cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/44904749
I heard about this in the UK elections recently, and someone recommended it to me recently for the US elections, because I said I empathize with the people who are voting against Kamala because of the genocide, despite being a Kamala supporter myself (you’ve probably seen me around arguing as such lol).
Basically, it’s a system where people in safe states, like me, agree to trade votes with someone in a swing state. So the safe state person would vote with the heart of the person in the swing state, so they can kind of vote their heart and mind at the same time.
Is this a thing we could set up? Would it be legal to make a community for that, or would it rub against laws about affecting votes or something? There was even a whole site for the UK, but not sure if it would work in the US.
You must log in or register to comment.
For those wondering, yes, it’s legal:
https://www.thewrap.com/yes-its-perfectly-legal-to-swap-votes/
Yay! Thanks for the source, I’ve been wondering about that myself.
Nice! That links to this Vox article, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/3/13478042/third-party-clinton-vote-trading
That article has this brilliant gem in it,
A Stein voter in Ohio who decides to trade her vote, for instance, will get matched with two Clinton supporters in safe states — both of whom will agree to vote for Stein in return for her one Ohio Clinton vote.
So a swing state voter doesn’t even have to accept reduced voting power in this bargain. Instead, the swing state voter pairs with a pair of Dem voters in safe states, so their preferred third party candidate gets more votes overall than if they hadn’t swapped. This is quite the deal sweetener.
Oh, and to help convince the swing voter,
"But I also want my party to get one vote closer to the 5 percent popular vote to try to help them get government funding for the next election from the presidential election fund.”
Since funding is based on popular vote (I guess nationwide popular vote) it doesn’t matter on swing vs safe state, one vote counts as one no matter where from.
So multiple people voting in safe states for the 3rd party gets them closer to funding than if the swing state voter voted for the 3rd party. So exchanging multiple safe state votes for a single swing state vote could really help that 3rd party out…
Wow… I read the headline and clicked through to see how illegal it was. I did not expect this. This is freaking brilliant.
This election is going to be so weird that I’m not sure the concept of “safe states” applies.
A county clerk could decide not to certify, and your safe state’s total could be excluding a whole urban area so all of a sudden it’s a swing state until after a court battle. The Republican state legislature could just decide to throw the whole thing out. Mike Johnson could decide he doesn’t like the results and he’s going to call the election for Trump. It could be anything.
Personally, I’m thinking a lot more in terms of “What if they steal the election, what am I personally going to do about it,” and not in terms of “Hey how can I find a stranger on the internet and make a demonstrative gesture.” If you want to protest against the war in Gaza or the US’s support for it, that sounds absolutely great. But anything other than Trump losing this election is going to be a true catastrophe for the Palestinians, and the chance that your non-vote for Harris in a “safe” state is going to be interpreted by the establishment as a protest against their Gaza policy and produce any good effect is basically 0, I think. Just go to a protest, or donate or volunteer for a pro-Palestinian congressperson, or something along those lines, would be my thinking on it.
The possibility of stealing an election is a separate problem. We could also think about what to do if they steal the election simultaneously, but to me, that doesn’t really matter if she doesn’t win anyway. There’s also a lot less we can do about that unless you live in that swing state or district and can sign up to be a poll worker, or are a lawyer, so there doesn’t seem to be too much of a point in concerning myself about that.
Just curious, what are you going to do about that anyway? I’ve thought about that, too, but the only thing I could think of would be to get a gun to prep for violence lol.
That doesn’t help at all if Harris doesn’t get elected because she’s alienated parts of the country into not voting for her. This is an idea to get people to vote for her. You could complain about it, or try to bully them into voting for her, or downplay a genocide, but we already proved that doesn’t work.
I also think you misunderstand. This isn’t so much about me, I live in one of the bluest states in the country, so much as me worried about her declining poll numbers in swing states and an idea to try to recover some. I know it’s been mostly Republican polls recently, but I still see it worrying some friends in real life, so this is my attempt at a solution.
Swing states are definitely still a thing in this election and they will remain important. They may change election to election, but they’re still always there because of the electoral college. There’s a reason you still see them focusing on the same states as always this election.
When did Harris alienate anybody? Netanyahu is engaged in a genocide. Several generations of American leaders have enabled Israel to do all sorts of similar things, since the days when Kamala Harris was a literal child. Biden decided to not break with Netanyahu. I don’t see Harris’s fingerprints anywhere on Gaza.
I’m not trying to give her a free pass for anything she’s said, or if she does continue enabling the slaughter once she’s in office, which to all indications, she might well do. By all means, protest against her Gaza policy, give her and any other politicians a hard time. Do whatever. God knows the Palestinians need it. I’m just saying that voting in the election in any way that risks Trump getting into office is about the most stupid and backwards way imaginable to try to influence her to have a better Gaza policy. It is disciplining your child by shooting them with a handgun, all of a sudden, and then saying they should have known better. It is an irreversible and horrifying solution which doesn’t do anything to improve the problem it is attempting to improve.
I know it’s been mostly Republican polls recently, but I still see it worrying some friends in real life, so this is my attempt at a solution.
Everyone can do what they want to do, including your friends, and including you. I’m just saying that in my opinion, your friends are making a grave mistake, and explaining why, and I don’t really agree with feeding into their “vote with the heart” tactics.
If someone gets in a car accident with spinal damage, and his mom runs over and grabs his and carries him and tries to look after him, he still might get paralyzed because she shouldn’t have moved him until the ambulance got there. She’s acting with her heart. It’s understandable. It’s a human thing. But she might cause horrifying damage. Your friends are doing the same.
We’re not just not breaking with them. We’re arming the genocide and putting boots on the ground to protect them from anyone trying to defend themselves from Israel. We’ve given nearly $20 billion dollars to Israel. She’s also the Vice-President and has tried to associate herself with everything the current administration is doing. When given the chance to put on a Palestine-American speaker at the DNC, they didn’t allow it, but did allow Israeli-American speakers. Then she proclaimed they had the most lethal army in the world and would always defend Israel. She has said she wouldn’t do anything different from what Biden is doing. She said Iran is the number one enemy, who is trying to stop Israel and defend themselves from them, instead of let’s say, Russia. She said she supports a ceasefire, but also said an arms embargo was off the table, which puts her and Biden to the right of Reagan, and is basically the only things Arab-Americans and groups like Jewish Voices for Peace are asking for, as Netanyahu will not do a ceasefire unless forced to by something like an embargo. Those are the kinds of people that I mean she’s alienated.
Ignoring these voices like Democrats are doing doesn’t mean they don’t exist. You have to put yourself in the mindset of someone who’s family member was just burned alive in a hospital Israel bombed by a weapon sold to them by Biden with the new candidate not saying they’re changing tact at all. If someone shot your child, then told you have to vote for them because the other guy would’ve been shot your child twice, you’re not going to give them your endorsement. You’re going to say fuck you for trying to make me support the genocide of my own family, neither of you are helping me, screw it, if you want my vote you know how to get it. Hell, you might try to kill them. These are humans we’re talking about here, giving, feeling beings, not robots. I’m afraid bullying, downplaying genocide, and trying to say Trump is worse isn’t working, and the razor thing margins show it’s not.
A vote swapping thread, site, or community isn’t much, but idk, it’s something.
And once again, my friends aren’t voting third party, hell they’re all Harris stans who care less about the genocide than I do, but I’m just saying they’re worried about losing swing states because they’re all politics-heads who watch the polls and saw her leads narrowing, and I thought of this idea in a discussion with them. Basically create some sort of vote swapping community online. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of support. Maybe people would rather just give up, or argue with people online then come together to find a compromise 😩
Like I said, if you want to give Kamala Harris a hard time for not breaking with:
We’re arming the genocide and putting boots on the ground to protect them from anyone trying to defend themselves from Israel.
Or:
We’ve given nearly $20 billion dollars to Israel.
When her current sin is basically:
She’s also the Vice-President
… you have my blessing for it. Putting pressure on her to break away from the DNC, Biden, every Republican, and everyone else in Washington that’s in love with the idea of killing Palestinians sounds like a good idea. I’m just saying that singling her out as the villain, and not voting for her in the election as the solution to that villainy, I don’t think it going to be the success that you would expect it to be.
Whoops might have accidentally deleted the post I was trying to crosspost instead of the duplicate post I made earlier 🤦
Basically, the idea is, if someone would want to vote for a third party because they don’t like a candidate’s pro-genocide policies or fracking or something, but they feel uncomfortable because they also live in a swing state and don’t want their least favorite candidate to win the election (probably Trump), they make an agreement with someone who lives in a safe state, who will vote for the third party that person wants instead.
Seems simple enough to set up and might assuage some people’s conscience instead of risking them voting for a third party, while still giving that party increased numbers this election. It also shows displeasure in the two party duopoly without risking the election itself for a candidate the person doesn’t want.
Would people be interested in a community or thread set up for this here on Lemmy and/or Reddit?
I’m intrigued.
I don’t quite get what the swing state voter gets out of it though - or why they’d give up their stronger voting power (see https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/19/15831640/supreme-court-gerrymandering-wisconsin for an explanation) for the lesser power of the person in the safe state.
The issue is that by voting their conscience for a third party, they might get a candidate they hate, because of the way the electoral college works every swing vote is super important, the margins can get so small. It’s risky. So they ensure the one they like least in the party duopoly doesn’t get elected, while still ensuring a third party they like can get a boost.
Or course if they really don’t care who gets elected between Trump and Kamala, then it doesn’t matter. But a lot of third party voters would still have some preference between those two, and they are aware there’s no chance their candidate is getting elected. It’s more of a protest number to use elevated numbers to show displeasure, which I feel can be done nationally and not just in individual states. Of course, the protest vote is more powerful if the closer candidate actually loses a swing state because they didn’t acquiese to the protest’s demands, but then you risk getting the other candidate you really didn’t want most, so this seems like a safer alternative/compromise.
Ah, I think get it now.
So swing state voter who really wants to vote for say Stein due to her policy on Gaza but wants Harris to win in case Stein loses, can swap with a safe state voter who’s first preference is voting for Harris.
Then the safe state voter votes Stein (perhaps as a write-in vote if Stein’s not on the ballot there), and the swing state voter votes Harris.
The safe state voter feels good because they caused one vote for Harris that Harris might not have gotten otherwise, especially in a swing state. The swing state voter feels good because they caused one vote for Stein but also didn’t risk swinging the election to the GOP by costing Harris a valuable swing state.
This is brilliant! I wish I had heard about this earlier, as I already voted, but I’d love to do something like this next time around.
Imagine, if every voter in Michigan and Wisconsin who was voting for Stein swapped with a Dem voter in California. Maybe a lot of these folks wouldn’t care between the two (GOP vs Dem) but probably there’s a significant amount here who would still rank Harris above the GOP choice. So this prevents a protest vote from helping the candidate that they’d like the least.
Right?! At last, someone gets it! Lol and you explained it even better.
Although you bring up a good point that early voting has started. Probably too late for me to start looking into something like this now 😩
Hey, it’s not too late yet. I may not be able to take part in this election anymore but if you haven’t voted yet, you still can.
I imagine that there are tons of third party voters out there, who haven’t voted early yet because they’re feeling conflicted between voting their conscience and preventing armageddon. I’m sure you’ll be able to find folks to pair up with and exchange if you go for it!
