It’s a first past the post system with only two major political parties. That means the choice is either the selected Democrat or the selected Republican, who are elected via a complex primary process that differs from state to state.
Voting third party in the U.S. achieves absolutely nothing. Especially when there are almost never third party choices for lower office, aside from the libertarians and they’re nuts. If you are determined to not vote for any Democrats or Republicans, your vote has the same effect as staying home and not voting.
I would love this to change, but I don’t foresee that happening anytime soon.
Hey, chin up. If the batshit nuts right wing of the GOP keep going the way they are maybe we’ll get a brand spanking new fascist third party. Lol, third party achieved!
Tangent for a moment: I’m kind of curious, if we could somehow encourage more stupidity on the right. Perhaps, the GOP would fracture into two parties.
In the short term, it could give Dems a large say in everything. Bolstered by the fact that the hard right is very performative and not really interested in doing any real work. In the more medium term, maybe that would finally give some freedom to open the door for more Dems and voters to peel off into yet another party.
I guess at that point, the danger is the right would then realize the situation. Rally their fractured party and completely ice out Dems and whatever left party that came out of the above. Multipolar politics at the party level could get really freaking scary too.
I really doubt the GOP splits. As much as the Trump and anti-Trump factions of the party dislike each other, they’re stuck together by the evil of strategic voting. We would need a different voting system to allow the existence of a third party that doesn’t also act as a spoiler.
It does not achieve absolutely nothing. It sends a message of policy requirements to obtain a percentage of votes. Meaning, if dems lose enough elections by a margin that is seen voting elsewhere they will have to move their policy to secure those votes and start winning again. The problem now is with trump threatening our freedoms and democracy, we can’t afford to teach those stubborn centrists a lesson in true progressive policy.
Go a reread the last sentence in my statement and explain how that implies trump has to win. Ive clearly stated the problem is with trump running, we can’t afford to lose to teach the dem establishment a lesson.
You know what is even less rational? Parroting the same shit that has been repeated ad nauseum by liberals for the past 40 years and then expecting an improved outcome.
That’s not how this works. That’s not how any of this works.
Democrats losing your vote to a 3rd party doesn’t trigger some kind of response within the party that will push them to embrace the tactics of the 3rd party that siphoned off your vote. If anything, it demonstrates to them that they should maybe push further right in an attempt to court Trump voters. But it’s cute that you believe you’re making a difference.
Congratulations. Instead of holding your nose and voting for the one guy who COULD beat trump and avoid sending the country into fascism, your principled stand allowed a fascist to rise to power AND sent Democrats the message that people prefer fascism.
What it can do eventually is destory the democratic party, then since we are in a two party system a new more leftist party can finally move in. Afterall one of the most important parts of the Democratic party is to make sure people like Bernie, let alone anyone to left of him, have no chance to be elected. They are the biggest barrier to progress.
Yes I am sure. Everytime someone to the left of Bernie get’s anywhere close to power you will hear democrats like Pelosi or Schumer have “concerns” about reaching across the isle, the budget for things like universal healthcare. You’ll have them tout truisms like “we need to be a united not divided in the face of terrorism.” Just look at who fund the democrats on the local levels, parasites like land-lords, insurance companies, banks. All of these industries thrive under the status-quo. You think they want progressive taxation, universal healthcare, or non-profit banking?
What this actually does is tell the Democratic Party that you’re unreliable and shouldn’t be catered to. Have you ever noticed how the Democratic Party gives a disproportionately prominent place to Black women? That’s because they have a long history of getting themselves involved and working to get others to the polls. Effective activists work as part of something greater.
It’s a first past the post system with only two major political parties. That means the choice is either the selected Democrat or the selected Republican, who are elected via a complex primary process that differs from state to state.
Voting third party in the U.S. achieves absolutely nothing. Especially when there are almost never third party choices for lower office, aside from the libertarians and they’re nuts. If you are determined to not vote for any Democrats or Republicans, your vote has the same effect as staying home and not voting.
I would love this to change, but I don’t foresee that happening anytime soon.
Hey, chin up. If the batshit nuts right wing of the GOP keep going the way they are maybe we’ll get a brand spanking new fascist third party. Lol, third party achieved!
Tangent for a moment: I’m kind of curious, if we could somehow encourage more stupidity on the right. Perhaps, the GOP would fracture into two parties.
In the short term, it could give Dems a large say in everything. Bolstered by the fact that the hard right is very performative and not really interested in doing any real work. In the more medium term, maybe that would finally give some freedom to open the door for more Dems and voters to peel off into yet another party.
I guess at that point, the danger is the right would then realize the situation. Rally their fractured party and completely ice out Dems and whatever left party that came out of the above. Multipolar politics at the party level could get really freaking scary too.
I really doubt the GOP splits. As much as the Trump and anti-Trump factions of the party dislike each other, they’re stuck together by the evil of strategic voting. We would need a different voting system to allow the existence of a third party that doesn’t also act as a spoiler.
I guess their point was “maybe the Democrats may choose someone else for the next elections”
The answer stays the same, likely, that they don’t have many to choose from, I dunno ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It does not achieve absolutely nothing. It sends a message of policy requirements to obtain a percentage of votes. Meaning, if dems lose enough elections by a margin that is seen voting elsewhere they will have to move their policy to secure those votes and start winning again. The problem now is with trump threatening our freedoms and democracy, we can’t afford to teach those stubborn centrists a lesson in true progressive policy.
I see, so Trump has to win in order to teach Democrats a lesson and you will teach them that by doing something they will never know you did.
That doesn’t seem especially rational to me.
If you actually fully read my comment, you would realize there was no point for yours.
I read it. If that’s not what you meant, what did you mean?
Go a reread the last sentence in my statement and explain how that implies trump has to win. Ive clearly stated the problem is with trump running, we can’t afford to lose to teach the dem establishment a lesson.
You know what is even less rational? Parroting the same shit that has been repeated ad nauseum by liberals for the past 40 years and then expecting an improved outcome.
That’s not how this works. That’s not how any of this works.
Democrats losing your vote to a 3rd party doesn’t trigger some kind of response within the party that will push them to embrace the tactics of the 3rd party that siphoned off your vote. If anything, it demonstrates to them that they should maybe push further right in an attempt to court Trump voters. But it’s cute that you believe you’re making a difference.
Congratulations. Instead of holding your nose and voting for the one guy who COULD beat trump and avoid sending the country into fascism, your principled stand allowed a fascist to rise to power AND sent Democrats the message that people prefer fascism.
What’s frustrating is that that logic works with preferential voting, but because the USA is using a shitty FPTP system, you’re right.
What it can do eventually is destory the democratic party, then since we are in a two party system a new more leftist party can finally move in. Afterall one of the most important parts of the Democratic party is to make sure people like Bernie, let alone anyone to left of him, have no chance to be elected. They are the biggest barrier to progress.
You sure about that?
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of not letting mask off fascists back to into a position of ultimate authority.
Yes I am sure. Everytime someone to the left of Bernie get’s anywhere close to power you will hear democrats like Pelosi or Schumer have “concerns” about reaching across the isle, the budget for things like universal healthcare. You’ll have them tout truisms like “we need to be a united not divided in the face of terrorism.” Just look at who fund the democrats on the local levels, parasites like land-lords, insurance companies, banks. All of these industries thrive under the status-quo. You think they want progressive taxation, universal healthcare, or non-profit banking?
What this actually does is tell the Democratic Party that you’re unreliable and shouldn’t be catered to. Have you ever noticed how the Democratic Party gives a disproportionately prominent place to Black women? That’s because they have a long history of getting themselves involved and working to get others to the polls. Effective activists work as part of something greater.