I’m aware that some third-party votes are pure protest votes, which are freely transferrable from a socialist party to a libertarian one and back again. Maybe even ‘many’ are; but it’s just as true to say ‘many’ aren’t but vote ideologically instead.
I suspect some of Nader’s 2004 Guam voters stayed home, some went to Obama, and some went to Barr. But I wouldn’t try to guess how many of each that was.

Some of Nader’s suppo

Many votes that alternative parties and independents receive are protest votes against the top two. As such, in the event that one of the alternatives is removed, the next best option for such a voter is either another non-duopoly vote or to not vote at all.

Also, despite some real differences, on some issues -ranging from the bailout, to foreign policy, to the drug war, and more – parties like the CP, GP, LP and independents like Nader have more in common with each other than any of them have with the RP or DP. For people who consider such issues to be primary, this is why they are non-duopoly voters.

Which non-duopoly option is in many cases a secondary concern.

And no, I did not petition Guam. They do not collect signatures, just accept a letter. But I did petition in over 30 states.

You’ve met these people? Did you petition for us in Guam, or something? Or are you merely speculating?

Yes. Many of them are protest votes, not necessarily strictly leftist or rightist.

It’s more likely Nader’s votes went into the 8,000 votes the Democrats gained, while Barr’s increase came out of the 9,000 the Republicans lost.

http://www.guampdn.com/article/20081105/NEWS03/811050339/-1/NEWSFRONT2

The LP vote is up substantially from last time: In 2004 it voted Bush 21,490; Kerry 11,781; Nader 196; Badnarik 67. Guam has picked the president every election since it started in 1980.

In your face, purists!