A whole swath of GOP voters appears firmly committed to not voting for Trump in November.
Donald Trump has a problem no matter what happens in New Hampshire on Tuesday night: There’s a whole swath of the Republican electorate and a good chunk of independents who appear firmly committed to not voting for him in November if he becomes the nominee.
It’s an issue that became starkly apparent in polling ahead of the Iowa caucuses, when an NBC News/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll of voters in that state found that fully 43 percent of Nikki Haley supporters said they would back President Joe Biden over Trump. And it’s a dynamic that has been on vivid display as the campaign shifted this week to New Hampshire.
“I can’t vote for Trump. He’s a crook. He’s too corrupt,” said Scott Simeone, 64, an independent voter from Amherst, who backed Trump in 2016 and 2020. “I voted for him, and I didn’t realize he’s as corrupt as he is.”
Okay maybe I can help spell it out for you.
Lets say Timmy, Ryan, and Bobby are running for class president. Timmy wants to increase recess time by half an hour, but supports an increase in pop-quizes. Ryan wants to lynch the teachers and burn the school down. Bobby is a pigeon.
Lets say there are 101 students to vote, where the person with the most votes wins.
Lets say there are 40 children who are all about lynching teachers and burning down the school. If the campaign were only Ryan v Timmy, Ryan wouldn’t have enough support to win.
Lets now say there are 25 children that are not “actively” pro-teacher-lynching, but are so absolutely pissed about the idea of more homework, that they refuse to vote for Timmy. Therefore, they all decide to vote for Bobby.
Our final count becomes:
Timmy: 36 Ryan: 40 Bobby: 25
Ryan has now won the election and the 61 children who did not vote for Ryan are now forced to watch him and his followers destroy the school.
It becomes more complicated with the electoral college involved, but the core concept remains: in any democratic zero-sum system, removing votes for one party passively enables another.
That is a good humorous example of a first past the post voting system and it flaws. I like the bit where Bobby is a pigeon.
No, actually not in any democratic system. In our current first past the post voting system, it is applicable (minus the electoral college). But (ranked choice voting)RCV or (Score then Automatic Runoff)STAR based systems the outcome would likely be different in some cases. That scenario also ignore the most common scenario where people simply don’t vote. In your scenario, everyone is required to vote. In real life, of the 25 bobby votes some would sit out, some would vote third party and some would vote for a ‘major’ candidate like Biden or Trump.
Okay, you’re right about ranked choice changing the math of the situation. That was an oversight on my part.
The 25 Bobby votes were meant to be just anybody who didn’t vote for a ‘major’ candidate (Timmy and Ryan were supposed to be Biden and Trump, respectively), so sorry if I wasn’t clear. The actual votes themselves, whether they sat out the vote or voted 3rd party (Bobby), doesn’t change the math, so I just left that possibility out.