“Another vote for Kerry” was one reaction to an ex-Republican writing to say that he’s voting for Badnarik this November. Let’s analyze this from a mathematical perspective.
Bush has zero votes. Kerry has zero votes. Badnarik has zero votes. Voter X votes for Badnarik. How many votes does Kerry have? A) one vote, B) ten votes, C) zero votes?
Let’s try it using some different numbers. Bush has 39,999,999 votes. Kerry has 39,999,999 votes. Voter X votes for Badnarik. How many votes does Kerry have? A) 40,000,000, B) 39,999,999, C) Five.
Alternatively, we can look at it from an ideological perspective. Kerry favors bigger government. Bush favors bigger government. Badnarik favors smaller government. Voter X, who favors smaller government, votes for Badnarik. This is a vote for A) bigger government, or B) smaller government?
There’s simply no reasonable way that you can claim a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for anyone but that third party candidate. To assume that any such votes would have gone to one of the two bifactional candidates is to make the same fallacy that the RIAA makes when people copy a CD – a willingness to copy a CD is not equivalent to a willingness to purchase a CD. If I didn’t vote for Badnarik, (or Peroutka), I simply wouldn’t vote. I would NEVER vote for either Bush or Kerry. If there’s no one to whom you can consent, then withdrawing your consent is the only option.
If you simply want to vote for a winner, then vote for whoever is leading in the polls the day before the election. That’s essentially what the Republican cheerleaders are urging others to do. But don’t pretend you have any principles beyond bandwagon-jumping. And for the love of all that’s good and holy, stop embarrassing yourself with your apparent inability to fathom basic addition.