PDA

View Full Version : G. Edward Griffin on the "wasting your vote" fallacy




OferNave
03-13-2008, 09:24 PM
I know that one of the most common obstacles we've encountered is people who think voting for Ron Paul is a "wasted vote".

I'm currently reading all the materials on G. Edward Griffin's site, Freedom Force International (http://freedom-force.org/), and I found this well-written argument against. I know we all know why the "wasted vote" idea is bad, but I certainly am not as eloquent as Mr. Griffin, so I'm grateful that he's done the work of crafting a good response for me. Here it is:

"Many voters have come to regard elections as magnificent games in which only the cleverest contestants are entitled to win. They become fascinated by the strategies and deployment of resource, and techniques for evading tough issues, and cleverness of TV spots, and ability to appeal to large voting blocs. They don’t really care who wins as much as they want to pick the winner. To them, it’s like betting in a football pool. They may favor one team over another, but they will place their bet on the team they think stands the best chance of winning, even if it is not their favorite. Winning is everything.

That is how they cast their votes. They may prefer a certain candidate, but they will not vote for him if they think someone else will win. How many times have we heard: “I like Bill Smith but he can’t win. So I’m voting for Harry Stone.” All the media has to do is convince people that Bill Smith can’t win, and that will influence enough people to withdraw their vote and make the prediction a self-fulfilling prophecy. The primary purpose of a vote is, not to choose a winner, but to express a choice. It is to create a public record of how many people support the policies and principles of a particular candidate so that, even if he does not win, the winner and the community will be aware of how much support the losing candidate has. It is the ultimate public-opinion poll. We do not want a winner-take-all type of system where those who are considered to have the best chance of winning receive an overwhelming but misleading vote of support. A tyrant who receives 51% of the vote will be more restrained than one who has 80%. The good man who receives 49% of the vote, even though not a winner, becomes a rallying point for those of like mind. He becomes a much more serious contender in the next election than if he receives only 20% of the vote. There is no point in voting for a candidate unless it is a true reflection of our choice. Representative government is serious business, and treating it as a football pool is succumbing to the politics of stupidity."

OptionsTrader
03-13-2008, 09:29 PM
For people not familiar with G. Edward Griffin:

http://video.google.com/url?docid=6015291679758430958&esrc=sr1&ev=v&len=5017&q=an%2Bidea%2Bwhose%2Btime%2Bhas%2Bcome&srcurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideoplay%3 Fdocid%3D6015291679758430958&vidurl=%2Fvideoplay%3Fdocid%3D6015291679758430958% 26q%3Dan%2Bidea%2Bwhose%2Btime%2Bhas%2Bcome%26tota l%3D301%26start%3D0%26num%3D10%26so%3D0%26type%3Ds earch%26plindex%3D0&usg=AL29H21t6g94sDZuZwoZlVPgCRELefsRDg

Bro.Butch
03-13-2008, 09:55 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw6zhIiGCvg
Ed Griffin @ Ron Paul Rally in Mountain View, CA