snopes.com

snopes.com (http://message.snopes.com/index.php)
-   SLC (http://message.snopes.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   I've just been blamed for Trump's victory (http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=94966)

DawnStorm 09 November 2016 01:18 PM

I've just been blamed for Trump's victory
 
I'm sitting at work, data entering away when I hear one of the IT guys M speaking (on the speaker phone) with one of the supervisors, T. Of course the conversation turns to the election results. Now I was not purposely eavesdropping, but it seems that I and people like me--those who either voted third party or not at all--are to blame/responsible for Trump's victory. WTF?! Yeah, one independent vote in the state of Maryland--Maryland!--has changed the world.:rolleyes: If you look at the map, Maryland went for Hillary. Shocker I know. Yes, I think I've been personally attacked for the crime of thinking for myself, and yes I'm hurt and angry. Question: should I call this person out or not? Co-Worker D advises against it, and that's what my gut says as well. If M says anything to me, I'm tempted to tell him what I heard and how sad it is that he cannot respect me as the individual I am. It doesn't mean he has to agree with me, but I think that g-we can disagree without being disagreeable. Am I over-reacting?
I'm not thrilled about the election, but IMO life will go on--just as it would have if Clinton had won. So...should I be tarred and feathered?

Sue 09 November 2016 01:21 PM

I do blame you and people like you for Trump's victory. Is it fair? Maybe not but every vote that did not go to Clinton was a vote for Trump IMO.

GenYus234 09 November 2016 01:40 PM

The only people I blame for Trump's victory are those who voted for him and those who supported him in some way. I don't think anyone should be required to vote "not as bad as someone else and more likely to win than the one I support". If for no other reason than every vote for a third party candidate helps third parties remain on ballots and may push that party to becoming a more viable candidate. If you truly believe that elections will always come down to contests between a giant enema and a turd sandwich, then the only way to fix it is to support the pile of lawn clippings party.

On your specific question, don't confront.

Sue 09 November 2016 01:42 PM

In any other election I might agree with that, this time around I really don't. The idea that this was a choice between two equally bad candidates was always troubling - it wasn't. But enough people bought into that crap to ensure that Trump won. Horrifying.

Darth Credence 09 November 2016 01:52 PM

As far as I'm concerned, you absolutely have some responsibility for this. Did you vote for him? No. Did your vote swing the election in any way? No. But you voted for a third party candidate, knowing full well that they had no possibility of winning, and knowing who was actually running.

GenYus234 09 November 2016 02:05 PM

You don't have to see both main party candidates as equally bad in order to not want to vote for either of them. You can have a candidate you loathe, one you dislike, and one you like.

If DawnStorm and every other third party voter in Maryland had voted for Hillary, the results of the election would be exactly the same. Leaving aside the "you must vote against your conscience" issue, her vote could not have made Hillary win no matter what. So where's the blame come from?

BoKu 09 November 2016 02:11 PM

Since you're asking, yup, I do feel you're partly to blame.

Darth Credence 09 November 2016 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenYus234 (Post 1933729)
You don't have to see both main party candidates as equally bad in order to not want to vote for either of them. You can have a candidate you loathe, one you dislike, and one you like.

If DawnStorm and every other third party voter in Maryland had voted for Hillary, the results of the election would be exactly the same. Leaving aside the "you must vote against your conscience" issue, her vote could not have made Hillary win no matter what. So where's the blame come from?

The blame comes from the fact that this should have been a rout, and everyone in America who does not want to follow the alt-right down the path of fascism should have understood that and stood up against it. Voting for someone else says, to me, that you think your own conscience is more important than the effect that a Trump presidency will have on people who will bear the brunt of it, and the US' standing in the world. The standing part would be improved by every additional vote for Clinton.

It sucks for DS and others like her, but they should have thought about that before voting. DS knows, deep down, that she is not blameless here - otherwise she wouldn't be asking the question.

Richard W 09 November 2016 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue (Post 1933724)
I do blame you and people like you for Trump's victory. Is it fair? Maybe not but every vote that did not go to Clinton was a vote for Trump IMO.

Me too - not in Maryland directly perhaps (maybe you knew your state was safe for Clinton and were deliberately trying not to affect the outcome), but the number of posts on Facebook I saw from people intending to vote for third-parties is a big part of the reason I am less surprised than some by Trump's victory. I've mentioned it as a reason I thought it was going to be a lot closer than people thought each time the conversation has come up in the UK; people couldn't understand how Trump could be so popular, but I said I thought he had a fair chance of winning despite my not seeing posts from a single Trump supporter - people were underestimating how divided those who would usually have voted against him were.

If you really do think that a Trump victory is a terrible thing, then you should have voted tactically since splitting the vote was a clear possibility. If it's something you can live with because hey, Trump's not that bad and at least you didn't have to dirty your hands by voting for Hillary Clinton, then you tacitly support him...

At least you will all understand how divisive the Brexit vote has been, now. Not so funny when it's you, is it?

(eta) And yes, I agree it shouldn't be this way and that it's an artefact of the first-past-the-post voting system and so on, and ideally you'd be able to put your preferred candidate as "1" and your less preferred as "2" and leave off Trump altogether, and everybody gets to express their real preferences without tacitly voting for somebody they seriously oppose, but since you know how your voting system works you should have seen that as a possibility.

GenYus234 09 November 2016 02:24 PM

Sorry DawnStorm, the lynch mob has spoken.

Sylvanz 09 November 2016 02:57 PM

I feel third party voters are partially responsible. I don't mean Dawn individually, but the mass of voters who did go third. I think it was abad idea. I also blame the non-voters, who thought "both are just as bad" and didn't vote at all.

Sue 09 November 2016 03:01 PM

I think that's where the real blame lies - the idea that "one is as bad as the other". What the hell? Clinton used a private email server and that's somehow on the same scale as everything that we know about Trump? One of my son's friends was over the other day and the subject of the election came up and he commented that he hated Hillary Clinton. When I asked him why he had no idea. Didn't even have any of the usual crap the republicans have been smearing her with for years now to offer as a reason. So hating someone for no particular reason was a good reason to support Trump :(.

Gibbie 09 November 2016 03:19 PM

The margin of difference in every battle ground state was equal to the voters for Johnson. Your specific vote in Maryland made no difference. She won it by a wide margin. But in Florida and Pennsylvania it was absolutely the difference. But that needs to serve as a wake up, this whole thing does. There's a disconnect with the majority of the voting public and the political system. And Trump is the result of it. Excellent article from WaPo outlining how this happened.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...mepage%2Fstory

Gutter Monkey 09 November 2016 03:38 PM

I just did a quick calculation and from what I can see if 17,000 voters in Michigan, 27,000 voters in Wisconsin and 68,000 voters in Pennsylvania had voted for Hillary instead of a third party candidate then she would have won those states which would have given her sufficient electoral college votes to win the entire election.

So yeah, third party voters in those states (as well as Arizona and Florida, where Trump also won with less than 50% of the total vote) could definitely have the finger of blame pointed at them.



As for Maryland ..... yeah the third party votes there wouldn't have changed anything.

thorny locust 09 November 2016 03:54 PM

The Maryland vote went for Clinton 61% to 35%.

That Maryland would go for Clinton was not in any significant doubt.

If you'd voted third party in Florida or Michigan, I'd have a different opinion.

And if you've been going around saying they're both equally awful, rather than that you were placing a strategic third party vote in consideration of where you live, then I think there's some fault in that.

But I would not in any case confront the co-worker unless that person comes at you directly with it. Responding to an over-heard conversation doesn't seem likely to me to end well.

crescent 09 November 2016 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnStorm (Post 1933723)
Question: should I call this person out or not? Co-Worker D advises against it, and that's what my gut says as well. If M says anything to me, I'm tempted to tell him what I heard and how sad it is that he cannot respect me as the individual I am. It doesn't mean he has to agree with me, but I think that g-we can disagree without being disagreeable. Am I over-reacting?
I'm not thrilled about the election, but IMO life will go on--just as it would have if Clinton had won. So...should I be tarred and feathered?

I don't think you should call the person out. People are shocked and surprised right now and many are reacting emotionally rather than logically. Calling them out now might only inflame the emotions. In other words, work is work and politics is politics, the two should not always mix, your co-worker should not have said what he said, but calling him out on it would be counter-productive. He maybe needed to vent. Venting can be done in ways that are not wise or tactful, but it is much more of an emotional response than a logical one. Confronting his emotional response might only make it worse.

Unless you wait a week or so. Let him cool down, then bring it up privately and tactfully. You can totally disagree without being disagreeable, but perhaps not in the heat of the moment.

On the other subject, in addition to third-party voters, some states had lower turnout than four years ago. Conservatives have always had higher turnout rates than liberals. I blame people who abstained from voting as much as I blame third-party voters, if not more. Most third-party votes went Libertarian, few of those would have voted for Clinton anyway. Lots of people who stayed home might have voted Clinton, though.

crocoduck_hunter 09 November 2016 04:16 PM

It's like Ralph Nader 16 years ago.

Lainie 09 November 2016 04:49 PM

Of course one vote didn't make the difference. But yes, every person who chose to vote for a third party instead of Hillary did, in fact, contribute to Trump's victory. That's a simple mathematical fact.

I'm sorry that's uncomfortable for you. I wish you no ill will. But I'm not going to pretend it isn't true.

ETA: Don't call him out. It wouldn't change his mind, and could only cause trouble. (Plus, he's right.)

FETA: ". . .just as if Clinton would have won." For you, probably. For me, probably. Not for everyone.

Gutter Monkey 09 November 2016 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lainie (Post 1933758)
But yes, every person who chose to vote for a third party instead of Hillary did, in fact, contribute to Trump's victory. That's a simple mathematical fact.

Actually it's not. I went through the maths in my post, the third party votes had an effect in some states but not Maryland.

Beachlife! 09 November 2016 04:59 PM

I voted for Jill Stein for a lot of reasons, but I thought Clinton had Michigan in the bag. I was mislead by polls and if I admit, it was a mistake on my part.

That said, in my state Johnson got more than 3 votes for every vote Jill Stein received. If all independents had voted for one of the mainline candidates Trump probably would have had a greater margin.

If you give me two crappy choices and I refuse to take one, you can blame me, or you can blame the system that came up with two crappy choices. Better yet, blame the 60 million people who voted for Trump.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.