caa a22 4500 378884700 CHVBK 20180305123440.0 cr unu---uuuuu 161128e20040614xx s 000 0 eng 10.2202/1540-8884.1031 doi (NATIONALLICENCE)gruyter-10.2202/1540-8884.1031 Johnson Jeffrey Alan Hendrix College The Apology of Nader's Raiders: Third Parties, Speech Acts, and Moral Obligations in the Voting Booth [Elektronische Daten] [Jeffrey Alan Johnson] Using the 2000 American presidential election as a case study, this paper considers the question of how third party supporters ought to cast their vote when their vote may result in the least preferable candidate winning. Examining the appeals made by Nader and Gore to Nader supporters, Johnson argues that one can claim obligations to vote either sincerely or strategically. He demonstrates that voters are obligated to do both when possible, but must rely on their consciences when it is not. Institutional arrangements may help minimize such moral conflicts. ©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston Democratic Theory nationallicence Voting nationallicence Sincerity nationallicence Strategy nationallicence 2000 Election nationallicence Infelicities nationallicence Nader nationallicence The Forum De Gruyter 2/2(2004-06-14) 2:2 2004 2 for https://doi.org/10.2202/1540-8884.1031 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.2202/1540-8884.1031 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Johnson Jeffrey Alan Hendrix College NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- The Forum De Gruyter 2/2(2004-06-14) 2:2 2004 2 for CC0 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0 nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-gruyter