voting strategically

[cellio]

I've been thinking about this November's election, and the presumption that PA is a swing state and That Matters, and voting for the lesser plausible evil versus voting one's conscience. I started to write about this in comments in someone else's journal (where it was arguably off-topic), so I figured I should bring it here.

Most of the time we vote in elections to address that particular election -- a tactical move (and an important one), in the grand scheme of things. I'm coming to the conclusion that no third party can ever advance so long as everyone does that, so I'm strongly leaning toward making a strategic vote this year, recognizing that the payoff will be delayed if present at all.

Obama or McCain is going to win this election; there is no doubt about that. Thus, many would say, voting for anyone else is throwing away my vote. It's not -- my vote, if accompanied by enough others, could help break the lock the Democrats and Republicans have on the election system. Our voting system is broken; it's set up to favor the two major parties, so it's not a level playing field. There are two ways to attack that -- change the rules (which does not benefit those in power, so it's not going to happen, and yes I've written to my representatives in Congress anyway), or get enough votes to appear on the radar. Both are, of course, highly unlikely, but if everyone says "it won't happen so I won't try" then it certainly won't happen. I'm not ready to give in to self-fulfilling prophecies.

One vote for Obama or McCain does not matter for that candidate -- not even in a swing state, I don't think. (Has PA's stake in any election been decided by as few as 10,000 votes?) One vote for someone else also does not matter for that candidate -- he can't win. But it does matter, a tiny little bit, for his party, and maybe for other parties in general. Enough votes can mean ballot access next time. Enough votes can mean someone else showing up in election returns, which can lead to people asking "who the heck are those guys who got 2%?", which can help in other future races. Enough votes could mean media coverage (with the same result). Or it might not, but it certainly won't if the votes aren't there.

Now granted, minor parties should stop trying for the big races and work up from smaller ones. That would be the right long-term approach that might bear fruit in my (hypothetical) grandkids' generation. But if the only tools available to me (given that I'm not willing to run a campaign) are major elections, I'll work with those as opposed to working with none at all.

I care about this, but let's be frank: demonstrably, I do not feel strongly enough about this to dedicate significant resources to it; I am not a community organizer, a lobbyist, or a campaigner. I'm just one person -- who leans toward a minor party -- with one vote, and I want to use it judiciously. I'm the moral equivalent of the folks who donate $10 to a campaign -- definitely in "every little bit helps but this bit doesn't help a lot" territory.

Four years ago I voted for the lesser evil because I perceived a real national risk should the greater evil win. Doing my part there didn't make a difference, and I find Hillel's words running through my brain: if not now, when? When will it ever be "safe enough" to vote for a minor-party candidate for president? It's real easy to fall into the trap of believing that next time will be different and "just this once" I should do the expedient thing, only to have "next time" never come. Is the tactical situation now so important that I should sacrifice a strategic vote for it?

So I'm leaning toward voting for the long term, but I'm open to arguments otherwise. (See also, if you like, the discussion from four years ago.)

Comments

[thecommanderdia.livejournal.com]

From the wiki...

Bahá'í elections use what is described as a three-stage councilor-republican system to determine electors. Who the electors are and who the eligible members are depends on the scope of the election. At all levels, only residents within the jurisdiction of the body being elected are eligible for membership. In general, adult Bahá'ís in good standing resident in the jurisdiction are both the electorate (either directly or through delegation) as well as the pool of potential members to serve on the body being elected.

Voting itself is held using a system sometimes called plurality-at-large. It is similar to a simple plurality election except that there are multiple positions open for election. In the typical case, there are nine memberships on an Assembly or House of Justice (barring by-elections), and therefore voters are given ballots with nine spaces, or are given nine separate ballots. Electors write the individual names of nine eligible Bahá'ís, without repeating. The nine Bahá'ís with the most votes win. In cases of tie votes for the ninth-least-populous vote (for example), a run-off election is held.

Electoral scope

Local or regional
At the local (city, town, county) level of administration, the Local Spiritual Assembly, adult Bahá'ís in that particular locality get to vote once a year for their nine-member Local Spiritual Assembly.

In the United States, Canada, and India, regional councils are elected by members of these Local Spiritual Assemblies in an election conducted by mail. Again, no nominations occur, each Local Spiritual Assembly member is directed to submit the names of those individuals who are resident in the region they feel are best suited to serve.

Some larger Bahá'í communities, such as in the city of Toronto, Ontario in Canada, are slated to move to an indirect delegated system similar to that used in National elections.


National
The selection of the National Spiritual Assembly is indirect using an electoral-unit delegation method. The nation is divided into voting districts or units. In each district the members are charged to select one or a few delegates who will represent them at the annual national convention, and who will vote for the members of the National Spiritual Assembly. The members at the local level then elect the individual(s) whom they believe will best represent them at the national convention, and who is the best qualified to vote for National Spiritual Assembly members. No input is provided to the delegate on whom to vote for in the national election. The number of delegates per country is determined by the Universal House of Justice according to the size of the national community[citation needed]; the National Spiritual Assembly determines the geographic area covered by each unit/district.[citation needed]

See also: Statistics on National Spiritual Assemblies

Global
Every five years from 1963, members of all National Spiritual Assemblies are called to vote at an International Convention at the Bahá'í World Centre in Haifa, Israel for members of the Universal House of Justice. These members act as delegates in a manner similar to National Bahá'í elections. Those who are unable to attend send postal ballots.