It's not, it's discouraging voting for the guy that counters the "boof bleach" incest loving fell who "only will be a dictator for a day". You know, the unified Reich vibe that you totally are against lmao.
There’s a contradiction. If you are allowed not to vote in a democracy, and you don’t like any of the candidates, then, how can it be misguided to withhold your vote?
No it isn't. You have the right not to vote but participation should be encouraged as it's what gives everyone a say. Seems pretty simple to me. I'm not even saying they don't have the right to discourage people but if you have lived through the last 8 years and do it, you're a REALLY slow learner.
I am really slow, so thanks for taking the time. But, let’s say you’re a socialist, and both candidates are capitalists. So you decide that neither candidate upholds your interests. How would any “encouragement” to vote change your mind?
In the case where neither candidate represents your political positions, not voting is an act of rebellion.
Well enjoy the 4 years of Trump this buy's you, let me know how clean your hands feel afterwards. It'll be impressive to hear the mental gymnastics. You know if the accelerated climate change doesn't kill us first.
I’m voting for Biden. But if he loses, I won’t blame voters like you for berating fellow citizens for wrongthink, and depressing voter turnout. I’ll blame the duopoly system for giving us shitty candidates.
Republican and Democrat are the two biggest parties by a large margin, but a few other smaller parties exist. Plus, some people run as an Independent. They're not affiliated with any party at all.
Edit: I never meant to imply the other parties had any chance at winning an election in a meaningful way, which is what these replies seem to think I was saying. (They don't have a chance, honestly.) But other parties do exist, including a party in which you can "vote green". That is all I'm saying.
In a first past the post system of districts with single representative candidates, it almost always resolves to two viable parties. That's the way it's been for basically all of American history.
The parties can change, but the shape of the system remains constant: a vote is only effective when cast for the largest opponent of your least desired candidate. It's unintuitive and discouraging.
The parliamentary systems used in much of Europe, for all their flaws, do allow for more robust and diverse representation.
Greens in America aren't in a position to govern. Even if Stein got enough electoral votes through the work of 30-60 literal miracles, she'd be totally unable to govern effectively. You need a deep bench and more of a base in the other branches of government to form a party that can effect changes and run this country
Then we can use third party candidates to determine who the power actually goes to. At the end of the day. America is so bipolar split tlboth parties are now completely at the mercy of anyone who can garner 10% support. RFK Jr at this point can literally be the decider or who becomes president and who doesn't. Maybe we can use that as a tool of power to force the 2 parties to open the voting system up or have their power cockblocked from them every election cycle.
No, this is not how it works. Please look up the spoiler effect.
I can't vote because I don't live there, but am in the imperial core of countries, so it would be very nice to not have fascists in charge, considering we literally have prosecuted whistleblowers reporting on warcrimes at the behest of the US government. We're your little bitches whether we like it or not.
Y'all really do need to be hyper-focused on pushing for sweeping electoral reform, for sure.
In the meantime though, voting for a 3rd party under your system is basically a vote for the person you don't want.
Vote Biden if you would dislike having Trump more. If you don't want to do that, then yeah, you're basically admitting you're cool with the outcome of Trump presidency.
Please don't waste your vote, your vassals beg you.
Look up the spoiler effect. Please! This vassal is begging you.
The question under your system (please inform yourself about first-past-the-post) isn't who do you want to win, it's who you do you want NOT to win.
If you vote for your third-party candidate, it's equivalent to not having voted at all, if they have no chance of winning.
You're going to get Biden or Trump with how people vote (spoiler effect, look it up), one of those is going to win, make your peace with that.
So, which would you rather?
I am happy to spell out in greater detail why voting for a third party candidate is a waste of time under your system, happy to chat if there's still any confusion about it.
first, i think it will be helpful to recall what a myth is: it's a story we tell to explain the world around us. the spoiler effect is one of those stories: it explains, for some people, why clinton won in 1992. but analysis of the facts of that election find that, in fact, perot hurt clinton's margin of victory.
this myth is persistent, and reinforced by multiple media sources and even academics, but there is no way to actually produce a test of the theory of its existence or its mechanisms. so while you might like to tell this story, even if only to yourself, to justify voting for people who do bad things, to pretend that this myth is objective fact, that it is a natural law, is either misguided or dishonest, depending on whether you actually believe the myth.
The question under your system (please inform yourself about first-past-the-post) isn’t who do you want to win, it’s who you do you want NOT to win.
wrong. the question is "who do i want to vote for" and i want to vote for the person i want to win. incidentally, i don't want to vote for someone i don't want to win.
If you lived somewhere with a decent preferential voting system, you'd be right.
You don't though, and it's not misinformation to say that under a first part the post system, voting for a third candidate that is not going to win is a waste of the influence you have. CGPGrey explains it well
🤦♂️ It's a "law" in the mathematical/scientific sense. It is a model that explains something.
You're just spouting smart sounding words without actually proving anything.
Please, please, do explain how the spoiler effect is wrong.
Tell me how when you have first past the post and a two party system, voting for a third candidate who won't win isn't just making it more likely the candidate you'd like less to win.
Please, would love to hear you well reasoned and sound argument.
it argues that a certain type of election system tends to lead to a two-party system. however, from a critical perspective, this theory might be untestable. why? because someone could argue that any outcome can be explained by the theory. for instance, if there are more than two parties, it could be said that the system still favors two but this is just a temporary exception. this kind of reasoning makes it very difficult to disprove the theory, turning it more into a statement that's true by definition than an actual hypothesis based on evidence. similar arguments have been made about economic theories that rely on assuming everything else stays the same. to be more than just a statement, this theory would need a way to be tested with evidence and potentially proven wrong. that way, it could be a useful theory for understanding political systems instead of just an unfalsifiable claim.
The evidence is all of the first past the post systems that trend toward two dominant parties. There are 1000s of example elections, and the elections which don't conform to this are just as bad, because the winner will win with even FEWER votes than 50%. If you have 5 candidates and people are voting fairly evenly between them, you can win with just over 20% of the vote. I hope you can believe that, that's just the mathematical reality (that I'm really hoping we don't have to debate over, it's a fairly simple mathematical problem).
The myth is that what you have can actually provide voters with a meaningful choice. That's the media narrative, that first past the post is meaningful and gives the president a mandate because people voted for them, but it most certainly doesn't.
it seems that you are already trying to explain away exceptions rather than accepting that this myth lacks predictive power and may not, in fact, accurately explain any past elections at all.
Do you think anyone other than Biden or Trump will win? If you do, then your choice is clear, and as much as you question the existence of the spoiler effect (which is not being spread much by the media in the US, it's being spread by detractors of the current voting system), it doesn't really matter. People will vote towards those two candidates (hope we can agree that this is the likely outcome).
If that's the case, voting for a third candidate is as good as not voting because if your candidate doesn't win, and you COULD have voted for your next choice (why ranked voting is so much better, and it's the voting system letting you down), then the candidate you most don't want (assuming 3 candidates) has a better chance of winning (since you didn't vote for your second choice).
You say this isn't provable because it's about people's beliefs and it can't be tested, but sorry, elections are about human choices, beliefs are at play. I don't think it's a coincidence that democracies with ranked choice voting have more first preference votes to smaller parties, and that it's overwhelmingly so.
You can't really escape the fact that even if people just voted for their favourite candidate in first past the post, people would win with less than 50% of the vote (unless you're saying that the votes don't add up to 100% then I dunno what to say)
you're missing the crux of why it's not provable: there is no test for it. it's not that it's "about beliefs" is that you can't conduct an experiment to determine the validity
ask yourself: what test can we make that would disprove the theory?
maybe i'm just not smart enough to come up with one, but i can't conceive of one. an untestable, that is, an undisprovable hypothesis, is an empty tautology. or, at least modern epistemologists and critical rationalists have treated them this way.
maybe disprovability isn't a necessary facet of sound scientific theories. i tend to agree with popper, though.
Okay, the test would be that we have first past the post (single winner elections, like for president, or local electorates with single candidates elected, not proportional voting, which is better), produce elections with a spread of votes across many candidates, and don't consistently trend towards two.
This is definitely testable and disprovable, it's just that the outcome is overwhelmingly the case I have described, the spoiler effect leading to two dominant parties. There may be outliers and times where a third candidate does win, but these are the overwhelmingly rare exceptions.
we need to define terms like "consistently" and "trend". but even once you do that we still have the problem that you're already explaining away exceptions. this theory is not disprovable because there is no outcome that you would say actually disproves it. you would say we just need more data.
I'm not explaining away exceptions, they're called outliers. In any set of data there will be deviations. When I want to plot some viscosity data and get a few random points on my chart that don't line up with the rest of the curve, I'm still very confident that my curve is close to being accurate, as long as I have enough data points.
We have enough data points on first past the post elections.
For it to be disproven you would show first past the post elections don't have to two party systems in the vast majority of cases (which isn't the reality).
Now, you can try and handwave this away by saying, "oh but that's what people were TOLD TO BELIEVE, so you can't prove it". That's why we have not just the correlation to rely on, we have maths.
And you can't (I hope you don't) really disagree that you either have many candidates, who then win with less than a majority, or two parties, which then necessarily means the third smaller candidates can't win, and so people then vote for one of the larger parties so their vote counts. That's the binary state of affairs, there are no other options, the reality of maths doesn't allow for anything else, the votes add up to 100% ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I'm not saying we need more data though, we have the data, plurality voting overwhelming results in two party systems. This is disprovable and I'm totally happy to change my mind based on the evidence and data.
I'm not straw-manning, you said before with regards to looking up the spoiler effect "I have. it's not a natural phenomenon, it's a story that the media tells."
Apologies if I misunderstood what you were saying there.
I’m not straw-manning, you said before with regards to looking up the spoiler effect “I have. it’s not a natural phenomenon, it’s a story that the media tells.”
in that context, the fact that the media says it and academics say it is a reason some people might believe it. i'm saying even if you do believe it, it's an undisprovable claim. it has little explanatory power, and ultimately, yes, is a myth.
Then Ms 8h account with their full name (deeeeefinitelty not a shill, deeeefinitelt a genuine user. Yeah people on Lemmy toooootally use their full name as if it were facebook), I'll just have to conclude you're trying to sway leftists not to vote for Biden, so the world ends up with trump.
Okay 👍 Please do explain your whacky logic though. I came to the conclusion you're a troll because you're not really engaging by explaining your position beyond: "I don't wanna, it's a lie! The media is lying!!"
Go learn maths, go understand the mechanism behind the spoiler effect. Go look at the literal mountains of examples of it in play. Unless you think it's just some massive coincidence that every first-past-the-post system trends towards two parties.
I'm very keen and willing hear to any actual logic you bring to the table to justify your belief.
Sorry, that's my bad. Your initial response was quite frustrating.
Emotions are high because this election affects people around the world, and hearing that you don't care enough to make a difference, is not very pleasant.
if the difference i made put biden in power, i would feel terrible. same for trump. so i will vote for someone i do want to have the office for 4 years.
For sure, I wouldn't like voting for either, also.
Just that if they're not equal, then that means you have a preference. And I hope you will act on that preference and make a difference, instead or just making yourself feel good that you've voted for the candidate you liked best.
You've been robbed of that choice by your voting system.
Well I suppose for voters like you, then yeah, go vote for your candidate. Just seems odd that you're saying you don't think their equally bad, but instead of then making a difference to ensure the less bad option wins, you'd rather make yourself feel good for voting for someone you like best.
May the gods have mercy on us mere vassals who are watching from the sidelines.
Stay safe in these troubled times friend, and thanks for engaging, even if at times it got a bit heated and apologies for offence caused.
As an outsider it's really annoying when someone just doesn't understand the reality they find themselves in.
A third party isn't in the cards, it never is, but it especially isn't right now. The only way to get a third party elected is to change your voting system, but that's a process that takes years, decades even. It's really not as easy as wasting a vote with a third party, it takes a lot more effort. And the only way to start or continue that process right now is to vote Biden because if Trump wins you might not even get another election to vote in.
And Trump has a good chance of winning because the republicans aren't having such discussions. They know what to do, and come election day they'll all march in and do their job, like they do every time. Remember that he only won last time because people like you felt icky about voting for Clinton.
If you allow me a moment of catharsis, I'll just add that if you Americans once again subject the world to more Trump insanity, I really hope you get to feel the worst of it.
he only won last time because people like you felt icky about voting for Clinton.
he won because people voted for him. I voted against him, and I'm going to again. and I'm voting against biden just like the last time. you're characterization is patronizing and dismissive of real concerns.
lol, you're so free in the freedom land that you taking an un-awful option from the trainwreck gets you hate from the cult on both sides of the mainstream political parties.
if a political party wants to enter the parliament, they gotta get at least 2% of the votes. so if you vote for one of the very unpopular parties and they only get ~1.5% you've effectively wasted your vote completely (This is how it works in my country - of course things are different in the US)
Things are even worse in the US. For president you need to get a plurality of the votes (more than any other candidate) nationally (let's ignore the EC for now) which means that any vote not for the two candidates who stand a chance is wasted.
But also in their congressional elections they set up the system so to get in you have to get a plurality in some district where only one representative will be sent each time (FPTP). So even if your party has 15% nationally, unless they can win a plurality in some districts, they won't get any representation.
Thats why 3rd parties are pure vote wasters in presidential elections and in Congress you only have a handful of independent reps who somehow win their districts without party backing.
Cobtrast that with most of Europe (including Denmark(?)) where you have proportional voting for a parliament and then parliament forms a government. You can vote for your green party and while they might not get to be Prime Minister, they might be needed for the parliamentary majority to form a government and get the environment ministry. Win! Or they might just exert slight pressure in parliament directly, which is where laws are made. Not a loss!
The poor 'Mericans, meanwhile, are screwed. The only reasonable choice is between the two major parties at the elections. To turn that oil tanker they have to get involved in those parties and try to affect which candidates are put forth and then the party even skips that step entirely if they happened to have won the last presidential elections.
It's unfortunately a bipartisan system with the shitty electoral system that needs reformation. It's barely a democracy, but there is a clear option out of the two, and for now, ensuring Trump is not president again is a step in a better direction.
Asserting this is obtusely ignoring the context that conservative voters have no qualms about voting for someone grossly immoral.
There aren't conservatives out there saying "Yeah well I was gonna vote for Trump but he supports genociding Palestinians".
The fact that conservatives don't have this problem and everyone else does means that, yes, you are enabling Trump by not voting Biden. The "logic" necessarily does not work the other way around, even if you say it like some sort of clever gotcha with a complex emoji.
so the so-called third party voters get to vote for their candidate and another candidate? why doesn't everyone vote for so-called third parties, then? twice as many votes!!
Why indeed? The fact is that not enough people vote for third parties for it to matter by an order of magnitude.
Conservatives don't vote third party. When we do, we split our own vote in the face of a party that has their base on lock.
Because that logic is abundantly obvious, people don't vote third party enough to make a difference. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. And it's so effective at actually splitting the vote that both parties have attempted running spoiler candidates in the past to do just that.
Why doesnt everyone just vote third party? Because enough people who could are afraid that it will mean degrading democracy by handing over the reigns if it doesn't work, thereby creating the very problem that they are afraid of.
Then how the hell did Trump win in 2016 and nearly win in 2020? He is literally antithetical to everything conservatives say they are, yet they still fucking turned out and voted for him instead of someone else.
Only one explicitly right wing 3rd party was even an option in 2020, and Jorgensen ran libertarian, which is an ideology conservatives as a whole tend to reject. As evidenced by the ~1% of the vote she got.
Gee thanks officer. I stated something that was correct to within 99% of my claim and cited a source. Good thing you were there to correct the remaining 1% for the poor readers out there who might have mistaken that error as significant
Vote splitting is not a myth. It's just math. Let me explain with an example:
1000 people at a conference are deciding where to order catering and hold a vote:
490 people want Mexican and do not want Asian
510 people want Asian:
480 people want Vietnamese, would be satisfied with Thai, and do not want Mexican
30 people want Thai, would be satisfied with Vietnamese, and do not want Mexican
The restaurants on the ballot are:
A Mexican restaurant,
A Vietnamese restaurant, and
A Thai restaurant.
If the people who want Asian recognize the strength of their combined numbers, then they can tip the scales by all voting for the favorite between Vietnamese and Thai. In this situation, we get 490 votes Mexican, 510 votes Vietnamese, and 0 votes Thai. This time Vietnamese wins and the majority of people, the 510 who prefer Asian, are either happy or satisfied with the result while only 490 are disappointed.
If everyone votes for their favorite, then we get 490 votes Mexican, 480 votes Vietnamese, and 30 votes Thai. In this case, Mexican wins and the majority of people, the 510 who prefer Asian, are left disappointed while only 490 people are happy with the result. The vote has been split and the result is that the entire conference is worse off for it.
By the way, the ratio of 480 Vietnamese to 30 Thai is irrelevant as long as neither value is 0. That ratio can be fixed to any positive value and a situation can be described in which vote splitting occurs with that specific ratio of Vietnamese supporters to Thai supporters. That's why vote splitting isn't too uncommon - any number of people voting Thai has the potential to split the vote. The one caveat is if literally every Vietnamese supporter decides to vote Thai as well; in that scenario, no vote splitting can occur. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen in practice because it's easier to convert the Thai supporters who are smaller in number than it is to convert the Vietnamese supporters who have greater numbers.
If you want examples from history, there are plenty. Our electoral college amplifies the effect since it breaks one federal election down into a large number of state elections, any of which can exhibit vote splitting. Other people have linked to them in this discussion and you can find more elsewhere online.
One day y'all will get the point that this entire ideology is in and of itself fascist.
"We aren't fascist we just stripped you of all other choices and move the goalposts anytime someone gets close to inclusion then blame you for wanting another option while shrieking that only WE can save the country but also we won't save it either cause we haven't had a platform other than 'slightly less right' for over a decade or two now."
One day you will get the point that the reality is that we as voters don't make the rules.
Yeah, you're right. We're boxed into this shitty ass system. Grandstanding about how shitty it is doesn't magically create a solution.
We vote for the least worst option and try to make progress towards a better situation in the future. It's either that or we fall to actual fascists who would rather take the vote away.
We already have "actual fascists." Reread your comment, even by YALLS OWN EXPLANATION, our vote was taken away long before we were born. Nothing but performative bullshit so you can claim to be the "good guy" as we're further and further clamped down on.
What you actually mean by "take the vote away" is "take your status quo" away. Biden and dems have been pushing legislation to take away all the hassle of nuking leftist organizations and to make ANY criticism of Israel something that let's them strip a school of funding and accreditation if they allow it - but y'all don't mind any of that "actual fascism" because it doesn't affect your personal day to day life.
You can fly your pride flags all you want but you're throwing Palestinians under the bus to protect your warmongering corporatist status quo, y'all are starting to throw trans people under the bus to protect it, and when the time comes you'll do the same to gays and POC all while screaming about the "lesser of two evils."
^ Someone who sees the problem and offers no solution, just like everyone else with their position
You can fly your pride flags all you want but you're throwing Palestinians under the bus to protect your warmongering corporatist status quo
There are no good guys. Only bad guys and much worse guys. Guess you want to virtue signal your way into the much worse guy so you can feel better? That's great, but maybe when we're lynching lgbtq folk as well as Palestinians you might consider looking in a mirror and wondering if your inaction made things worse.
Or, more likely, you'll complain about how doing something doesn't matter while the actual fascists you can't tell the difference between set their sights on another marginalized group.
There are solutions, you just don't like them and in proper faschie fashion you ignore them and claim that anyone left of biden is advocating for not voting (as you're doing RIGHT NOW. "Wondering if your inaction makes things worse." "You'll complain about how doing something doesn't matter")
That's literally fascist tactics but you also love the other fascist tactic of asserting that ONLY YOU can save the country so you have no choice but to spread disinformation swearing up and down that leftists do nothing but tell people not to vote (which I've literally NEVER seen, by the way, not that fascists care about reality.)
My food is done so I'm blocking you now. I don't owe my time to fascists or people who argue in bad faith, and your both (of course, they go hand in hand)
Ah yes, the old "my solutions are the only ones that work" Good luck with that.
By the way, deciding that everyone but you is a fascist is a great way to not have allies.
spread disinformation swearing up and down that leftists do nothing but tell people not to vote (which I've literally NEVER seen, by the way, not that fascists care about reality.)
Bro. Look around. There are people saying they won't vote democrat here in this comment section, much less the whole of leftist lemmy.
Block me, I don't care. There's no point in arguing with someone virtue signaling as hard as you are anyway.
Hope you don't mind being blocked back. I don't have time to argue with an idealist basement dweller about some imaginary solutions that make him feel better
"Nooo you don't understand I'm definitely going to defeat fascism by doing absolutely nothing ever. You just don't understand the benefits of political apathy"
so if you currently think "im not gonna vote", then you're giving trump a head start
A majority of the non-voters are more likely to vote for the democrats. thats also why the republicans are making it as difficult as possible to vote. coz they know, the more who vote, the less likely they are at winning
No one here WANTS to vote for Biden, but it's literally the only way to make sure Trump isn't president, unless you want to go ahead and change the national bipartisan system by November.
The timing maybe? I've been saying Biden is the worst example of a democrat since the Obama days, and got downvoted about pointing out his bullshit. His contribution to the drug war alone is atrocious. But I kept getting down voted for saying it. Suddenly now it's election time, second go round, and here comes everyone jumping on Biden. Seems sus.
Huh? That's what I'm saying, Biden is a saint compared to Trump. It's just sus that right now, at election time 2024 is when it's suddenly a big deal. It only benefits Trump
Your wording was probably a little confusing, I read "jumping on Biden" initially as in "voting / rooting for him", but you likely meant it in the context of them "questioning everything he does". Depending which one is used changes your phrasing from criticizing Biden to supporting him.
Thing is, the absolutely worst things that he's done throughout his career have been pretty mainstream at the time. Like that omnibus crime bill? That was overwhelmingly supported, with only very, very limited Democratic opposition in very limited areas. (And a lot of black communities still support 'tough on crime' approaches because they look at the short term rather than the long.)
Even the support of Israel is pretty middle-of-the-road. Most Dems still support Israel, even while being appalled at the indiscriminate nature of Israel's violence in Gaza
Unfortunately, the US political system does not have a feature to "dislike" all the candidates. Not without a major, probably bloody, revolution, anyway. Your choice is to support and pick one candidate, or let everyone else pick the candidate for you.
You can always write in your own candidate. Not that it's likely to sway the vote in any significant way, but at least it might help you feel better about your choice.
Telling the DNC that you and most people will vote for him unconditionally is sabotaging his chances; the dems need to understand they cannot win if they continue the path they're on, and telling them otherwise is counterproductive.
Silencing criticism of millions isn't gonna win an election. Doing the things the people whose votes you need are telling you to do will.
Well, the problem is, the way the US sees it, keeping Israel as an ally is more important than Joe Biden. Yes, even if that means fascism comes humping an American flag. You can still be at the top of the postwar order with a fascist in charge!
If public sentiment is "everyone's gonna vote for Biden no matter what", they're not gonna change the course, and then be shocked when they get blown out worse than they did in 2016.
If the public sentiment is that we're gonna vote for Biden no matter what, then when the election comes we'll vote for Biden ....no matter what.
What you're describing is if the DNC hear "blue no matter who", but what they hear isn't reflective of reality. Meanwhile, what we want is for everyone to vote blue no matter who, but give the DNC a good scare into getting their act together.
So what we absolutely need to do is be critical of Biden when the DNC are watching, but stress the dangers of a Trump presidency when they're not paying attention.
And the DNC are not on Lemmy. So Lemmy is where we should say blue no matter who. We can go criticise Biden on Facebook or whatever boomers use these days. But there's no point in it on Lemmy, except when we're saying to vote for him in the election and kill him in the revolution.
The problem is that people are dumb, and plenty are legitimately not planning on voting for Biden now.
If and when Biden deals with Gaza, everyone with this mindset immediately needs to turn around and start sucking off Biden with previously unseen vigor and determination, otherwise this is only going to damage his chance of being elected. Hell, even then I still see some damage being done.
It just seems irresponsible to spread this message, especially when people like OP seem to genuinely believe it. Pick a less blatantly fascist opponent than Trump to do this with ffs
If and when Biden deals with Gaza, everyone with this mindset immediately needs to turn around and start sucking off Biden with previously unseen vigor and determination, otherwise this is only going to damage his chance of being elected.
There's tens of thousands of mostly children dead, and Israel is using famine and disease to wipe out the rest, no shit it damages Biden's chances if his actions come this late. Especially if Biden's answer to Gaza is ship Israel weapons more quietly while claiming to hold up shipments, while Israel starves Gaza out.
Then again, if Biden stops the money and arms to Israel, and sanctions Israel, and Trump responds by promising money and arms to Israel so they can resume the genocide, I don't see how anyone could not vote Biden.
What more can be done? We are already sending 100% of the weapons, money, and diplomatic support Israel needs. We're already bombing Yemen for taking actions to stop Israel and shooting down Iranian drones trying to stop them. Is Trump going to do the same thing, but be proud of it?
Shit I can't even say that, Biden is extremely proud of his support for Israel. Trump is simply going to be more obnoxious about it.
Lesser evilism isn't gonna win an election when your lesser evil is already genocide.
To everyone in this thread, whoever you are or are not voting for: what is your plan if Trump wins? I think everyone agrees that it is pretty much 50/50 on him winning. What do you plan to do about the coming total fascist hellscape? Do you have plans and means to emigrate? Are you buying guns and ammo? Are you just gonna go along to get along?
Picking up my shit and moving to the EU, maybe northern Spain. I have zero idea how to buy housing there (I’m a citizen though) but a bit of uncertainty is better than the alternative.
Not a problem for everyone else but US. US has been using that same tactic for a lot of other countries. We'd probably consider it karma catching up at this point.
And as always, you can always blame someone else that got you to this point. But we're so used to that now.
They're not talking about a well regulated militia, they said a bullet for the current sitting president of the United States and a former president of the United States.Im not saying anything against the second. I'm saying that what they have implied is actually just murder.
I mean if you mean I’d like to see Jeff Bezos be shot in the face that'd be hilarious. If you’re suggesting I want sitting politicians to be assassinated i want you to to quote were I said that.
yeah I'm forever voting blue no matter who. The republican candidate will always be a fascist. It will never end with Trump. It's going to be fascist vs not fascist blue vote and I will eat whatever shit the blue vote shits out. More cops? I'm all for it, not a fascist dictator. Support Israel? Fine with me, not a fascist dictator. It sucks but that's just America now for the next thousand or so years, fascism or something else. Better hope the something else isn't closer to fascism than before or else you're fucked.
And 5 month ago it was double that time and people already screamed that pointing out that an alternative to two genocidal geriatrics is needed were screamed down as being Trump puppets.
We already wasted half of that time to find a solution with people being vigorously opposed to demanding a solution as they are afraid to lose the status quo.
Declare to the Dems "I'll only vote you, if you stop genocide, internment camps and start taxing the rich properly." Then follow through with it. Already saying you dont want to follow through with it is telling them, that they dont need to listen to you. This is the only language they understand. Ideally look into organizing for a third party, so the Dems can be overtaken by a better third party which can take their place in the political system. The DNC has proven time and time again that they will be authoritarian and undemocratic to ensure no actually progressive candidate to make it into their leadership.
I hate Biden, and I do think that voting isn't going to solve our problems, but do you really think that NOT voting is going to solve our problems? Democrats know that they're always going to me more left than the Republicans, which will be enough for most people, and that very few people are going to try holding out for leftward change that could've been voted in during the primaries but wasn't.
What we need to do is vote for Biden to prevent Trump from destroying the country in 2 weeks flat, then actually force change. Voting works great when the system works, but it's been broken for a while - we need real action now, up to and including a revolution if need be.
All uprising means innocents killed. There were many innocents killed in the American revolution and every other revolution, yet most are celebrated, because we all understand that revolutions only happen because far too many innocents are already being killed, and at least this solution stops that eventually. Revolution as a whole is meant to be a horrifying last resort for people who are left no other choice.
People are not calling you a Trump puppet because you criticise Biden. People are arguing with you because you think not voting is a solution that Democrats are actually affected by.
By not voting, you just ensure the person you want the least to be in office wins (Trump). There's plenty of shills trying to discourage people from voting with that rhetoric. Republicans only win when dems don't show up.
I am not saying not to vote. I am saying not to vote Dems if the Dems dont stop the genocide. So vote third party or better yet pressure the Dems now to stop the genocide, so they can be voted for.
The last one is the best option. But it only works if they understand that you are serious about it and will not vote for them no matter what.
The political cycle is not 10 months long. Or 24. Or 48.
If you want change, you need to be involved in pushing over a large number of heavy objects over a long period of time. No one candidate, no one election, is going to change anything.
Because your damn country isn't "descending into fascism", it's been bathing in it for centuries, and every time there's someone trying to lift y'all kicking and screaming out of it just a little bit, the totalitarians crop up to try and self-destruct it all. Then, suddenly, a bunch of you come out of the woodwork to declare that it's better to blow it all up, actually, than to do literally anything to stop it, because you believe there should be a quick and easy solution, and everyone else around you is just an idiot for not seeing it.
But you only believe that because you're some kind of self-important, hubris-huffing sucker.
You know what is definitely not fixing it? Reassuring the Dems at every step that they will have your vote no matter what, as long as they are only slightly better than the Reps. Actually it is directly encouraging them to be at their possible worst.
Think of politicians as children and you as their parent. Do you think "reaffirm your child that no matter what it does, it will always get its favorite dessert" is a good parenting strategy? You raise egocentric psychopaths this way and this is exactly what you are getting as politicians.
If you have a dem that no longer aligns with your interests, you vote them out during the primary.
But then you show up during the general, hold your nose, and vote Democrat.
Want to know why?
Because the Republicans will vote Republican no matter what and we've unfortunately pushed our democracy to the point where we either vote for the somewhat okay guy or the guy that will bite your face off.
I wonder how many accelerationists around here are fascists/explodingheads users. Fascists don't fear the prospect of pretending to be something they aren't if it means furthering their agenda.
They're not afraid of posing as, say, a disenfranchised, discouraged and disillusioned left-winger who believes both sides are bad and there's no future except revolution.
They're not afraid to post about how "Genocide Joe" is funding genocide in Gaza while neglecting to point out how "Totalitarian Trump" would send B-52s to carpet bomb Gaza and the West Bank until nothing is left.
They're not afraid to point out how red states are still succeeding in trampling over LGBT rights under Biden while also ignoring how Trump would almost certainly push for that nation-wide.
They'll cry about our current supreme court justices while ignoring that Trump was the one who put those justices in power to begin with.
To be clear, I think the US is pretty far from saving and that it'll take a miracle to save this country from ruin. However, I'd rather see the country collapse slowly and in a relatively controlled manner that gives people time to prepare for its demise; while also giving people time to attempt to patch and fix the holes.
Revolution is high risk, high reward; if the left-wing wins, then you might get the socialist utopia you've always dreamed of. However, what if the right-wing wins? Yanno, the people with the majority of privately owned guns in the US. What if they win?
A Trump presidency means your leftist revolution against a fascist government will almost certainly be opposed by both rednecks and the US military.
However, if the fascists revolt during a Biden presidency, then the military will likely be backing you.
In the event of armed revolution, the president, whether it's Biden or Trump, will use the military to protect and reinforce their power. With Trump, opposition to his power will be coming from the left, so that's who the military will target. With Biden, the opposition will come from the right, and so the military will target them instead.
Of course, that doesn't mean you'll get the leftist utopia you've always dreamed, but at least you'll remove a lot of fascists from the equation. Removing those fascists means it'll be easier for the country to swing to the left and stay there. It won't happen overnight, but the result would likely be a government far more stable than if you tried to burn everything down and start over from scratch.
The reason why I say all this is because I feel that we are closing in on a revolution. Something is about to snap, and it will happen either during the elections or soon after. As such, you really, really don't want Trump, because Trump means you'll be fighting against the biggest, most well-funded and technologically equipped military in the world.
The air is tense and electric, filled with gasoline fumes and heated by our exhaust. The masses are shuffling to and from their workplaces, burned-out and overworked. They are struggling to afford rent, afford food, afford sleep and water. Static electricity is building on their shuffling bodies, and soon a spark will leap from an outstretched finger, igniting the air and bathing the US in fire.
Yeah, I'll admit that I'm pretty jaded and cynical when it comes to politics and the future of humanity. I'm not all that old either, but I'm old enough to remember how it seemed like life was getting better until Trump took office, and how much the US tumbled as a result.
I'm old enough to remember when being left or right wing was a debate and not a fight between competing "truths"; and how the US left and right wing were sometimes willing to compromise on issues instead of fighting a culture war where they try and see how badly they can fuck up the US and still successfully blame the other party.
I'm old enough to remember when people typically trusted the news and science; and conspiracy theorists were amusing nutjobs at best, harmless annoyances at worst.
I'm old enough to remember when the idea of a Christian theocracy in the US was considered insane by anyone except the most extreme conservatives; while militias were something only domestic terrorists and the most extreme political radicals supported.
And I'm honestly, not that old. I just... I've watched the downward spiral and it seems like no one in power actually wants to stop it, which is why I've become so jaded and cynical. It's why I think revolution is coming, and I'm just hoping that the political ideology I'm aligned with won't be forced into fighting a losing war against the US military.
That's why I think people should support Biden. No, he's not a good person, and I don't think he honestly has the best interests of America and the rest of the world in mind. Sure, he's tried to do some good things like (unsuccessfully) forgiving student loans multiple times and showing support for America's unions, however he's still enabling Israel's genocide and he's still beholden to the corporations that fund his party (which means he'll avoid real changes whenever possible). Yet, if Biden gets elected and the American right-wing revolts (I'm convinced they'll try), then the US military will be fighting them, not us. If Trump gets elected then there may not even be a chance for revolution before cops start kicking people's doors down.
Anyone that wants to accelerate things has never lived in the kind of world that they're advocating for.
I had a teacher in school that was a Bosnian Muslim during the genocide of the Balkan wars. She, her older brother, and her mom made it out. I never heard her talk about her dad, so I don't think that he did. She and her older brother would practice their drawing by the light of burning tires. The eventually escaped to England, and then got asylum in the US.
I would agree with you, but who's working on fixing things? It's looking close this time, and the historical pattern is that the Presidency flips parties when an incumbent can't run. What's the plan so we can ensure that a GQP authoritarian doesn't win in 2028? This was the talking point in 2020, and very little happened; Biden's AG even waited almost 3 years to appoint a special counsel, only after being buffaloed into it by the House January 6th committee, virtually ensuring that there trial will be delayed until after the election. And there's still no action whatsoever to hold Bush administration officials accountable.
I've asked the question "what's the plan to stop fascism in 2028?" several times now, with no other response, so I guess the answer is, "pull off a communist revolution in just 4 years."
Yes, by all means, exercise your right to vote as you see fit. But if the only way we can avoid fascism is by never losing an election, shouldn't we be seeking better ideas and stronger protections from fascism now before that plan fails?
If you don't vote you're not a part of the conversation. You obviously don't have any grasp on how the election process works anyways, so why are you even keyboard warrioring this at all?
I'm not saying that either. I told you to use your right how you see fit. It is not my place to tell you how to vote, nor is it my place to negatively pressure strangers into voting for my preference. I think everyone should vote. I'm also saying that promising votes to politicians regardless of their actions indicate that their actions won't hurt their chances.
I'm also saying that promising votes to politicians regardless of their actions indicate that their actions won't hurt their chances.
That's very true and likely going to lead to a very nasty future once this is thoroughly exploited. But I don't think that just "there should be something better" might help. Also, there might exist unsolvable problems, and if this is one of those we're in a very bad position, indeed
That's also part of my point. Voting will not get us out of this problem. We need to pressure politicians, we need to protest, we need to organize, and we need to implement more successful alternatives to the status quo. We will never avoid fascism if the only thing we do is vote. Right now the best way to pressure the better candidate is to make him believe, right up until election day, that he will lose.
You can't have it both ways. You might only be "pretending" to be withholding your vote but your "pretend" stops when all the people you've dissaffected don't show up.
Studies show that even in states that still do a plurality vote but encourage 3rd party voters see higher overall turnout and generally favor democratic candidates. The only ones disaffecting voters are the ones pushing the narrative of "a vote for x is a vote for y".
You have to choose your words more carefully. There's a lot of astroshitting all over the place. Should expect no less, if the primary races and 2016 and 2020 were any indication.
I agree "vote blue no matter who" is potentially dangerous. However at this current juncture, it really doesn't matter. Republicans can't be allowed to have control of another branch. They've shown their hand, and are pulling no punches. Straight up lies, exaggerations, and accusations fueling a culture war in a strategy to get to 270 with as little a popular vote as possible.
If we could win by more than the slimmest margins, there'd be a hell of a lot more room for division within the party.
Ideally the Dems would win so hard that the Republicans would be forced to change or go extinct. And ideally, the Republican party would lose so badly for so long that they cease to be relevant and the Dems split into two parties.
Why 48% of the country votes against this is mind boggling.
Paradoxically, people somehow think that voting for a third party will make the Dems change their platform n
Not sure how that's supposed to work. The more people that vote for a third party, the less people vote for the main party. That could make the result 48-47-5 with Trump still winning, and the Dems have no way to move the needle, because now they have no office. Or it could make it 28 third party, 30 Biden, and 42 Trump. Either way Trump wins.
Third party votes take votes away from the most aligned primary party and ultimately makes the outcome less desirable. The only way they can be effective is when the aligned party already has a very comfortable lead, and even then its risky.
I also think it's incredibly arrogant to think that a third party could come completely out of left field and score the highest office in the land while holding few (if any) state and local offices.
You don't understand how FPTP works. It is designed to penalize people for voting for a third party (because it will always devolve to two parties. They may occasionally change, but it starts at the bottom, not at the oval office).
This "lesser of two evils" is a consequence of that. No one candidate is going to be best aligned with the majority of people. When there are two candidates, one will be more aligned than the other.
When a third candidate enters, they have to be closer to one of the two, and attracts voters that were more closely aligned with the primary party candidate.
So if you've got a close FPTP race, you could easily take a race that would otherwise be 51/49, make it 47/49/4, and even though the majority of people were more closely aligned with Candidate A, because some of them went for C, candidate B won instead.
Therefore, it's foolish to abstain because you disagree with all candidates, because somebody is going to win no matter what. And it is foolish to vote for a third party, because they will not win, they will only detract from the closely aligned party, which in turn favors the less-aligned party.
Then you should know that to move things left, you need to vote more local progressives.
People don't start out going for the presidency (and they shouldn't, as the obvious recent mistake of a president shows).
Slowing down fascism provides opportunity for progressive politicians to make moves in the right direction, and take positions that are higher up the ladder.
Allowing a nose dive to fascism prevents the progressive folks from having an opportunity.
In short - yes, slowing it down is good enough at the presidential level.
I do know that. You seem like you're pretty in tune as well, so you should be aware that being permissive and/or welcoming of 3rd party presidential candidates generally favor democrats at the state and local level.
And it depends on the main candidates as well. What we have now is "strong" words against genocide while continuing, or fascist genocide. The third party candidate (RFKJr) is an anti-vax, conspiracy theorist, covid-19 denying, whacko with name recognition for a while host of democrats, and was one until. He's a spoiler candidate. Voting 3rd party in this election is, imo, dangerous.
I'm not sure what mutual respect you're referencing. If it's the kind you've been putting forth then I'm right there with you, and you have nothing to complain about.
If you're just saying "no fair!" then too bad, there no fairness in life. That's reality.
By mutual respect I mean not assuming ill will when a new person enters a discussion. I've voted in every single presidential, state, local, municipal, and union election since I turned 18 in 2014.
Do you acknowledge that you're voting for a coin toss between a slower descent or a faster descent into fascism? Averaging out to you being in favor of an even faster descent into fascism than the person you replied to?
Yes but not voting for that candidate is effectively just like voting for the other even worse guy.
I mean we both know that Biden ain't great, but Trump? Trump is far fuckXng worse! Don't like the genocide ? Biden is wayyyyyy more likely to sign a ceasefire than Trump. Want Trans Rights? Biden doesn't care, Trump wants to remove them. I'd rather have Biden's apathy than Trump's hate.
You know what would force Biden to provide actually decent politics? If people demanded them and withhold their vote otherwise. And you know who would rather want Trump to win, than provide adequate protection of human rights, including Trans rights? Joe Biden, the guy you want to vote for. The DNC and him are laughing their asses off together with the Reps that no matter what, you will keep letting them get away with it.
The one risking Trump to win again is Biden. And he does so because he doesnt give a fuck about protecting you or anybody else. If you remove yourself from the power of punishing a politician and will always reward him no matter what, you are removing your own democratic power. It is not about "owning" Biden. It is about taking your power and sovereignity, that you are supposed to have in a Democracy. By giving them the blanket check, you are surrendering yourself to them and encourage them to do their worst. And make no mistake. The Dems will start cracking down on LGBT people if they think that to be necessary to gain votes in some states.
Well what are you going to do about it?! As far as I know there is nothing you could do to change that before November.
If you vote for Biden now you get 4 more years where you're free to protest as much as you want, because contrary to Trump, Biden is likely to be receptive to your protests. We are not powerless.
And even if we were, what would happen? You don't vote for Biden -> Trump wins -> the whole country shifts even more into conservative ideologies -> you don't vote democrat again -> same thing but worse.
you are removing your own democratic power
Ok I see your point but not voting is like not even using that power and if you read my previous point you can see how your democratic power will go even lower if you don't do anything.
There is other parties on the ballot too. Definetely people should be voting, but they shouldnt vote Dems if the Dems continue genocide. Imagine there is 20% Green vote all of a sudden. Then Dems will be scared shitless and know that they have to work to win back those voters because the next election it might be that the "two parties" will be Green and Reps instead.
But better yet apply the pressure now and go demonstrate, talk to your representatives, take union action against the genocide...
You're just an accelerationist. Fatalism, nihilism, apathy, hopeless, etc aren't anything new, most of us disagree with you. I wonder if your outlook would improve if you got therapy or if you had a little skin in the game and stood to lose something.
The little bit you have actually said has indicated that and you have done absolutely nothing to refute it so my advice is that sarcasm only works when the targeted recipient of it has been shown you would only say it sarcastically.
Why not? You're claiming they're operating on a principle of trying to accelerate collapse, and that Trump is the candidate to do that. But this is completely inconsistent with what the person is saying they'll do. It doesn't explain their behavior.
Who says they aren’t?
So we're just making things up whole cloth about people now?
It's cute of you to step in to defend your alt account, but you can't be serious.
They're an accelerationist, for whatever reason, they want collapse. The quicker it happens the better, they admitted as much above.
You're supposing that Trump is the candidate to do that, I think most of lemmy would agree with you so I'll cede that point.
That point ceded, we can agree most of lemmy won't vote for Trump right? So what would be the point of talking about voting Trump here? It's far more effective for the accelerationist (who likely isn't conservative anyway) to be a "leftist" who's so disgusted with how corrupt and unfair the system is they simply just check out and encourage others to check out as well, "both sides are the same" of course.
So we're just making things up whole cloth about people now?
We're inferring things, it's quite a bit different comrade.
In a democratic political party you can influence the politics democratically. In a fascist party: Not possible.
The country does not need to hit rock bottom before it can improve. It can be changed democratically from within if you allow it to by voting for anything but the party that will take away that possibility.
You need to go take a civics class and stop trying to suppress the leftwing vote. Do you expect anyone to sit down and explain to you how campaigning for issues works? Do you expect us to list every decent win "the left" has gotten the last 5-10 years?
What have you gotten accomplished? What have you even participated in?
Just because you sit in a basement unplugged from reality, doomscrolling, doesn't mean the rest of should sit here and take advice from you. You admit you just want fascism faster.
Bad-faith, accelerationist, useful idiot. If it weren't so cliche I'd call you Vlad.
That was a lot of words to not even attempt to answer a very simple question
Bad-faith, accelerationist
I like the self awareness displayed by calling me bad faith and then immediately reiterating the thing you just made up about me and decided was true based on what seems to be a deliberately bad interpretation of my original comment.
So what do you suppose we do? Start a revolution against the biggest military on earth? I believe America needs to stop having a two party system, this way there is more chance someone like Bernie gets elected. But alas who will vote for them...
I already said this somewhere else but please vote, not voting for Biden is essentially like voting for Trump. And once Biden is in you can be as mad as you want against him, protest and shit, because Biden might actually listen, Trump would never.
No, it's not "essentially like voting for Trump". It's voting for the person you voted for. What is the fundamental difference between voting for Biden and voting for a different candidate in the event of a Trump victory? There is none. Do not shame the voters. Shame the politicians into acting in a way deserving of leadership.
So what if voting blue will end up with innocent people dying? Their sacrifice for my freedom will not go without honor. I will enshrine their lives with a statue commemorating their bravery in the fight for my freedom. The lives of innocent trans people, black people, and Palestinian children is a steep cost but it's one I'm willing to spend for me to go to Starbucks and get a latte for $9. Who's to say my life is worth more than theirs? Well Joe Biden made that determination for us, so I believe that's right! I'm glad it's a bunch of random black and brown people getting blown to bits for my right to vote, not me!
If the Dems keep winning the Republicans will have to slide left. It happened in the UK with Labour (unfortunately in the opposite direction).
When that happens, and Trump is not literally attempting to end democracy using project 2025, the plan of strong-arming the dem candidate into being more left is plenty feasible, and the risks are less dire.
It happened in the UK with Labour (unfortunately in the opposite direction)
This happened after Labour's entrenched power groups vigorously sabotaged Corbyn. Corbyn committed a somewhat serious blunder during Brexit, but he still had Labour well in the direction of defeating the Tories, and that might have happened earlier if his most spiteful opponents hadn't been inside his own party.
Ah yes, that time several years ago when the dems won last election, the republicans responded by "sliding left". When the dems win 2024 the republicans will also be very civilized and non violent and slide even further left. Non-whites and LGBT people everywhere in America will be safer the night Joe Biden is elected than the night before, you heard it here from HauntedCupcake first!
You mostly don't see it because they win inconsistently by a narrow margin. It would totally happen if the republicans weren't so popular and the Dems kept winning. Hence the hypothetical.
The main issue is convincing the populace, but my point is more that the US has a way out of fascism, the public just need to recognise and want it
Thats not going to happen. The small handful of swing states will dictate a pattern of both parties steadily and we'll just keep going lower. Im sorry but there's zero chance the US doesn't elect enough republicans for them to be forced to change policy. They're making gains.
whichever side we support stands a chance of winning. They aint gonna compete in a game of skill in November, they're gonna ask us who wins and we decide.
Yes, "we", consisting of statistically significant factions of the voting population. Campaigns take time and money, neither of which any candidates besides the two front-runners have enough of to be competitive. They're not gonna ask you who wins, you don't decide. I don't see 70 million Americans shifting to anyone else at this stage.
Is it a paradox to say that driving in circles around a roundabout is pointless because it doesn't get you anywhere, but driving along the route to a destination does? Driving is driving, does it work or not? Paradox! Smearing food on your belly doesn't satisfy your hunger, but eating it does. Does food satisfy hunger or not? Paradox!
If we had approval or ranked choice voting, voting third party would accomplish something. Since we have First Past the Past elections, voting third party is as effective as smearing food on your belly or circling a roundabout for hours.
Its pretty irritating everytime someone brings up ranked choice voting. They know its a good thing, they want it to happen. But its getting brought up to try and criticize my choice of candidate. You want ranked choice voting? You know who supports ranked choice voting in their election platform? My candidate! I am well aware of how shit FPTP voting is, Im not the one promoting it.
I'm not promoting it either, that doesn't change the fact that it is what we use. Voting for a candidate that supports RCV doesn't basically mean that the election you voted for them in becomes retroactively RCV, you act based on what the system is, not what it should be.
That's not how the system works. All voting third party does is equivocate approval for the two front runners. Do you approve of the insurrectionist fascist and the neo-liberal equally? Are they exactly the same to you? Do you think they are equally supportive of election reform?
The fascists with minority support only have power because kids who don't understand the electoral system either abstain from voting, or vote third party. If everyone held their nose and showed up to vote lesser evil, the Republican party would wither away into being a third party themselves and a progressive party could actually gain footing.
Your candidate doesn't stand a chance precisely because people like you keep pretending the system works differently.
If everyone held their nose and showed up to vote lesser evil, the Republican party would wither away into being a third party themselves and a progressive party could actually gain footing.
Hows that goin for ya? Making any progress in the decades you've been trying that for? 'If everyone just did this', yeah? How about if everyone just voted for the candidate that supports ranked choice? Just get everyone to do X.
Pretty well actually, considering the glacial pace inherent to changing a political landscape. It's made it onto the ballot in several states, and is used several local and state-wide elections here and there. The Fair Representation Act has been brought to th the floor in 2017, 2019, 2021, and again this year but it hasn't been voted on yet.
How about if everyone just voted for the candidate that supports ranked choice?
How's that going for ya? Elected a third party candidate to the presidency yet?
so Im looking into states that have implemented this, to see if electing democrats had anything to do with it. Looking at Alaska and Maine at least, democrats had nothing to do with it, they were citizen initiatives brought to election referendum, neither democrats or republican representatives introduced or voted on it. Notably, the Alaska state legislature has more republican members than democrats.
How’s that going for ya? Elected a third party candidate to the presidency yet?
I think you missed my point of us being in the same boat. You're not likely to get enough people to vote for people they dont like to crowd out republicans in Washington, and Im not likely to get enough people to vote for people they would otherwise love with a D or R by their name.
The Fair Representation Act has been sponsored by a Democrat every time.
It's orders of magnitude more probable to get the slim minority you're talking about to align D than it is to get the overwhelming majority I'm talking about to rally behind the same third party candidate. It's not even worth comparing, the concept is laughable at best. To even hint at that happening this election is bordering on clinical levels of delusion.
If you want to campaign for your candidate next cycle, be my guest. Start early, organize, fundraise and get the message out. Next cycle. This cycle, you're dividing the anti-Project-2025 voting bloc. This cycle, you run the very real risk of ensuring there is no next cycle. Remember that.
Yes, a democrat, with single digit cosponsors out of hundreds of democrats in a democrat controlled house the last time it was brought up. If the democratic party wanted ranked choice voting, we would have ranked choice voting now. the democrat controlled house didnt even bring it up for a vote. That's the thing, it's republicans=conservative and democrats=progressive for you, but a large number of democrats are conservative to me. I dont think a fully democrat controlled congress passes ranked choice voting. I dont think they pass lobbying reform. Hell there are democrats that still vote against minimum wage increases. I dont think a fully democrat controlled government looks much different from the one today.
What's gonna be different next cycle? You think Trump's going away? You'll be right here again in 2028 telling me democracy is at stake if I dont vote for your choice.
Don't forget that it's not ok to vote for your candidate because they don't already have enough support, therefore there's no way to ever reach the threshold where it'll be ok to vote for them.
It's only ok to vote for the neolibs that the billionaires approve after a promise that nothing's really going to change.
Even in a state that's so blue the Dems have no chance of losing, voting for or writing in someone left of the incumbent will still be deemed a vote for the red team.
"No Joeboy, i don't like it that you killed all the brown kids on the playground. But since you are my favorite child we will still get ice cream for you now."
Would you parent a child like this? It is doomed to fail. You are all setting yourself up to continuously get fucked by both the DNC and the Reps.
One of two people is going to be in charge of the country seven months from now. You can have the boring liberal with an awful allegiance to a questionable ally run by a power-hungry bastard... or you can have our very own power-hungry bastard, who is also going to give the aforementioned bastard everything he wants.
Someone is getting that ice cream. Let's make it the kid who is trying to murder the parents and take over the family and will kill even more brown kids while throwing tantrums.
And that is your failure as a people. You raised your politicians into knowing that they will get their ice cream regardless of what they do. And you are currently reinforcing it, instead of saying: You have 5 month to fix your shit. If you fix it, there will be a big bucket of ice cream, otherwise no.
No, that's the system we inherited. And some of us are working to fix it. Later this year one of those two kids is getting that ice cream no matter what I say about it. To pretend otherwise makes you an idiot, a liar, or a jackass.
Your failures as a person are bad analogies, bad analysis, and ignoring the fact that anything else we do kills even more brown people. But I suspect that's what you like. You're mad he's not killing enough of them.
So be mad. You're a bad actor and this conversation is over. I'm not responding to you for you, but for anyone else reading that wants to know why you love killing brown people.
Edit: Downvotes from people who are trying to get extra genocide because there's not enough currently are absolutely welcome. I'm glad you disagree with me.
Nobody thinks its a magic bullet, we're all looking for the next rung that leads us closer to a happy democracy. None of us are looking for instant easy solutions, we're trying to iterate and be better.
Obligatory: "Ranked Choice" is a specific use of ranked ballots. It's subpar. It beats what we're doing now, but anything beats what we're doing now.
What you want is a Condorcet method like Ranked Pairs, where the winner is whoever beats everyone else. RCV just picks whoever can scrounge together 50% first. RCV would not elect a candidate who is literally everyone's second choice. Ranked Pairs would.
The simple alternative is Approval Voting, where you let people check all the names they like. It matches Condorcet results... somehow. There is no good reason we're not using it everywhere.
Approval Voting seems to just dilute your vote the more candidates you vote for. Candidates will tell people people to only place one vote. What a silly system.
But ranked choice is easy to implement and in practice if everyone would put a candidate second they aren't likely to be knocked out in the first round. There are very limited practical examples where it doesn't provide the optimal outcome.
It also seems to have some level of support and momentum in the US and it seems to me like it'd be better not to get caught in the weeds fighting over which new voting system should be implemented there.
This is absurd. Take a look at the polls. There is only one 3rd-party candidate with double digit percentages. Do you really think JFK is taking more votes from Biden than Trump?
I never made any indication on how I'm voting. I'm just tired of this baseless claim that voting 3rd party only helps Trump. Polls excluding 3rd-parties show Trump significantly further ahead than those with 3rd-parties. Therefore, Biden's only chance of winning is due to JFK capturing conservative votes.
What is "how America works" in this context? You seem to be trying to make the point that 3rd-party voting only hurts Biden. I'm pointing to recent polling that shows that, when 3rd-party options are included, Biden's margins get closer to victory. You should be thanking 3rd-parties if you are hoping for a Biden victory.
A different way to think about it - most of the intended audience on Lemmy, and especially in this community, would've voted democrat instead of republican. So from the frame of reference of this post, most folks here claiming to vote third party did in fact have their vote "taken" from Biden.
If she had bothered to campaign in the Midwest and had just generally been a much better candidate, more people would have.
It's the job of a politician to earn votes and faithfully represent the priorities of the majority of the voters. People like Hillary, Biden, Schumer and the rest of the Dem leadership seldom do either.
It’s also the job of the electorate to educate themselves on the consequences of their vote (and non-vote). Don’t act like nobody knew who Trump was, what he had already done, or was listening to what he was saying.
Again you are completely taking Biden out of his responsibility. Why do you want to vote for a guy that rather wants to lose to Trump, than provide decent policies around basic human rights, like the right not to get genocided?
Biden and the DNC rulers are a group of psychopaths. They will not care as long as they get the money form their rich donors, who don't care if Biden or Trump is doing their bidding.
Again you are completely taking Biden out of his responsibility.
Ve done nothing of the sort. If you think anything I’ve said even comes close to that, you’re hallucinating. Or lying.
Why do you want to vote for a guy that rather wants to lose to Trump, than provide decent policies around basic human rights, like the right not to get genocided?
That’s such a loaded question and so absurdly fallacious on its face, I’m not going to even dignify it by answering it, but I will say that you clearly don’t care what I want, just to push an agenda.
But, since you didn’t ask, what I want is for Trump to lose, and that math is simple: any vote not for Biden helps Trump, and no matter how much you dislike Biden, Trump will be 1000x worse. We know, because Trump has promised that.
Biden and the DNC rulers are a group of psychopaths.
Compared to Trump, they’re saints, and if you can’t see that, you’re clearly incapable of rational discourse on the matter. Or you’re clearly here to feebly undermine confidence in Biden in support of Trump.
Either way, your argument is transparent, fact-free, and little more than Fox News fodder.
By voting Biden you declare your support of his policies. That is the fundamental way of how democracies work. You vote your representative because you think he is representing you.
By attacking anyone who says you shouldn't approve of genocide as your representation you abolish your representative from his responsibility of not supporting genocide and instead blame it on the people who think that genocide is never an acceptable representation for them.
For you individually as a citizen there is only one legal way to hold a politician responsible. And that is by denying them further support in the next election. Now if it comes to group action through demonstrations, unions, lobbying etc. that is great and even better to do. But if it is down to you and the ballot the only direct thing is to declare before what your political demands are and vote accordingly. If your demand is "genocide is okay" then you will have to make that up with your consciousness, the victims and survivors and eventually towards future generations.
By voting Biden you declare your support of his policies.
Wrong. But if telling lies makes you feel better about voting for a literal fascist (or doing nothing to stop him) who promises to be a dictator from day 1, don’t blame me for trying to stop that when it’s clearly what you want.
"I don't like Biden's support for Israel's genocide so I'm going to make it more likely that the guy who would support Israel's genocide even more gets into office."
It’s also the job of the electorate to educate themselves on the consequences of their vote (and non-vote).
It actually isn't, no. Nobody is paying them to do that and, in the case of millions if not tens of people who are amongst the working poor because of the kind of economic policy the Dems have been putting out ever since she and her husband remade the party in their own image in 1992, they aren't realistically able to with neither candidates nor mainstream media helping them sort the wheat from the chaff.
When you're already working 60 hours a week trying (and often failing) to make ends meet on top on whatever family commitments you may have, you can't be expected to have energy left to fact check candidates and media outlets for free. It's simply not that voter's responsibility to keep powerful and well-paid people honest.
Don’t act like nobody knew who Trump was, what he had already done, or was listening to what he was saying.
Then maybe Hillary and the media shouldn't shouldn't have done all they could to make sure he became the candidate!
That the fascist ever got anywhere near the nomination, let alone the presidency itself, is hundreds of times more the fault of the rich and powerful people paid to prevent it than the people they failed to convince to vote for an evil, however lesser it would have been.
It actually isn't, no. Nobody is paying them to do that
That is the worst and most entitled excuse for the abandonment for any and all personal responsibility since I heard my 3-year-old niece try to convince my brother she should never have to wipe her own butt because he will always be there to do it for her.
Clearly, you didn't understand what I was trying to explain any better than your niece would have.
If anyone's abandoning personal responsibility, it's the awful candidates who don't do their job and then blame people who suffer for it much more than the candidates ever will.
I'm not saying that it's a good or even neutral thing to not vote for the lesser evil when only evils are available. Of course that's had.
I'm saying that it's the responsibility of the candidates to not be evil and to convince enough voters of it that the greater evil doesn't win.
Clearly, you didn't understand what I was trying to explain any better than your niece would have.
I understand that you’re trying to blame others for something that’s your own responsibility: educating yourself, and the consequences of your own actions, such as your vote
And while you whine about candidates “not being evil” and refuse to vote for Biden, you help the far more “evil” Trump win.
But I’m sure, just like my 3 year-old niece, you’ll find someone else to blame for the consequences of your actions.
I understand that you’re trying to blame others for something that’s your own responsibility: educating yourself
Clearly you don't understand since that's in no way what I'm doing. I DO educate myself about the candidates, their policy positions and their trustworthiness at every election. I'm saying that not everyone CAN s that since they already have more to do than can be reasonably expected of them.
and the consequences of your own actions, such as your vote
Again, not myself I'm talking about. I'm gonna be at my local polling place come election day no matter how much I have to hold my nose and suppress my gag reflex
I have it easier than just tens of millions of working poor: I don't have to work long hours on election day. I don't have children I'd need to get someone to look after and my local polling place isn't understaffed and the only one available to hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.
Voting isn't easy for everyone as it is for me and evidently also you.
And while you whine about candidates “not being evil” and refuse to vote for Biden
Again not once since I turned 18 23 years ago have I missed a chance to cast my vote
you help the far more “evil” Trump win.
Nope, that's you lot with your insistence that everyone shut up and obey your crappy candidates and never demand good choices.
A good candidate would beat the orange man-child in a landslide ten times out that ten. Only awful candidates lose to him or barely scrape a win.
Clearly you don't understand since that's im no way what I'm doing
It’s the first thing you said in your first reply to me. lol
Again, not myself I'm talking about.
When it’s your vote, of course it is. you’re just trying to deflect responsibility for that (and educating yourself) onto others. It was the very first thing you said to me.
Voting isn't easy for everyone as it is for me and evidently also you.
And
Nope, that's you lot with your insistence that everyone shut up and obey your crappy candidates and never demand good choices.
Making up stories again as an excuse to blame others for the consequences of your actions.
And you’re hallucinating again if you heard anyone say that you can’t demand good choices. But you’re also delusional if you believe that helping Trump win by not voting for Biden will accomplish anything but the opposite.
It’s the first thing you said in your first reply to me.
Said it in third person about other people. Learn how grammar works.
When it’s your vote, of course it is. you’re just trying to deflect responsibility for that (and educating yourself) onto others
Again, it isn't. As I told you at length, I've never not voted and have always researched candidates before doing so.
What I'm trying to get through your thick skull is that other people don't have the time, energy and easy opportunity to do that, which makes it important for candidates to be honest and good enough to be worth going through all that trouble while already running on fumes.
Both Biden and Hillary have failed that part of THEIR job abysmally.
It was the very first thing you said to me.
Again, learn fucking grammar 🤦
Making up stories again as an excuse to blame others for the consequences of your actions.
Of the dozens of times you were dropped on your head as a child, how many would you say were intentional?
And you’re hallucinating again if you heard anyone say that you can’t demand good choices
You didn't literally say so, but you're implying as much by telling everyone to shut up and fall behind awful choices such as Biden.
But you’re also delusional if you believe that helping Trump win by not voting for Biden will accomplish anything but the opposite.
Again, never said anything of the sort. You shitlibs REALLY love using that strawman every time anyone points out how Biden is throwing the election and thus American democracy.
You’re the only one who puts the words in anyone’s mouth, and repeatedly lied and hallucinated to make your absurd and fallacious argument. The comments here bear that out. Once again, blaming others for the consequences of your own actions.
If anyone's abandoning personal responsibility, it's the awful candidates who don't do their job and then blame people who suffer for it much more than the candidates ever will.
Don't bother. They don't want to understand that and will continue to just ignore that point while screaming. Everyone who doesn't want to vote for their candidate is a "tankie facist" to them anyways.
“No you!” is yet another argument I’d expect from my 3 year-old niece. But it doesn’t change the facts, and your comments are still here for everyone to see.
Nor does it change the fact that your vote is your responsibility alone, as are the consequences.
I'm just pointing out your obvious projection. That you automatically call that "no you" rather than consider whether I might be right only confirms my point further.
I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the poor niece you keep defaming is actually much more reasonable than you are. Possibly better at reading too.
You should go do something fun in stead of just repeating the same misconceptions again and again.
Maybe play some Fallout New Vegas or watch Barbenheimer back to back?
Another argument I expect from my three-year-old niece. But it doesn’t change the fact that you are responsible for your vote and the consequences of your own actions.
Not job, DUTY. Otherwise I get your point. I'd like to add that it is also the duty of those more educated to try to educate others in a non-hostile, factual, and rhetorically effective way in order to bolster the numbers of people who can make informed/educated decisions on these things.
I honestly regret not voting for Hillary. I didn't vote for Trump either, I voted third-party because I thought Hillary was going to win, and even if she didn't win, what's the worst Trump could do, huh? So I figured it wouldn't hurt to vote for a third-party with the hope they'd get enough points to be on the debate stage during the next general election.
Granted, my vote probably wouldn't have made a difference. Tbh, considering I live in a state with winner-takes-all voting, I'm not even sure my vote actually matters now; but I'm still going to vote for Biden. It's better than assuming he'll win and risking another Trump victory.
Yes, I know I'm not the main character and I'm only one person. I know that changing my vote alone won't make a difference. However, whatmightmake a difference is if I talk about my reasoning in a public forum. Then, people might stop, read my post, and change their minds. Now, it's not one vote, it's two. They might spread their view as well, and two votes becomes four. Four votes becomes eight; and eight becomes sixteen. As small as that sounds, sixteen votes can make all the difference in an election. There are elections that have come down to one or two votes.
I did the same thing, in a solidly blue state, with the same thought processes; I voted for Jill Stein. Even after Trump won, I figured he couldn't fuck it up too badly. I even thought he might manage to get one thing right (I'm very solidly pro-2A), but nope, he couldn't even do that.
Biden isn't nearly far enough left for me. But I'll vote for him without even a hint of hesitation, because he's so much better than the only realistic possibility. And I live in a purple state now, so it might end up mattering.
