If you don’t like stein, consider voting party for socialism and liberation instead.
They’re running Claudia de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian statehood and an end to arms shipments to israel.
I found out recently that they’re on the ballot or have official write in status in 42 states, so unless you’re in Alaska, Nevada, Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Georgia or Pennsylvania go for it!
E: forgot Nevada. They’re not officially recognized in Nevada.
I’d advise that no one buy into any of this nonsense. De la Cruz has a mathematically impossible chance to win, and at this point will serve only to siphon votes and spoil the election. Knowingly or not, this is what is happening.
Think about it: Ever wonder why you’re really only hearing about them recently? Where were they four years ago? What have they done to prove they will even do as they say? They have no track record to stand on, but for some reason, these people seem to think they can sneak into an election and have a chance to win on unproven, untested policy with no practical or effective way to make any of it happen?
Make no mistake- there is no good intention from anyone asking you to throw away your vote on these people this late in the game- NONE.
Were it a year or two ago, I could maybe see it. But weeks away from what might be the most important election of our lifetime- to even think to request people not do everything they can to stop a racist rapist traitor to America from forcing our own militarily against us, systematically removing the rights of our LGBTQ+ friends and family, and the rights of women to have body autonomy is as shamelessly in bad faith as one could possibly be.
I might be misremembering the electoral values of the states here, but I think the combined value of the states they’re not official write ins or on ballot is only 64.
That leaves 474 electoral votes that psl could get, so they very much could win.
The history of the party is easy to find. They’ve been around for a little while now.
I’d choose a party with no track record over one with a consistent track record of genocidal violence and extrajudicial killings, but luckily psl has a track record of grassroots activism that’s pretty consistent, so I don’t have to take a gamble.
It’s a bit absurd to call opposition to genocide and apartheid unproven, untested policy.
I’m swiftly climbing the ladder of age and my whole life people have been saying “well, you should have been advocating for this or that last year, it’s too late now, this is the most important election of our lifetime!”
The best time to vote (and do groundwork for) psl was last year, the second best time is now!
I agree with the last part though, don’t listen to people peddling tired cliches and misinformation trying to manipulate you into voting one way or the other!
News flash genius…. Most everyone here is opposed to genocide. As has been said before, you’re not part of some fringe grassroots group that figured out that genocide was bad ahead of everyone else.
Stop with that shit. I don’t believe you’re here in any good faith to help anyone in any way.
If most everyone is opposed to genocide then I agree with them and want to help them find parties and candidates that oppose it too, like psl!
What party in opposition to genocide do you support?
I’m not going to stop politely and courteously advocating for the party and candidate I think is appropriate in threads where it’s on topic in a political comm.
It might not be a good idea to accuse people of bad faith when you open up with a sarcastic insult. World is pretty strict about that stuff, it’s like their number one rule.
With the way our system is set up, a third party will never win. Especially when 50% of America is still backing Trump. We need a new voting system before anything can change
I was trying to garner support for the psl here months before the election too, and years before it in real life organizing.
Just for the sake of completeness, if you can’t see a persons position as having a good faith form, doesn’t that mean you’re the person here in bad faith? If you truly believed there was no earnest true believer doctrinaire communist that was committed to their party of choice because they really thought it was the best use of their and everyone else’s time, wouldn’t you just report me as misinformation or whatever and move on?
I’ve always considered bad faith to be not the person I disagree with but the person who isnt willing to engage with anything I’m saying, to assume that there’s a human being on the other side of the capacitive predictive text thumb pad and that they have reasons behind what they’re saying that are worth listening to.
Again… everyone is against genocide. Your bad faith accusations aren’t working on anyone anymore. It’s just… cringy as fuck now.
And so you know- the third party clowns currently running have no viable end game to shut shit down over there. Go ahead and look it up. They say they do- but have no clear answer on how they’d do it that is even remotely viable. But it all looks good to the smug edgelords that think they’re somehow unique because they are against dOiNg gEnoCiDes!
They will have a barely above zero chance of successfully doing this. My god you people will believe anything won’t you?
I wonder why they didn’t just say they’re going to end world hunger…. Or cure cancer.
De la Cruz is a nobody that has no idea what there doing and no chance to ever see a position of authority to create let alone enact any policy that would produce meaningful change.
She’s a spoiler. And at this point- I’m beginning to think it’s purposeful.
You really think she’d have the support of Congress to do such a thing? In a system like America’s? That’s ridiculous. You should know full well such a thing would never happen even if Cruz were to magically win the presidency.
Talk is cheap, and it’s easy for third parties to say they’ll make such sweeping changes when they don’t have to actually back it up. They can tell you what you want to hear, but at the end of the day it’s all talk because such policies will never get past Congress.
Are they running anyone in elections they might actually win? I might vote for a party like that for mayor or something. But I wouldn’t even vote for them for state house representative unless they were well known enough in my state that they might actually win.
‘Third’ parties in this country can show themselves as serious if they try to establish themselves from the bottom up. If all they do is run for president and occasionally Senate or House, then they show themselves as unserious parties which are probably nothing more than attempts to siphon votes that might have gone to a real candidate.
I don’t know odds, I’m not much of a gambler. You gotta start somewhere though and winning isn’t all that matters: at the presidential level losing parties’ turnout determines their ballot access, event presence, access to funds and media and obviously how much you hear about them.
At the state and local levels there are Byzantine other benefits to having some percentage of the vote that vary wildly from place to place.
So its worth it to vote for a small candidate even if they lose because it can have big effects down the road.
Psl runs candidates at lots of local races, especially in California because that’s where they started.
Of course, if your main worry is having voted for a candidate that can win: good news! Psl can win every race it has a candidate in as far as I know. People were saying that they didn’t have enough ballot presence to tip the electoral college but they were wrong!
If you don’t like stein, consider voting party for socialism and liberation instead.
They’re running Claudia de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian statehood and an end to arms shipments to israel.
I found out recently that they’re on the ballot or have official write in status in 42 states, so unless you’re in Alaska, Nevada, Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Georgia or Pennsylvania go for it!
E: forgot Nevada. They’re not officially recognized in Nevada.
I’d advise that no one buy into any of this nonsense. De la Cruz has a mathematically impossible chance to win, and at this point will serve only to siphon votes and spoil the election. Knowingly or not, this is what is happening.
Think about it: Ever wonder why you’re really only hearing about them recently? Where were they four years ago? What have they done to prove they will even do as they say? They have no track record to stand on, but for some reason, these people seem to think they can sneak into an election and have a chance to win on unproven, untested policy with no practical or effective way to make any of it happen?
Make no mistake- there is no good intention from anyone asking you to throw away your vote on these people this late in the game- NONE.
Were it a year or two ago, I could maybe see it. But weeks away from what might be the most important election of our lifetime- to even think to request people not do everything they can to stop a racist rapist traitor to America from forcing our own militarily against us, systematically removing the rights of our LGBTQ+ friends and family, and the rights of women to have body autonomy is as shamelessly in bad faith as one could possibly be.
DO NOT LISTEN TO THESE PEOPLE.
I might be misremembering the electoral values of the states here, but I think the combined value of the states they’re not official write ins or on ballot is only 64.
That leaves 474 electoral votes that psl could get, so they very much could win.
The history of the party is easy to find. They’ve been around for a little while now.
I’d choose a party with no track record over one with a consistent track record of genocidal violence and extrajudicial killings, but luckily psl has a track record of grassroots activism that’s pretty consistent, so I don’t have to take a gamble.
It’s a bit absurd to call opposition to genocide and apartheid unproven, untested policy.
I’m swiftly climbing the ladder of age and my whole life people have been saying “well, you should have been advocating for this or that last year, it’s too late now, this is the most important election of our lifetime!”
The best time to vote (and do groundwork for) psl was last year, the second best time is now!
I agree with the last part though, don’t listen to people peddling tired cliches and misinformation trying to manipulate you into voting one way or the other!
News flash genius…. Most everyone here is opposed to genocide. As has been said before, you’re not part of some fringe grassroots group that figured out that genocide was bad ahead of everyone else.
Stop with that shit. I don’t believe you’re here in any good faith to help anyone in any way.
If most everyone is opposed to genocide then I agree with them and want to help them find parties and candidates that oppose it too, like psl!
What party in opposition to genocide do you support?
I’m not going to stop politely and courteously advocating for the party and candidate I think is appropriate in threads where it’s on topic in a political comm.
It might not be a good idea to accuse people of bad faith when you open up with a sarcastic insult. World is pretty strict about that stuff, it’s like their number one rule.
America is a two party system.
Someone should tell it there’s all these other parties then.
With the way our system is set up, a third party will never win. Especially when 50% of America is still backing Trump. We need a new voting system before anything can change
Even for a losing party, vote tallies are used to determine access to funding, events, media and help to raise public awareness.
We gotta start somewhere.
Or we could just vote third party and convince conservatives to vote third party as well?
I accused you of bad faith because that’s what I think you are. And I think the PSL is hot garbage and that’s why no one is taking them seriously.
Is there an argument I could make from my position that wouldn’t read as bad faith to you?
You’re here trying to garner support for the hopeless psl within weeks of an election, so….
No.
I was trying to garner support for the psl here months before the election too, and years before it in real life organizing.
Just for the sake of completeness, if you can’t see a persons position as having a good faith form, doesn’t that mean you’re the person here in bad faith? If you truly believed there was no earnest true believer doctrinaire communist that was committed to their party of choice because they really thought it was the best use of their and everyone else’s time, wouldn’t you just report me as misinformation or whatever and move on?
I’ve always considered bad faith to be not the person I disagree with but the person who isnt willing to engage with anything I’m saying, to assume that there’s a human being on the other side of the capacitive predictive text thumb pad and that they have reasons behind what they’re saying that are worth listening to.
Most everyone here is also voting for the Democrats, instead of agreeing to vote for a third party who is opposed to genocide
Again… everyone is against genocide. Your bad faith accusations aren’t working on anyone anymore. It’s just… cringy as fuck now.
And so you know- the third party clowns currently running have no viable end game to shut shit down over there. Go ahead and look it up. They say they do- but have no clear answer on how they’d do it that is even remotely viable. But it all looks good to the smug edgelords that think they’re somehow unique because they are against dOiNg gEnoCiDes!
What part of cutting military funding by 90% (Claudia de la Cruz’s platform) would fail to stop funding Israel?
They will have a barely above zero chance of successfully doing this. My god you people will believe anything won’t you?
I wonder why they didn’t just say they’re going to end world hunger…. Or cure cancer.
De la Cruz is a nobody that has no idea what there doing and no chance to ever see a position of authority to create let alone enact any policy that would produce meaningful change.
She’s a spoiler. And at this point- I’m beginning to think it’s purposeful.
You really think she’d have the support of Congress to do such a thing? In a system like America’s? That’s ridiculous. You should know full well such a thing would never happen even if Cruz were to magically win the presidency.
Talk is cheap, and it’s easy for third parties to say they’ll make such sweeping changes when they don’t have to actually back it up. They can tell you what you want to hear, but at the end of the day it’s all talk because such policies will never get past Congress.
Are they running anyone in elections they might actually win? I might vote for a party like that for mayor or something. But I wouldn’t even vote for them for state house representative unless they were well known enough in my state that they might actually win.
‘Third’ parties in this country can show themselves as serious if they try to establish themselves from the bottom up. If all they do is run for president and occasionally Senate or House, then they show themselves as unserious parties which are probably nothing more than attempts to siphon votes that might have gone to a real candidate.
I don’t know odds, I’m not much of a gambler. You gotta start somewhere though and winning isn’t all that matters: at the presidential level losing parties’ turnout determines their ballot access, event presence, access to funds and media and obviously how much you hear about them.
At the state and local levels there are Byzantine other benefits to having some percentage of the vote that vary wildly from place to place.
So its worth it to vote for a small candidate even if they lose because it can have big effects down the road.
Psl runs candidates at lots of local races, especially in California because that’s where they started.
Of course, if your main worry is having voted for a candidate that can win: good news! Psl can win every race it has a candidate in as far as I know. People were saying that they didn’t have enough ballot presence to tip the electoral college but they were wrong!