The scenario I described in my original reply above about winning all the state lotteries is, no question, quantitative hyperbole. The odds of that scenario are batshit insane low. Which is kinda what I was going for.
Is that based on the statistical chance of Hillary or the Donald dropping dead before the election? Because even dead I’d say Hillary has more chance of winning than Jill Stein…
2 Likes
That would imply that they’ve somehow determined the probability that Clinton becomes permanently incapacitated before the election. Love to see their sources and calculations for that one.
No sarcasm. You pretty much came to the same conclusion I came to. The idea is that if you dont vote for the moderate Republican, the asshole with the orange comb-over takes power. Im lucky - Im based in NYC (or the Troll Academy, St. Petersburg if you ask some people). So my vote does not count. But if it did Im not sure who I would vote for. After all, if you have left wing views, then the guys who have successfully guaranteed that the American people never get the chance to reject your preferred policies are the right wing of the Democratic party. So the real barrier to say, public single payer is not T-Rump, but the DNC.
If you really have left wing views you are probably best ignoring the Dems and putting your efforts into the Greens. But of course that doesn’t mean you should vote Green in this election. Thats a matter for ones individual conscience and judgement. For what little its worth, those who feel the urge to call me a sh*thead for writing this should know that I really value their constructive criticism. No really I do. And their abuse will definitely influence me towards supporting their preferred candidate.
4 Likes
In a direct democracy, this would be true, but we have an electoral college system, so it isn’t true. If I were to vote, I would vote for the person who votes for the President, not for the President themselves. Swing state voters should definitely vote for Clinton, but anyone in a solid Red or Blue state can vote their conscience.
1 Like
Good point! I’d neglected to consider that part. I think I also misunderstood your stance, as I agree with the rest of what you said as well.
1 Like
Yes, it’s exactly this.
Gary Johnson might be the first Libertarian candidate since John G. Hospers in 1972 to win an electoral vote
Faithless electors are not that uncommon. There’s been one every other election or so during my lifetime. I think that the factors are ripe for there to be a faithless elector on the Republican side, and they could easily vote Johnson instead of someone like Mike Pence. Although if John Edwards or even Lloyd Bentsen can get electoral votes, maybe Pence can as well.
It’s hard to make frequentist predictions about this sort of thing (which Silver knows well, because The Signal In The Noise covers exactly this) but I think there will be a 25-50% chance of a faithless elector, and another 25% chance that that faithless elector votes for Gary Johnson. My back-of-the-envelope calculations are in the mid single digits that Johnson can get an electoral vote, but I’ll trust Silver’s 2.3% number if he’s done the analysis.
“Winning an electoral vote,” as in one vote.
Chance of Johnson winning 1 out of 435 electoral votes, and losing: 2.3%
Chance of Johnson winning 0 out of 435 electoral votes, and losing: 97.7%
Chance of Johnson winning 218 out of 435 electoral votes, and winning: 0.0%
3 Likes
Doh! Thanks 
2 Likes
That’s what I keep asking-what will a Trump presidency cost us, and what will we gain from it? What will a Clinton presidency cost us, and what will we gain from it?
Because a Trump presidency could completely destroy the republican party. A Clinton presidency would likely galvanize them.
I’m really concerned about the *secondary effects * of those two possibilities, and I can’t get an answer from anyone that doesn’t boil down to “we can’t think about the future-we need to worry about right now”.
I have yet to see anything good in life that comes from that line of thinking.
2 Likes
Wouldn’t he need to win 270 electoral votes to win? Not that it changes his chances of winning.
1 Like
A Trump presidency is more likely to move the core ethos of the Republican party from conservatism to the alt-right, just look how the prospect of victory has started bringing the #neverTrumps in line. One of the big fears of traditional conservatives is that Trump wins and becomes the new norm.
Clinton might galvanize them, but she’s old, white, and awkward. She shouldn’t be quite as threatening as Obama. Plus if she can make it through the refugee crisis and immigration reform the alt-right plurality might not be big enough to nominate another Trump.
1 Like
You get those stats from FourThirtyFive.com?
1 Like
The yuuuuuugest vulvas?
2 Likes
[quote=“Skeptic, post:206, topic:86033, full:true”]
Because even dead I’d say Hillary has more chance of winning than Jill Stein…[/quote]
Especially if they have a debate first.
2 Likes
I will vote third party this time. Just, not Johnson…
3 Likes
He also puts the odds of Johnson winning the election at 0.3%.
I didn’t read through everything. It’s certainly not what I would have expected, but I guess that’s how it works out.
Although honestly, there’s probably close to that high of a chance that both major party candidates in their late 60s are somehow incapacitated between now and election day (or when the electors vote), which is something I don’t think 538 accounts for but they might.
2 Likes
I keep asking myself what else could a Trump presidency destroy? My marriage? My civil rights? The economy? The environment?
6 Likes
This article was originally published in 1999 and titled “Why I’m Voting For Ralph Nader And Why You Should Too”
I mean, really, what the worst that can happen, right?
2 Likes
