The Daily Texan, student newspaper for the University of Texas, carries this opinion piece advocating that no one ever vote for an independent candidate. The piece says that no independent has ever won an election in Texas. Actually, an independent was elected to the Texas legislature in a special election on August 2, 2016. She was Laura Thompson.
Also, another independent, Homer LaKirby Lenoard, was elected to the Texas legislature as an independent in 1936.
The piece says that a vote for an independent or third party never has any political effect. This is far from the truth. Votes for minor party or independent candidates are sometimes more powerful than votes for major party nominees. The Prohibition Party cost the Republicans the presidency in both 1884 and 1916. Those votes for Prohibitionists were very powerful. This outcome motivated the Republicans in Congress to pass the Prohibition Amendment in Congress in 1917. The amendment had been sitting in Congress since 1875 and had never before made any headway. But Republicans passed it, hoping that it would end any threat from future Prohibition Party campaigns. They still didn’t expect the states to ratify the amendment, but in 1919 it was ratified.
It did succeed in killing the Prohibition Party.
I always wonder in regards to the Prohibition Party in the era where women did not have suffrage, because if women’s suffrage existed, they were more pro-temperance/prohibition than men were. If women’s suffrage had come earlier, we would’ve probably had prohibition sooner when you double the size of the electorate.
The article is even worse than being wrong; its headline is outright election misinformation, since it is worded in a way as to suggest that votes for third party candidates aren’t counted.
I’m rather hoping someone on their editorial board sees the FB comments I left on their page in reply to another election article, and they either reword the headline at the very least, or retract it entirely. I even linked to your post here, so they can see just how factually incorrect the opinion piece they published really is. It’s bad enough when other media prints/broadcasts smears and outright misinformation about third parties, but it’s even worse when a university newspaper does it because it gives such misinformation an undeserved academic validity and influences young voters who may still be forming their opinion about politics and the world.
“it is worded in a way as to suggest that votes for third party candidates aren’t counted.”
@Joshua H. Unfortunately some people think that’s true. Some people think that only two parties can get seats, and that the two parties that get the most votes actually win the seats. Even if that meant skipping over the first place vote getter to give the seat to the highest polling candidate of which ever of the two parties got the most votes on average nationally.
Of course we know that’s not the case, but a lot of people are grossly uneducated on our elections.
A lot of people also think that they have to vote for the party that they are registered in during the general election. Apparently people don’t realize everyone is an independent during the general election and party affiliation is irrelevant.
How about NEVER vote for commies/fascists aka Donkeys/Elephants aka STATISTS L/R versions ???
Would they prefer that people not vote at all?
He also misuses the phrase ‘third party system’, which is very different than a ‘three party system’. Considering we are currently in the sixth, or even the seventh party system, saying people want a third party system is an egregious semantic error.
HOW MUCH CRIME RESULTING FROM 18 AMDT 1919-1933 ???
ESP BY CORRUPT LEGIS / EXECS / JUDICS IN GOVTS — FEDS / STATES / LOCALS — THREATS AND BRIBES.
NOW DRUGS, ETC. — MORE THREATS AND BRIBES.
The artical does make good points tho.