If everyone voted for what they truly wanted and believed in, there would be no more political duopolies.
I agree. However, this is not the reality we live in. If you vote for a candidate that gets 2% of votes, then they will lose, and the leading candidate that represents your party will not get your vote. This gives your political opponents an advantage by your choosing.
That’s the spoiler effect created by a first past the post system. You won’t get to the first result unless you change how voting works. A good way to get there is to start local instead of what most people do which is nothing until federal elections, then whine how the system isn’t giving them good candidates.
I agree. However, this is not the reality we live in. If you vote for a candidate that gets 2% of votes, then they will lose, and the leading candidate that represents your party will not get your vote. This gives your political opponents an advantage by your choosing.
@Synthead what if 8 out of 10 of you want to vote for a third part candidate but you won’t in case they lose.
Honest voting might look like Candidate A = 2 votes, Candidate B = 6 votes, Candidate C = 13 votes
But status-quo voting gets you Candidate A =10 votes, candidat B = 11 votes, Candidate C = no votes
That’s the spoiler effect created by a first past the post system. You won’t get to the first result unless you change how voting works. A good way to get there is to start local instead of what most people do which is nothing until federal elections, then whine how the system isn’t giving them good candidates.
This is where ranked choice voting would help.