that accomplishes nothing but improving the odds of your last choice. It’s not like your vote is an endorsement… everyone knows about strategic voting, so, the fact that you’re voting strategically makes it obvious that you don’t support that person just because you voted for them.
I doesn’t improve either candidate’s chances at all.
Voting for a candidate doesn’t improve a candidates odds?
Not voting for the candidate when you could’ve doesn’t improve the opponents odds?
Actually mathematically false. You’re saying 1+1=4 because if it doesn’t your feefees will be hurt.
And voting is an endorsement, no matter how much you pretend otherwise.
It’s not pretend, it literally isn’t in any way shape or form, because people are aware of strategic voting, and it is done anonymously… You can vote for a candidate because you denounce another candidate, and not like the other candidate at all.
Voting is in no way shape or form an endorsement of anything, it’s just a statement of your preference… and your preference is kamala over trump, so you should make that preference clear. You absolutely do not have to endorse a candidate to vote for them, you just have to hate another candidate and vote strategically.
Save this nonsense for when FPTP is abolished, then it’ll actually be of value, for now, you might as well not even show up to the polling place, you’re just wasting everyones time. Has a protest vote ever accomplished anything? has a third party ever accomplished anything? You know the answers to these, you’re just being stubborn because your ego is wrapped up in this.
You’re obviously a teenager whose brain has not fully developed. If you’re an adult, god help us.
Not voting for the candidate when you could’ve doesn’t improve the opponents odds?
No, it doesn’t. Not voting for a candidate neither increases nor decreases their chances. Voting for a candidate is what increases their chances, voting for their opponent is what decreases them.
Actually mathematically false. You’re saying 1+1=4 because if it doesn’t your feefees will be hurt.
Nope, it’s actually mathematically false, you’re the one twisting numbers around. Remove me from existence and Trump and Kamala’s chances will be the same, so I’m not increasing or decreasing either’s chances.
Voting is in no way shape or form an endorsement of anything
Definitionally, endorsing a candidate is when you say, “This candidate is the best choice and I intend to vote for them.” It doesn’t mean, “I agree with everything this candidate says or does.” If you vote for a candidate, tell people you vote for them, and encourage others to vote for them, that is definitionally an endorsement.
You’re obviously a teenager whose brain has not fully developed. If you’re an adult, god help us.
I’m in my 30’s. You’re just wrong about everything you said.
No, it doesn’t. Not voting for a candidate neither increases nor decreases their chances. Voting for a candidate is what increases their chances, voting for their opponent is what decreases them.
Yes, and this is so simple, if you vote for a candidate that you prefer, it will increase their chances, if you choose not to, you will decrease their chances. I am baffled that you are confused by this, you must be joking.
Nope, it’s actually mathematically false, you’re the one twisting numbers around. Remove me from existence and Trump and Kamala’s chances will be the same, so I’m not increasing or decreasing either’s chances.
Yes, but you prefer kamala, and could’ve raised kamalas chances, by choosing not to do that, you are actually raising trumps chances. Again, it is baffling that you do not understand that not voting is a possible choice here, and that it would reduce the chance of your preferred candidate to not vote for them.
Definitionally, endorsing a candidate is when you say, “This candidate is the best choice and I intend to vote for them.” It doesn’t mean, “I agree with everything this candidate says or does.” If you vote for a candidate, tell people you vote for them, and encourage others to vote for them, that is definitionally an endorsement.
You don’t have to do any of that, but you should because you prefer them! None of those things are the definition of voting for them. You’ll notice, i can vote for a candidate completely anonymously, say I voted for a different candidate, and NOBODY WOULD EVER KNOW!
ELECTIONS ARE ANONYMOUS, you raising a number by 1 and expressing the preference you yourself admit to, is not an endorsement, even by your own definition.
I’m in my 30’s. You’re just wrong about everything you said.
Then god help us. I wasn’t wrong about anything, except perhaps that, which only makes your case sadder, however teenagers are very prone to lying about being exactly 30. I was generously assuming your absolute stupidity was a function of your youth, by debunking that, you look even dumber.
No, the same which is the same for the candidate you prefer. The chances only change if you vote for them or for their opponent. It is objectively, mathematically false to say that the chances change when you do nothing, it’s not even a coherent statement, doing nothing by definition changes nothing.
that accomplishes nothing but improving the odds of your last choice. It’s not like your vote is an endorsement… everyone knows about strategic voting, so, the fact that you’re voting strategically makes it obvious that you don’t support that person just because you voted for them.
I doesn’t improve either candidate’s chances at all. And voting is an endorsement, no matter how much you pretend otherwise.
Voting for a candidate doesn’t improve a candidates odds?
Not voting for the candidate when you could’ve doesn’t improve the opponents odds?
Actually mathematically false. You’re saying 1+1=4 because if it doesn’t your feefees will be hurt.
It’s not pretend, it literally isn’t in any way shape or form, because people are aware of strategic voting, and it is done anonymously… You can vote for a candidate because you denounce another candidate, and not like the other candidate at all.
Voting is in no way shape or form an endorsement of anything, it’s just a statement of your preference… and your preference is kamala over trump, so you should make that preference clear. You absolutely do not have to endorse a candidate to vote for them, you just have to hate another candidate and vote strategically.
Save this nonsense for when FPTP is abolished, then it’ll actually be of value, for now, you might as well not even show up to the polling place, you’re just wasting everyones time. Has a protest vote ever accomplished anything? has a third party ever accomplished anything? You know the answers to these, you’re just being stubborn because your ego is wrapped up in this.
You’re obviously a teenager whose brain has not fully developed. If you’re an adult, god help us.
No, it doesn’t. Not voting for a candidate neither increases nor decreases their chances. Voting for a candidate is what increases their chances, voting for their opponent is what decreases them.
Nope, it’s actually mathematically false, you’re the one twisting numbers around. Remove me from existence and Trump and Kamala’s chances will be the same, so I’m not increasing or decreasing either’s chances.
Definitionally, endorsing a candidate is when you say, “This candidate is the best choice and I intend to vote for them.” It doesn’t mean, “I agree with everything this candidate says or does.” If you vote for a candidate, tell people you vote for them, and encourage others to vote for them, that is definitionally an endorsement.
I’m in my 30’s. You’re just wrong about everything you said.
Yes, and this is so simple, if you vote for a candidate that you prefer, it will increase their chances, if you choose not to, you will decrease their chances. I am baffled that you are confused by this, you must be joking.
Yes, but you prefer kamala, and could’ve raised kamalas chances, by choosing not to do that, you are actually raising trumps chances. Again, it is baffling that you do not understand that not voting is a possible choice here, and that it would reduce the chance of your preferred candidate to not vote for them.
You don’t have to do any of that, but you should because you prefer them! None of those things are the definition of voting for them. You’ll notice, i can vote for a candidate completely anonymously, say I voted for a different candidate, and NOBODY WOULD EVER KNOW!
ELECTIONS ARE ANONYMOUS, you raising a number by 1 and expressing the preference you yourself admit to, is not an endorsement, even by your own definition.
Then god help us. I wasn’t wrong about anything, except perhaps that, which only makes your case sadder, however teenagers are very prone to lying about being exactly 30. I was generously assuming your absolute stupidity was a function of your youth, by debunking that, you look even dumber.
False. If you chose not to, the chances remain the same.
Yes, the same, which is WORSE for the candidate you prefer.
No, the same which is the same for the candidate you prefer. The chances only change if you vote for them or for their opponent. It is objectively, mathematically false to say that the chances change when you do nothing, it’s not even a coherent statement, doing nothing by definition changes nothing.
and the same is a lower chance for the candidate you prefer than if you had voted for them.
How are you confused by this???
if you vote for kamala
+1 chance for kamala
if you do not vote
+0 chance for kamala
If trump is an option, and you didn’t increase the chance for kamala, you have increased the chance for trump