• RatzChatsubo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    44 minutes ago

    People get weird close to the election.

    People voting green party did so for a reason. Not everyone fits into perfectly shaped boxes for the 2 party system. Many vote 3rd party for leverage for policy change. The narrative of picking the lesser evil doesn’t always apply to the narrative of the individual voter.

  • _lilith@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Ranked choice voting eliminates the concept of spoiler candidates/parties.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 hours ago

    There you go again. Blame third parties for your own failure. Keep doing it, tell yourself it’s true.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I might risk voting 3rd party if this election wasn’t a choice between boring corporatists and 100% concentrated evil.

    The stakes are just too damn high to risk letting Trump get back into the White House again.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Honesty is refreshing. I’m voting for Harris because I don’t want to see Trump’s orange face every week. Yes, I know what she is. Yes, I know what that makes me. I’ve made my peace with it. No, I don’t blame others who feel differently.

    • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      it’s not worth it until first past the post is removed.

      Until then it’s mathematically impossible for a third party candidate to win. Focus your energy instead on removing first past the post, then you have a chance

      • Gurei@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The only time I went third party it wasn’t to win. It was because I saw it as two main candudates so shirty that there was a good chance for third party to snag more voters than usual, possibly enough to gain slightly better recognition in the future.

        The monkey’s paw curled.

        We got Trump. The recognition came as irrational blame for Trump.

        I won’t make the same mistake of voting for someone I think would do the best job. Now it’s merely an effort to keep the worst viable candidate out.

  • AidsKitty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Dont let online bullies influence your vote. Each citizen gets one vote, cast it for whom you wish to support. Learn about the issues, the policies being proposed, and cast your vote for whomever you support.

    • taipan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I double checked the subtraction with the NYT numbers you linked to, and the numbers look correct to me. Which numbers are wrong?

      • nexguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I think maybe he means numbers themselves are wrong? I mean look at 7. That number is just all kinds of fucked up. Don’t get me started on 23.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    That makes an assumption that all or a big majority third party voters would prefer Harris over Trump.

    Just for clarifying the logic here.

    • Red_October@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Nobody who would have otherwise voted for Trump is going to be convinced to vote for Stein. Every vote she gets IS one that was much more aligned with Harris.

      This isn’t a question of ALL third parties, but there aren’t any right-aligned third parties making any kind of a meaningful run.

      • aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 hours ago

        What??

        In Michigan Gary Johnson got 172,136 votes, in Pennsylvania he got 146,715, and in Wisconsin he got 106,674. If all Greens voted Clinton and all Libertarians voted Trump then New Mexico would’ve only been won by Clinton with around 1,000 votes, Colorado would’ve also been nearly Trump. Nevada, New Hampshire, and Minnesota would’ve been won by Trump. Maine might’ve gone majority Trump.

        Third parties hurt Trump more than they help him, because Libertarians would not have voted Clinton.

          • aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 minutes ago

            How does that contradict what I said. Also the LP is still further right than the GOP

        • Red_October@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          9 hours ago

          And how many of them are running now? This isn’t about them, this is about the one third party candidate that actually makes headlines.

  • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Don’t mind me, just sweeping þrough to prune ð propoganda weeds on ðeir latest block/ban dodge accounts!

  • Smoogs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    If this were true then American politics really are terrible. Minority should hold seats. America needs to revisit representation.

  • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    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.

    • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      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.

      • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 hours ago

        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!

        • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          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.

          • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            3 hours ago

            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.

                • turtletracks@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 minutes ago

                  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

            • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              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.

              • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Is there an argument I could make from my position that wouldn’t read as bad faith to you?

                • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  You’re here trying to garner support for the hopeless psl within weeks of an election, so….

                  No.