You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-35 points

Every vote for Harris is stealing a vote from third-party candidates who represent real change. By sidelining those voices, you’re indirectly helping Trump win!

If you really want to avoid a Trump win, supporting a viable alternative outside the two-party system is the only way to push the conversation forward.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

If you really want to avoid a Trump win, supporting a viable alternative outside the two-party system is the only way to push the conversation forward.

Ok so this is bad faith or you clearly have no idea how this country works. Or maybe even both.

So let me get this straight… In order to avoid another Trump term, we must vote for a party that, mathematically, has no chance of winning? Taking votes from the only candidate running against Trump that might win in the process?

Let’s remember that Trump said he will not run again if he loses. That means winning in 2024 is the only way that “another win” can happen.

So please, I would love for you to explain to me, how voting third party in 2024 will “avoid a Trump win”?

Again, and perhaps you just don’t know how elections here work, but these candidates can not possibly win.

That’s not hyperbole, they are literally incapable of securing the 270 electoral votes needed to win. Please tell me you understand this. Like you get the basic arithmetic being used here, right?

So with that said… I would LOVE to hear how voting third party will avoid another Trump term.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’ll take this as capitulation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

part of me shitting on third parties is the fact they enable the bad stuff they want to happen, see the elections of 2000 and 2016. but it also needs to be pointed out, repeatedly, loudly, this other point you just nade:

IT IS STATISTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR A THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE TO WIN ENOUGH ELECTORAL VOTES TO BECOME PRESIDENT.

they don’t have an answer for that. if they do respond they never address that specific point only saying well enough people just have to vote third party.

none of these people have any clue how our government or elections or voting works. I’ll bet some of them are convinced that because the cheneys endorsed harris it means she’s an even bigger genocider even though they both have said they don’t agree with her politics except for the politics that preserve the constitution. they’re dead enders man.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

IT IS STATISTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR A THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE TO WIN ENOUGH ELECTORAL VOTES TO BECOME PRESIDENT.

saying it doesn’t make it true

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-17 points

Every vote for Harris is stealing a vote from third-party candidates who represent real change. By sidelining those voices, you’re indirectly helping Trump win!

If you really want to avoid a Trump win, supporting a viable alternative outside the two-party system is the only way to push the conversation forward.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

K

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Every vote for Harris is stealing a vote from third-party candidates

Sorry but that’s an absolute shit take. I didn’t mention any individual candidate or party. I didn’t say voting for a third party is a vote for opposite major party candidate. It’s just basic math that the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in a state wins that state. If you think there is a state where any third party candidate has a chance of winning please show me the polling that backs it up. Otherwise, just admit that the winner will be the nominee from one of the two major party candidates, and admitting that acknowledge that basic math says the more 3rd party votes are cast, the fewer votes there are between the 2 major party candidates for one of them to overcome. You can be pissed off about it all you want, but it’s reality.

If you really want to avoid a Trump win, supporting a viable alternative outside the two-party system is the only way to push the conversation forward.

Unfortunately that is just idealist naivete. I vote in the major party primaries to try and get either the least crazy republican (gerrymandered districts) or the most progressive democratic candidate on the ballot. The only thing that will break the duopoly is to get RCV in every state, and the presidential election has fuck-all to do with accomplishing that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

It’s the very duopoly you’re stuck with that makes real change impossible without challenging it. While ranked-choice voting (RCV) is important, dismissing third-party voting as useless only keeps the system locked in place. Voting for a third party is part of pushing for bigger reforms like RCV—it’s a step towards showing there’s demand for alternatives outside the same old two-party narrative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It’s the very duopoly you’re stuck with that makes real change impossible without challenging it.

Indeed. But no 3rd party candidate has received a single EC vote since 1968. Voting 3rd party for president in the general clearly isn’t doing a god damn thing to shift the parties.

While ranked-choice voting (RCV) is important, dismissing third-party voting as useless only keeps the system locked in place.

I never said it was useless. But it’s true that voting for a less popular left-leaning is going to reduce the number of votes that the most popular right-leaning candidate needs to receive to beat the most popular left-leaning candidate.

Voting for a third party is part of pushing for bigger reforms like RCV—it’s a step towards showing there’s demand for alternatives outside the same old two-party narrative.

I don’t think you will get the ear of the Democratic party by skipping the primaries or voting in a 3rd party primary. They don’t know how you vote in a general, so you showing up in their primary is the only way they know reliably that you have opinions for their direction. Bernie succeeded in shifting the Democratic party left by running in the Democratic primary. Lets do that at the local levels, especially for primary candidates who support RCV. There’s pretty much no chance we can get RCV as a federal law, SCOTUS would absolutely knock it down as unconstitutional, so that fight has to come through the state legislatures.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I think they’ve switched candidates they’re voting for a few times, since they don’t have any values other than getting MAGA in office and their preferred candidates don’t have any values other than receiving foreign money.

They’re mad every time they get called out on campaigning for MAGA. So of course we get “no u” style responses, whether or not it makes any sense whatsoever.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 426K

    Comments