Lawrence O’Donnell has a weekly appearance on MSNBC, called “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell.” He has been a writer for “The West Wing” TV show, an actor, and a political commentator. Here he publicizes the October 23 debate between four minor party presidential candidates; criticizes the major party candidates for failing to discuss indefinite detention and drug laws; illustrates that the minor party candidates did debate these issues; and finally, urges voters in non-swing states to consider voting for the minor party presidential candidate who best represents that voter’s views. But he suggests voting for one of the two major party candidates if the voters lives in a swing state. The segment is 8 minutes long.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
Logical as far as it goes. However, if enough people followed that advice, then it would eventually change the outcome in that state. The answer, of course, is to abolish the Electoral College and replace it with national IRV where every person’s vote matters all the time.
Even in the swing states the case cannot be made that there is any significant chance that a single popular vote would cause a different slate of electors to be chosen. Indeed the chances that assigned lawyers would move into the situation and have canvassers invalidate or reconsider previously adjudicated provisional votes is far greater that a natural plurality of one vote.
That said, all voters everywhere should vote for candidacies they most prefer.
O’Donnell marks his ballot on his show live with former CA governor Gray Davis and did not follow his own advice to voters in non-swing states which was to feel free to select a minor party candidate with the logic that all votes in such states are wasted votes. O’Donnell in fact lamented that he’s never lived in a swing state and has often voted for non-major party candidates for president. He mentioned that he voted for a winning presidential candidate only once. So what did he do in front of the cameras? He votes for the major party incumbent for president.
There’s an integrity issue here I think.
I live in Massachusetts, and have always followed that advice. Except in rare cases of an overwhelming Republican landslide (and sometimes not even then), Massachusetts will vote Democratic for President. I haven’t ever felt the need to vote for a major party candidate for President as long as I have voted here.
As for IRV, I don’t think I helps third party candidates at all. Like top-two primaries, it will reinforce the major parties and increase pressure to “not waste your vote.”
The best reform of the Presidential election would be (IMHO) to get rid of the Senatorial electors, to minimize a candidate winning the popular vote and loosing the electoral vote, and having electors chosen by proportional vote within states, to increase the effect of third party votes.
There are 2 possibilites for a third party to start gaining traction in Presidential elections.
1) Third parties get together and decide to create a fusion electoral slate, with Presidential electors from these parties, thus fighting the Republicans and Democrats equally.
2) Third parties decide that they talk to Republicans and Democrats in order to get some Presidential electors on their slate; Libertarians get electors on the GOP and Democratic tickets, Constitutionalists get electors on the GOP ticket and Greens get electors on the Democratic ticket.