"Voting for a third party accomplishes one thing. It takes votes away from one of the other major-party candidates. Given that the status quo favors the Republican candidate – think the Electoral College – voting for a third party is probably going to take votes away from Joe Biden. Whatever you think of him, he’s better than the alternative. (The alternative, by the way, likes making jokes about being a dictator.)
Actually, it accomplishes another thing. It enriches presidential candidates for third parties that do not work in cooperation with one of the major parties. (It’s called “fusion voting.”) For instance, the Green Party — these people know they can’t win. They know the status quo prevents them from winning. They don’t say that, though. In the space between what they know and what their supporters don’t know is a scam. In the absence of systemic change, third parties that don’t cooperate with one of the major parties are inherently exploitative."
Okay?
Like say, i accuse Harris of saying she’ll help Gaza but wont do anything once elected. I can give you a reason that it would be in her interests not to, she and her party receives Israeli backed campaign funding.
But you dont have any such reason for why Stein wouldnt.
I don’t actually remember Harris saying she would help Gaza. She was very firm on her support of Israel. I’m not saying she’s happy about how they are handling things, but she’s not going to cut off weapons and money.
No matter what reason I give you, you’ll argue it. That’s how Lemmy works. You can find it if you try. Additionally her foreign policy that supports Assad, Russia, and Iran raise a lot of questions about her ability to keep US interests above her own.
So you dont have a single reason then
I do. But discussing those with you would be less rewarding than not discussing them with you. Your mind is made up, just like mine.