• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          That’s true. Asserting doesn’t make it so, its actual definition makes it so:

          "In single-winner plurality voting (first-past-the-post), each voter is allowed to vote for only one candidate, and the winner of the election is the candidate who represents a plurality of voters or, in other words, received more votes than any other candidate. In an election for a single seat, such as for president in a presidential system, voters may vote for one candidate from a list of the candidates who are competing, and the winner is whichever candidate receives the highest number of votes. " source

            • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              this is just storytelling.

              Now you’re denying what the laws regarding the voting system is the USA?

              it’s not a natural law.

              Its state law in 48 out of the 50 states.

              “48 out of the 50 States award Electoral votes on a winner-takes-all basis (as does the District of Columbia). For example, all 54 of California’s electoral votes go to the winner of the state election, even if the margin of victory is only 50.1 percent to 49.9 percent.” source

              • PeggyLouBaldwin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                5 months ago

                the existence of a winner-take-all system does not entail that a non-vote or even a vote for some candidate besides trump or biden helps trump. only a vote for trump helps trump.

                • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  You’re moving the goalposts. What was being discussed is if a vote would have gone to Biden, but becomes a non-vote, then that absolutely helps Trump under plurality voting.

                  • PeggyLouBaldwin@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    it’s unprovable what might happen if a vote, known to have been cast one way, were cast some other way. this is known as a “counterfactual” and they are, tautologically, unprovable.