 3rd party is going to need either more than a big donor, or just one who is willing to drop more than just a few million.
You also can’t discount the grassroots donations. Ron Paul made a ton of money from regular people and I think the grassroots will be willing to put up more money for a similar candidate in the future. That’s many millions of dollars as well.
And sadly, both you and I won’t make any impact on our state electoral colleges, but we will have an impact on the total number of votes that go 3rd party and send a message to the Dems and Repubs that we aren’t happy with the candidates they are giving us.
82% Gary Johnson, 80% Romney, 21% Obama. A 2% increase is not enough to convince me not to vote for the lesser of 2 evils, ha. I suppose my vote remains to Romney. Even though in DE that doesn’t mean much.
If you know your state is going Obama anyway and if you believe in Gary Johnson, then you may as well vote for him. However, if you really do believe in Romney then you should vote for him. 82%-80% is basically the same. It’s up to you who you want to endorse. Thanks for sharing!
The election will be decided by electoral college votes in a few swing states such as Florida and Ohio. Thus, literally speaking, my vote in New York will not matter in the least because New York will always go blue. That I said, I am 93% Jill Stein, 87% Obama, 59% Gary Johnson, 95% Democratic, and 91% Green, and I will vote for Obama. My problems with voting for Jill Stein are that (a) I have never heard of Jill Stein and (b) it seems to me pointless to vote for someone who has not a slightest chance of winning an electoral vote. In other words, a vote for Jill Stein is in my opinion a wasted vote. This apparent makes me an idiot in the eyes of Kevin McKee. Somehow I can live with that.
To clarify, your opinion on your vote is none of my business. If you think a vote for Jill Stein is a wasted vote and you decide to vote for Obama I have no problem with that. Who am I to judge how you decide who you will vote for?
My only problem is when someone tries to tell another person who is voting 3rd party that they are wasting their vote.
You’re only an idiot if you go around telling people who want to vote for Jill Stein that they are wasting their votes.
Well, I didn’t get that sense from your original message. I have, however, reminded people who are planning to vote for Romney in NY that this state is going Democratic no matter what they vote. But without any name-calling (idiot, etc.) kindly tell me how voting for a 3rd-party candidate who has no chance of winning any electoral votes is not wasting, etc. I disagree, however, with your premise that Romney and Obama are not very different. If so, explain how I got 87% and 44% Romney on that poll.
87% for Obama, that is.
My purpose in voting for Gary Johnson is to express my personal support for his policies and to express my dissatisfaction with Romney and Obama. My goal is accomplished whether Johnson wins or loses, and thus is not wasted.
The reason there is a 40 point swing in your results (and mine too) between Obama and Romney is because there are small differences between the two. Obama and the Democrats might want a $1 trillion deficit while Romney and the Republicans want a $900 billion deficit. If you are happy with spending $1 trillion more than we have and putting that on a credit card for young people, that is technically different than preferring $900 billion. However, I contend that the real difference is between excessive deficit spending and forcing the federal government to live within its means. Johnson proposed a balanced budget in his first year as president.
Just review my list of all the things where Obama and Romney are the same. Sure there are subtle differences in things like taxes, govt spending, the environment, etc but nothing drastically different.
I’ve reviewed your list, and other commentators could come up with as many points of difference. Political analysts whom I respect (like Andrew Sullivan) do in fact see fundamental differences between the two major candidates. I’m not going to summarize their main points as you could easily find the arguments yourself.
It is easy for your friend Johnson to propose a balanced budget, talk is cheap, but even on the less-than-null chance that he would be elected, he would almost certainly find it far more difficult to implement his pipe dreams in the Washington of today than he imagined.
As for the main point, in 2000, about 3 million voters registered their protest votes for Ralph Nader rather than W or Gore. Considering the result – a close race in which the winner of the popular vote was defeated by a Supreme Court decision – , how many of those Nader-voters do you think today may not have not regretted their act of bravado, when they could have cast a vote for a realistic candidate?
I don’t think Gary Johnson is under some illusion that if he were president that he’d have the approval of congress to pass a balanced budget. He would, however, have the bully pulpit of the president and he’d veto any unbalanced budget, forcing Democrats and Republicans to come together on a 2/3rds majority to pass a budget and bypass the presidential signature.
And who knows if those people regret their decision to vote for Nader or not. It’s not your decision to regret it for them though. They voted for the candidate they liked best and I applaud them for that. I HOPE Obama beats Romney by less than the number of Gary Johnson’s votes. It will show that the main parties need to start appealing to the Liberty movement.
Of course they can vote for whomever they like. I am simply raising the question of what happens when a large bloc of voters votes for a candidate who has no chance of winning. Doing so may make the voter feel virtuous or empowered, but practically speaking it has no effect either way.
I am 79% Obama, 66% Johnson, 63% Stein, and 52% Romney. This largely stems from my beliefs in the science and education. And I will be voting for Obama for these reasons, though I do believe we should be more conservative fiscally, many options to vote that way are too extreme for my beliefs, also it is my hope that through education we can reach a place where people are smart enough to have an understanding of financial matters and force congress to act more responsibly.
And where is this education going to come from? It won’t come from the federally funded schools and universities that rely on excessive government spending for their budgets.
The biggest problem in democracy nowadays is that there is mainly choice between two packages. I would love to vote for directions, since we are choosing for 20 local votes, it would not be more problematic. And the government would have a mandate to follow these general directions:
do you want:
A) continue to go to war in iraq: Y/N
B) do you want to reduce the deficit by: 1/2/3 trillions in the next 4 years
…..
That may seem like a good thought, but there is a reason our founders didn’t set up our government in that way.
What if 51% of the country voted that we set off nukes all throughout every country in the middle east? What if 51% of the country decided slavery is good and all black people must become slaves again effective immediately?
There’s a reason we don’t have a direct democracy, and it’s because the majority opinion is not always the right one.
Kevin, I would urge you to look beyond your words on this post:
“There’s a reason we don’t have a direct democracy, and it’s because the majority opinion is not always the right one.”
I would nearly wager my life and all worldly possessions that the combined opinions of millions of voters is more a) intelligent b) novel c) appropriate to ANY given situation that ANY president has ever faced in the history of the US. The issue with direct democracy is that every voice would need to be heard, this is no longer possible. If given a choice to “set off nukes all throughout every country in the middle east” Y/N, I am being forced to pick an answer which may not be representative of my own.
Suggested reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
Example of crowd opinion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton#Variance_and_standard_deviation
A direct democracy is truly an absurd idea. If we want to guess the weight of a cow it might be alright, but how do you expect people to vote on something they don’t understand?
When I was 18 I didn’t know the first thing about economics. If someone had asked, “Do you want America to change our economic policy from Keynesian to Austrian?” I would have looked at them like they were speaking French. I bet there’s a huge chunk of Americans today who don’t know what those philosophies are.
I’m certain there are plenty of issues that I don’t understand today and couldn’t make an educated vote upon.
Furthermore, even if a direct democracy were to result in a prosperous nation it’s still not right because it eliminates liberty. In a direct democracy 51% of people can force anything upon 49% of people. Slavery, death, torture, etc. As I said before, the majority opinion is not always the right opinion.
And remember we are a republic NOT a democracy which many people believe we are. Were we a democracy any person could get equal billing as a candidate which is far from what we have.
Go ahead and call people idiots for saying that, but voting for someone who has no chance is like voting for no one at all. What you are stating here is basically that you should place a “feel good” vote. I agree that in a perfect world we would have a libertarian candidate witha legitimate chance, but that will never be the case. You need to pick between to two leading candidates who most represents your ideals. If you don’t, you are most likely cutting off your nose to spite your face. Essentially, don’t hate the playas, hate the game….
If your choices were Joe Biden, Barack Obama, or a 3rd party then who would you vote for?
Kevin,
I think my results illustrate a significant difference between the candidates. My results were as follows:
93% Obama
87% Jill Stein
81% Rocky Anderson
7% Mitt Romney
If anything, my results indicate that Mitt Romney is an outlier from all other candidates and that these other candidates have much more in common with each other than with Romney. Very interesting. Longtime reader, had to post on this one.
Yes; it is wasted, it will always be a two party system after enough runshttp://blog.cgpgrey.com/the-problems-with-first-past-the-post-voting-explained/this is not MY web site.
I’ve actually voted for myself a number of time for Mayor and Governor. And I’ve been told it was a waste. But a vote for “other” is still a vote and that’s powerful. It tells the two major parties you aren’t satisfied but you are still going to vote. This tells them that you just might vote for the other guy too so they want to hear what you are saying.
Interesting thing – one time I was voting and I asked the person at the polls how to write in my vote. He then told me it was a waste anyway. Umm, I think his only job there was to help me vote not tell me who I shouldn’t vote for. Just shows you how powerfully some people feel about using your vote the way you want.
And hey, if you aren’t sure who to vote for vote for me – Glen Craig!
I linked to your site after several very conservative friends told me I was wasting my vote. The results showed I am far more middle of the road than they are. I used to think I was fairly conservative but now I realize that isn’t the case.
81% Johnson/73% Obama/72% Romney/54% Stein and Anderson.
I don’t even mind Romney as much as I just cannot vote for Paul Ryan. I just can’t do it. I don’t care how fancy Mrs. Romney’s horse is. I don’t care if I’ll basically be the only one in my precinct not voting for Obama. In my state I have to write in Johnson..but I will do it because it’s the only choice I can live with.
The conflict seems to be between idealism and pragmatism. If you vote for a third-party candidate, you can defend yourself by saying you’ve voted for the person you believe in even if you know they can’t possibly prevail. If you vote for the lesser of two evils or the better of two unsatisfactory choices, you can defend yourself by saying you’ve voted for the better (or less bad) of two realistic options. I don’t want to muddy the issue by talking about “wasted votes,” or who’s an idiot, or the like. I come down myself on the side of pragmatism, even while I know that the only consequential votes in this election will be those cast by the residents of a few swing states.
Like you said here, there’s no such thing as a pragmatic vote where I live (Texas). My state will vote for Romney no matter what I do.
If you live in a state where you already know what the outcome will be and you prefer a candidate that’s not R or D, I see no reason not to vote your conscience. In your case if there’s no pragmatism involved, why not send a message to Obama that you want him and the Democratic party to adopt more of the Green platform by voting for Jill Stein?
Because voting for a president is not just a matter of checking off a list of positions I agree with, but an assessment of character. I know nothing about Jill Stein, but I know Barack Obama, whose steadiness, maturity, and calm appear to me a greater source of strength for the nation than Mitt Romney’s cynical contempt for half the voters.
I took the isidewith quiz and came up 94% with Romney, 66% with Obama (with Goode and Johnson in between). How can you say Romney and Obama are the same? Apparently the folks who designed the quiz and scoring system disagree with you.
Thanks for that link, I got Jill Stein on top (77%), and I had never even heard of her before this quiz. Now I’m going to do some serious research on her positions. It’s also interesting that my next two results were pretty close between Barack Obama and Gary Johnson, considering how different many of their stances are. And poor, poor Mitt (only figuratively speaking, of course) – he only got 18% of my vote.
Of course, since I’m registered to vote in Texas, he’ll get all of my electoral votes anyway. Yay, democracy!