|
Should we sign to get Nader onto ballots in Definite Red States? I'm wondering about this.
Let's say for now that he were on the ballot in 7 swing states and 7 Red states. The amount of time he spends campaiging is finite, and so the amount of time and resources he spends per state is limited. So now compare the first situation to this second situation where he's on the ballot in 7 swing states and 15 red states: this means he has more Red States in which to divide his time.
So should we? If he's going to have trouble with ballot access, the number of close Blue and swing states he accesses could be still enough to make a difference in the race. If he gets access to more definite Red states, the amount of time he spends in critical states, by simple probability, decreases.
I think it might be a worthwhile cause. Let him spend a bit more time in Utah and Alabama.. it'd end-up being time that he doesn't spend in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
|