What about Evan McMullin?

A poll recently placed Evan McMullin in a close third to tied Hillary and Trump. ("Poll: Trump falls into tie with Clinton among Utah voters", Deseret News, 12 Oct 2016)

Following are bullet points of a respected friend of mine on McMullin. I agree with him largely. Except that I hope any electoral college loss by either of the leading candidates might be a win worth working for.

- Evan McMullin has no executive experience of any kind.
- Evan McMullin’s presidential run is the creation of the same people who crafted and supported George W Bush’s failed foreign policy.
- Mormons are being taken for granted — again.
- Face it:  most people who favor McMullin know very little about him except that he is Mormon and he appears to have traditional Republican positions.
("Why I am #neverMcMullin", Geoff B., 12 Oct 2016)

I largely agree with this. I support Gary Johnson's foreign policy. It is what I hear in this paragraph from Geoff.

My vision of the United States is one where we trade and are at peace with the world. It is one where we vigorously respond to attacks and defend our borders but remain neutral in conflicts that are none of our business. We should spend much more on intelligence — trying to spot potential enemies before they get to our country — and much less on troops and armament. We should close most of our foreign military bases and concentrate on threats to those countries that are essential to the U.S. national interest. ("Why I am #neverMcMullin", Geoff B., 12 Oct 2016)

While I largely agree with Geoff, I hope any electoral college loss by either of the leading candidates might be a win worth working for.

McMullin is more of a war hawk than I like, but not nearly as much as Hillary is. I am excited to send a clear message that the two leading candidates are unacceptable choices for the Presidency. If there was a chance McMullin might win in AZ, I think would vote for him.

-

From my friend Jeffrey Thayne

I've heard people say that if Utah votes for a third party, it may help Clinton get elected; or that if Utah votes for a third party, it may help Trump get elected. 

The fascinating thing -- and most don't realize this -- is that this literally cannot be the case (the way the electoral college is set up). If Utah's electoral votes go to a third party candidate, it literally cannot help or hurt either of the two main candidates. That's because a candidate needs a majority of electoral votes to win outright (which, right now, means 270 electoral votes). 

If Hillary gets more than 270 electoral votes, she wins. This is the case no matter whether Utah votes for Trump or a third party. Utah's votes going to Trump won't have stopped her from getting 270. 

If Trump gets more than 270 electoral votes, he wins. This is the case no matter whether Utah's votes for Hillary or a third party. Utah's votes going to Hillary won't have stopped him from getting 270. 

If Utah's votes going to a third party is what keeps either of them from getting 270 electoral votes, then it by definition keeps both of them from getting to 270. 

In short, if Utah votes third party, it literally, mathematically cannot help or hurt either Hillary or Trump; it has a small, small chance of preventing both of them from winning outright, but no chance of helping either of them win. 

If either Trump or Hillary win, it will not have been because Utah voted third party. (FB Post, Jeffrey Thayne, 12 Oct 2016)