The Democrats have successfully milked this tactic of supporting the "candidate who will do the best job" (short for the Independent/Libertarian/Insert your candidates party here) with the consistently successful hope of drawing off votes from the "candidate who has the best chance of winning" (insert Republican or Tea Party candidate name here).tallmike wrote:What I hear you saying is, "don't vote for the candidate you think will do the best job, vote for the one who has the best chance of winning"The Annoyed Man wrote:PLEASE take this into account. Kathy Glass, the libertarian candidate, may be a worthy person, but she has no chance of winning. None at all. The only thing she will do is take votes away from Abbot. Right now, she's not really registering in the polls, although she was showing 5% back in late October. Any points she gains will likely detract from Abbott rather than Davis.
Are we any better off because we have consistently voted for R's or D's? Then why would we keep doing it?
It is how the Virigina election was won the other day.
Votes that may have gone to the Republican candidate were siphoned off to a third-party candidate who appears to have been financed in part by the DNC or a flunky. The Democrat Governor-elect pretty much won by the margin of votes that the third-party candidate pulled from voters who otherwise may have voted for the Republican.
I lean heavily Libertarian, but I NEVER throw my vote away on a third-party candidate. I try to vote for the candidate closest to my political leanings that is a mainstream candidate.