• GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    You’re obviously just baiting, but for readers on, I’ll post this hyper simplified situation I commented already.

    5 total voters.

    2 for trump 1 for Biden 1 for Mickey and 1 abstains

    Trump wins.

    If the mickey and the abstain voters don’t want trump, their best action was to vote for Biden, as that would have achieved:

    2 for trump 3 for Biden 0 for mickey.

    Biden wins.

    In competitive locations, votes are a scarce resource.

    By not voting for Biden, you have helped trump, and not achieved your own voting goal all the while. You never voted for trump, but your actions aided his victory.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Just repeating it and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t make it so.

        If you feel capable of refuting the point, lay out any example you can provide, that meets my original premise.

        For example, I acknowledge many places in the US are NOT competitive, thus the scarce vote concept is much less relevant. Location was always in my comments, so that is not a goalpost move.