Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

It's correct thinking. Most people are not going to vote for radical third parties with their extreme, half-assed myopic platforms. The people who vote for them are stuck in the ivory tower. By voting for them you are, in reality, making it much easier for something worse. That's a realistic probability. I am not going to risk voting in some republitard because I voted for the socialist worker's party, which I probably would. But there aren't enough people here who would want to to make it worthwhile anyway. Even if they DID have third party's easily available.

We don't have a coalition style government. It's first-past the post. Which means I am still throwing my vote away and getting no representation.

The only right choice is the choice which leads to the least bad result. Voting in such a way that you know will likely not do that is morally irresponsible imo. A clear example of this is voting for the hippie party if the alternatives are either liberals or fascists. Obviously, you might want the hippies really bad, cause you hate "the man." But by voting for them, if they are a larger third party, might detract from voting for the Liberals, who are closer by far than the Facists. So in effect, you can realistically be helping bring about just the opposite of your ideal, which is moronic. I don't want to sabotage my own interests. Which too many people are seemingly wont to do.

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

Allowing a worse evil to take its place out of childish idealism I think's worse. There aren't enough people who would vote for the same things I would vote for, ideally. I am therefore still wasting my vote, given representation is not proportional, AND I run the serious risk of actually sabotaging my own goals.

It's great to live in candy-land, but I prefer practicality in voting.

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

People's votes do matter, even with the Electoral College. Most people misunderstand it. They don't vote any way they fee like it. Quite often, they go with the flow in each state. It informs their decision-making, and collectively, the tally of electoral votes by state popular votes (first past the post gets em all) is what matters.

If enough people in a state do not vote for a certain guy, he's not going to get the electoral votes.