Well, let's extend this "logic" , shall we?
Let's say Romney wins...and the winning party -- the "first party" -- is the Red party; and the 2nd place party is the blue party.
This would mean that if you voted for Obama in a red state, you "wasted your vote."
Obama didn't win; and in red states, Obama had NO CHANCE of winning.
Therefore, all red-state voters "wasted" their votes!
The reverse, of course, is also true, electorally -- even for Romney.
If Romney captures 0 electoral votes in clear blue states -- win or lose -- 0% of those votes in those solid blue states won't give Romney a single electoral vote he needs to win...hence all of those solid blue state voters voting for Romney...they wasted their vote!
2nd place by (state) race only counts in sports like horse racing...not state by state electoral POTUS races!!!!
So what is the "takeaway" here for voters like me, who will be voting for Virgil Goode?
Well until these authors (& accompanying posters) begin to lecture blue and red state voters not to bother voting for the obvious 2nd placer in those given states, then their inconsistencies ring quite hollow...and therefore, it's time they "sit down" from such a "lecture tour"...
You make an excellent point. My state, Oklahoma, will absolutely, positively NOT vote to reelect Obama. Does that mean all the Democrats should stay home, because their votes are arguably “wasted?” I don’t think so. I may not agree with their choice for president, but each person owns their own vote. It doesn’t belong to anyone else. The only person who decides whether their vote is wasted is the person who casts it (or doesn’t cast it—whatever they believe is best).