178

More than 15,000 people in Arizona have registered to join a new political party floating a possible bipartisan “unity ticket” against Joe Biden and Donald Trump.

While that’s less than the population of each of the state’s 40 largest cities, it’s still a number big enough to tip the presidential election in a critical swing state. And that is alarming people trying to stop Trump from winning the White House again.

The very existence of the No Labels group is fanning Democratic anxiety about Trump’s chances against an incumbent president facing questions about his age and record. While it hasn’t committed to running candidates for president and vice president, No Labels has already secured ballot access in Arizona and 10 other states. Its organizers say they are on track to reach 20 states by the end of this year and all 50 states by Election Day.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 108 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ah, I remember when I thought voting third party would matter. Hey kids. Take it from someone who voted for Johnson in 2016. I get that voting strategically fucking sucks, and you want to make your voice heard, but it is not worth getting Donald Trump elected just to be part of the 3% that said "I don't like either of these people." With any luck, third parties won't give the presidency to republicans next year, and one or two supreme court justices will die or retire in the next five years, allowing us to start repairing our rights. Because justices nominated by Biden will suck, but justices nominated by Trump (or God forbid, Desantis) will suck in the same ways and much, much worse.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world 77 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, exactly. Both of these things can be true at the same time:

  1. First-past-the-post plurality voting is a crappy system, devised before humanity discovered the math of voting systems. It has all kinds of predictably terrible results.
  2. It is currently the system we have. Because of this, if people who object to fascism fail to vote for a non-fascist candidate who can win, then the fascists will win.

Anyone who disregards point 2 because of point 1 thereby ends up materially supporting fascism. This is unfortunate but that doesn't make it false.

"But I want to vote my principles!" Great! Is one of your principles "fascists should lose"? If so, then please make sure to take the steps that support that principle!

Currently in the US there are two parties that can credibly take the presidential election: the center-right party and the fascist party. This is unfortunate but that doesn't make it false.

Vote third party in local elections. Elect a Socialist mayor or a Libertarian judge; a Green sheriff or a Communist dogcatcher. Build those local party networks. Support approval voting or other voting systems that actually make some mathematical sense. But please don't let the fascists win because you're pissed off at the voting system.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

One thing I liked about living in a safely blue state is I could vote for whoever I wanted without risking the destruction of the planet.

But Fetterman's my senator so I guess that's cool

[-] seang96@spgrn.com 7 points 1 year ago

I don't think so I'd consider PA safely blue. Fetterman is cool though.

[-] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

That was exactly their point.

[-] seang96@spgrn.com 1 points 1 year ago

Ah they were talking about another state for the first section.its scary how red PA is outside of the 3 largest cities though lol

[-] rambaroo@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm sure third party voters aren't turned off at all by people condescending them and calling them children.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

I didn't mean to call all third party voters kids, I was addressing people for whom '24 will be their first election. If it's not your first election and you still haven't figured out that third parties are a trap, I'm not even gonna try to convince you otherwise.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Take it from someone who voted for Johnson in 2016

You mean a Republican who smokes weed? 🙄 If the libertarian party was your first choice, the GOP were your second, so by your own binary logic, that was a vote taken from Trump, not Hillary.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

Nah, by the time November rolled around my choices were Johnson>Clinton>Trump

I was 18, not exactly the most politically intelligent kid

[-] Delicious_Tomatoes@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago

It seems that you and your responders have all forgotten what the electoral college is.

I remember when I bought into "voting third party throws away your vote." Hey kids, take it from someone who grew up in a blue state. I get that thinking strategically fucking sucks, and you want to go with the herd, but it is not worth keeping the establishment party established just so you can be part of the 80% of people who say, "The actually good candidate wasn't electable." With any luck, solid states that show growing support for third parties will start applying the pressure that any incumbent party needs. Because the Supreme Court sucks not just because of Trump, but also because of Obama's milquetoast policies before that, and another Justice's refusal to retire when she knew the level of risk.

(Using your format limited my response, but the most important thing I've been learning lately is that voting is the token the government gives us so that our politics start and stop with the ballot. You can say "Why not vote and be politically active?" and I'd agree. But I'm concerned about how most people just forget to do anything after they vote.)

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
178 points (94.5% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2008 users here now

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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS