I have a number of Facebook friends who are disgruntled following the defeat of Bernie Sanders. I am not the most sophisticated political mind, especially compared to you fellows of DK, but I am trying to refine my argument against the demexit which I can take to them. Here’s what I posted today:
Don't vote for Jill Stein.
I believe the best possible strategy for a progressive revolution is to make the democratic party more like how Sanders envisions it, not to form a third party.
If no candidate gets a majority of electoral votes the House of Representatives elects the president from the candidates who have won electoral votes. That is why, absent a constitutional amendment changing the way we elect presidents, a two party system will remain robust.
The highest second-place score ever when there were more than two parties was John C. Breckinridge who got a measly 23% of electoral votes, 2nd place in a landslide by Lincoln. The next highest take ever was Theodore Roosevelt winning 2nd place with 17% of the electoral college. This was four years after his second term as Republican president. He ran because he didn't like his Republican successor, Taft. Taft beat him in the Republican primaries that year so he ran as a Progressive. His run split the progressive bloc off from the Republicans resulting in the Democrat Woodrow Wilson winning electoral college majority with only 42% of the popular vote.
Now substitute Trump for Wilson, Clinton for Taft and Stein for Roosevelt and we get President Trump.
And if you don't think Trump would eff up Mt Rushmore, then you aren't paying attention.
So third Parties don't win. More than anything, they seem quixotic which is mistaken for being principled. A vote for a third party is principled only if we pretend that the electoral math doesn't matter, but it does. So I challenge people who acknowledge that demexit is so damn risky how their conscientious vote is truly principled. I urge the demexit people to do the opposite, to #demstay: flood the democratic party with progressive voters and change it from the inside.
I have some question for you:
1) If you still believe that demexit will end up with Clinton being elected, then why risk her losing? Is it really principled to play with fire when the consequences are so ruinous?
2) If you think that empowering a third party when there is a presidential election is good, then why didn't you empower it four and eight years ago when it could have been developed into a party that could legitimately compete in a presidential election?
3) And if you did put your support behind the third party years ago and it still isn't viable, why are you still doing it (Bernie, Elizabeth Warren, Robert Reich and Noam Chomsky aren't doing that)?
4) If you think that there are enough demexiters and independents to get Stein elected, and that enough of them they will vote for her, how come you aren't buying lottery tickets all the time? Why do you think that a third party sudden ascendency is less remote than winning billions in the Lotto Big Spin?