Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

DinahMoeHum

(23,559 posts)

4. The voting tallies do not count who you vote against. . .

Reply to Siwsan (Original post)

Tue Jan 31, 2012, 09:46 PM

Jan 2012

. . .only who you vote for.

This is why third parties right now are dangerous; they dilute the vote and all too often you end up with somebody you don't want.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So, more people voted against Willard than for him, and yet he's a winner [View all] Siwsan Jan 2012 OP

That's only true in majority voting. Plurality voting is a different matter. Selatius Jan 2012 #1

I'm just being snarkey Siwsan Jan 2012 #2

It's actually pretty common in many states. Palin won with just 48.3%. Selatius Jan 2012 #3

The voting tallies do not count who you vote against. . . DinahMoeHum Jan 2012 #4

Clinton won his 1st term with only a plurality SaintPete Jan 2012 #5