Election Do-Over Poll Shows Gains for Gary Johnson, Jill Stein
No sign of third-party regrets


If the people who participated in last year's election could do it all again, Donald Trump would win the popular vote this time—but he wouldn't actually get more support than before. Instead, according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll, many Hillary Clinton voters would now stay home or back a third-party candidate.
In the actual election, Clinton bested Trump in the popular vote, 48 percent to 46 percent. In the survey, 46 percent said they voted for Clinton and 43 percent said they voted for Trump—not the same numbers, obviously, but it's a similar margin. When those same people were asked who they'd pick if they could do it again, Trump now won, 43 to 40.
You'll note that Trump hasn't gotten any more popular—he gets 43 percent either way. But Clinton has bled support: Gary Johnson now gets 5 percent of the vote (one point higher than how the respondents said they voted last year), Jill Stein gets 3 percent (another one-point bump), and another 8 percent would either vote for someone else or not vote at all. (The remainder say they have no opinion.) The pollsters note that "nonwhites are 10 points more likely than whites to say they would not support Clinton again, with more than a third of them heading to the Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson."
It's not all bad news for the Clintonites, though. When you include people who didn't vote in 2016, Clinton comes out ahead in the do-over, 41 percent to 37 percent. (Johnson and Stein are still at 5 and 3 percent, respectively.) So some nonvoters appear to wish they hadn't sat the last election out.
But when it comes to third-party supporters, we don't seem to be seeing anything like the regretful Ralph Nader voters of 2000. If anything, this poll suggests we're witnessing the opposite.
Bonus link: "Again and again this year, Americans looked at the choices before them and said, I'd prefer something else."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A post-election poll; finally an answer to the question "what could possibly mean less than voting in an election?"
Also, since the poll was undoubtedly not done for free, it answers "what is the dumbest thing somebody would rather have than money"
But, hey, Johnson showed a 25% increase in his vote percentage in a poll that means less than nothing.
I greatly value knowing that I was right on all fronts. However, paying money to know that implies that there's a chance I might've been wrong.
Hey, can you guys let me know when Johnson works up to 5.25%? Because then it's time to start planning victory.
In other news, I'm really impressed by the concept of including people in a poll who didn't bother to vote the first time around, and pretending they'd vote now when it's all hypothetical and meaningless. Most people don't realize what a long neglected contingent that maybe could have the potential to possibly think about hypothetically voting.
This article totally neglects to mention that the largest block of registered voters (approximately 72 million) chose not to cast a vote for a Presidential candidate. It'll be interesting, in the next election, to see if either party can crack the 50% level, huh?
When you include people who didn't vote in 2016, Clinton comes out ahead in the do-over, 41 percent to 37 percent.
And when you add in the votes that were stolen from her by Johnson, Stein and Trump, she wins in a landslide.
Yeah - but what about all the people who have been coercively disenfranchised just because they're dead?
New super-early voting for people who plan on being dead on Election Day.
AND WHEN YOU GIVE HER BACK ALL THE TRAITOROUS WOMEN WHO VOTED TRUMP SHE IS CROWNED GOD-EMPRESS AND THE WORLD WOULD BE HEALED
Don't be ridiculous. Hillary already knows that she IS god-empress of the universe. She's just tired of all of you who fail to acknowledge her.
So most people don't like Hillary, and only 43% of voters like Trump. That's still terrible. It means you have about 21.5% of voters who make the basket of deplorables! That's a lot of deplorables- if one trusts Hillary's assessment of course.
That's almost 23 million people. That is a lot of deplorables.
Didn't polls before the election show more people were planning on voting for Johnson and Hillary and fewer for Trump than actually did? Kinda suggests that talk is cheap, saying is one thing and doing another. Kinda like all those opinion polls in Congress on who's in favor of repealing Obamacare when repeal was merely a hypothetical.
People are very fond of voting for Gary Johnson, just not on Election Day.
Good point, very good point you make! Their pre-election bravado is non-existent when they get into the election booth.
Why do you think they call it dope?
In related news.....
Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead....
Decent Adam Sandler movies are rare but they do exist. I'm not sure I can say the same for David Spade.
I literally can't even. Jesse, have you never seen Joe Dirt?
He's not bad in The Blacklist either.
It's because she's your sister, isn't it?
I... what?
Joe Dirt. Maybe the most famous scene.
Uh, hello? Tommyboy?
That's not a David Spade movie. That's a Chris Farley movie with which David Spade happened to be involved.
Joe Dirt, Tommy Boy... you guys realize you're making my case for me, right?
If your case is that you've got questionable taste in SNL alumni vehicles, sure.
Speaking of which, they should bring back Weekend Update with Norm McDonald. Only condition under which is watch SNL again. Jon Stewart and Trevor Noah are pathetic posers, Norm is where it's at.
No,no,nope. If you're going retro, we've got to go back to Dennis Miller, aka "Captain Hairdo".
Say what you will about Joe Dirt, it's not as bad The Ladies Man.
So is it too soon to start printing "Don't Blame Me-I voted for Johnson/Stein" bumper stickers. Or will this just be an invitation for getting your tires slashed by the Resistance(TM)?
Talk is cheap. Especially talk about what you would have done in the past.
I'm sure it's quite easy to find that wise, well-educated Nostradamus who totally would have voted for Reagan but not Dubya, and Kennedy but not Carter, all for serious policy reasons - nevermind that only retrospective pop culture told them which of those was a good guy or bad guy. If you give people hindsight, they start lying to themselves about their own motivations.
They may well be lying to themselves. If they're lying to themselves in this way, rather than in the way that made Nader's name mud for much of the left after 2000, then that says some interesting things about the state of that retrospective pop culture.
Nader's name mud for much of the left after 2000, then that says some interesting things about the state of that retrospective pop culture.
No proggie I knew could personally stand Gore in 2000, in fact, I know of a few who even voted for Bush and the rest said they were for Nader. It wasn't until they were told by their betters that Nader allowed Bush to steal the election and therefore they MUST hate him that he became persona non grata.
Nader didn't steal the election from Bush. It was all of the idiots who were told to punch out the second hole on the butterfly ballot. They wanted to vote for Gore, but had been told by simpleton election hacks to "punch the second hole," which they did religiously. I nearly die laughing every time I think of it.
Well, here is one guy that voted for nobody, I left that spot blank. And today I'd vote for Trump with pleasure. I say that not really being a fan of his at all. In fact, I don't think much of him at all. So why would I not for him today? The democrats have been more than deplorable since the election along with the Orwellian media. I can't think of one time in my more than 50 years I have been more repelled by a political party than I am today by the democrats. In fact, I despise so much what they stand for and how they are behaving as a group that I am starting to change my mind on some things I agree with them on. It isn't about their move left, if that is the direction. It is their move to fascism and authoritarianism. It is the acceptance of the corrupt media that wants to push stupid Russian influence and forget Benghazi lies, deleted e-mails, silencing Bernie, blaming Trump as the womanizer he is while letting Billy and his equally abusing wife off the hook. The list goes on.
And ?. in addition to all your fine points ?. we now have evidence that Trump can actually do some good things. His appointment of Gorsuch to the Supreme Court will bring many more voters into his camp next time. By that time he may have had a chance to appoint another constitutionalist.
??????Ojust before I saw the paycheck which was of $9068 , I did not believe ...that...my father in law was like they say actually taking home money in there spare time on their computer. . there brothers friend haze done this for less than seven months and at present paid the loans on there apartment .??????? ?????____BIG.....EARN....MONEY..___???????-
As we've seen, time and time again, the voters talk bravely independent until they're faced with the actual act of voting. At that point, many, many of them return to the Democrat or Republican candidate, likely because they hate the other so intensely they feel the need to "defeat" the opposition.
Sadly, the do-over in 4 years will show much worse results.
??????O Do You want to get good income at home? do you not know how to start earnings on Internet? there are some popular methods to earn huge income at your home, but when people try that, they bump into a scam so I thought i must share a verified and guaranteed way for free to earn a great sum of money at home. Anyone who is interested should read the given article..??????? ?????____BIG.....EARN....MONEY..___???????-