March 28, 2004
Nader Should Not Run
I have a rough version of a new proof. This attempts to socially prove that Ralph Nader should not run for president, if Democratic Intent is to be protected. It's contested by one far-fetched scenario by which Ralph Nader could hypothetically win the Presidency.
NaderCannotWinThePresidency is socially proven, contested by NuclearNader.
Nader is a ThirdPartySpoiler, by definition.
SpoilersUndermineDemocraticIntent proves that a ThirdPartySpoiler that cannot win should not run, if DemocraticIntent is to be protected.
Therefore, Nader should not run if DemocraticIntent is to be protected, contested by NuclearNader.
Parent: ProofList
The Democratic Intent of the voters can be defined as the candidate that the population prefers overall, among a group of candidates. In a group of two candidates, the majority preference is the Democratic Intent.
There is one scenario that says Nader could win one state, limiting the others from winning 270 Electoral Votes, and then demand that Kerry assign all his delegates to him by proclaiming that he doesn't care if Bush wins over Kerry (since Bush would probably beat Kerry in the House Of Reps). This is arguably absurd, but we haven't yet proven it impossible. Are delegates from any states prohibited from casting Electoral Votes for someone other than the winner, even if the winner wishes it? A proof would probably have to look closely at precedent and social pressures on delegates to guarantee this wouldn't happen.
Parent: NaderNeedsToWinLotsOfStates