I vote for third party candidates whenever I can. If the election isn’t close, I vote for third party candidates just to run up their numbers (because I disagree with their exclusion and am willing to use my vote to increase their percentage of the vote). If the election is close, I pick whichever candidate I most prefer out of the candidates who have a shot at winning.
@Hawaii_Jake It seems that your argument is this:
1. Clinton lost Pennsylvania in 2016 by fewer than 50,000 votes.
2. Third party candidates in Pennsylvania won a combined 200,000 votes in 2016.
3. Therefore, voting third party changed the election.
If so, then it bears mentioning that the argument is fallacious in the absence of evidence that enough of those 200,000 would have voted for Clinton (as opposed to voting for Trump or simply not voting at all at the presidential level). If they had split evenly, the result would have been the same. If they had split 60/40 for Clinton, the result also would have been the same (albeit much closer). And that’s leaving aside the fact that if Clinton had won Pennsylvania, she still would have lost the Electoral College. So even if third party voters in Pennsylvania changed the result of their state’s election, they did not change the result of the national election.