86

PHOENIX (AP) -- The 2024 presidential election is drawing an unusually robust field of independent, third party and long shot candidates hoping to capitalize on Americans' ambivalence and frustration over a likely rematch between Democrat Joe Biden and Republican Donald Trump.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

One can't cater to or court the irrational. We can however stop humoring them and giving them undeserved respect. That might lead more rational people to mistakenly consider them.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

One can’t cater to or court the irrational.

Republicans keep doing it. They beat Clinton in 2016 by doing it.

Centrist Democrats would rather lose than debase themselves by moving one Planck length to the left.

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

And it's coming back to bite them in the ass. Further, condoning and catering to those views only speeds up the rotting brain mush that is the current American political psyche. Making it easier for fascist strong men to take over. On undeliverable promises of candy mountains and soda pop swimming pools. As a socialist largely opposed to Democrats neoliberal economic plans. I can still support them, as our best current possible option. But they absolutely do need to promote themselves better.

But Republicans have cornered the market on those who enjoy being lied to at infinitem. And it is simply not a viable tactic for democrats to even try to steal that group from them.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

And it’s coming back to bite them in the ass.

So first it'll never work, and now it works but it's biting Republicans in the ass by... giving them control of the House and the Supreme Court. When you're finally done moving goalposts, please return them.

As a socialist largely opposed to Democrats neoliberal economic plans. I can still support them, as our best current possible option.

Yeah, I can support them too. That doesn't mean I need to shut up when I think they're making stupid mistakes, particularly since they're gonna blame me for the results regardless of who I vote for.

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Yes, in a long-term scope it will never work. The statements are not contradictory no matter how hard you try to imply that they are.

Love that straw man though. Why that's even non sequitur. The thought process to contort from someone pointing out that they're a socialist and disagree with Democrats. To claiming that critiquing democrats is inappropriate after immediately critiquing democrats. That's such an odd claim that I'm inclined to ask if you were reading off the wrong script.

That said, in the context of presidential elections. One should NEVER consider 3rd party candidates until one of 2 things happen. First past the post voting is replaced with something better. Or said 3rd party has a presence in state or federal legislature of 10% of US states.

Criticize Democrats all you want. I sure do. In the meantime primary them, push them left. But don't split the vote letting the ideal be the enemy of reality when it's important. And it's very important Trump never gets back in. Well important if you like even having an illusion of voting.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yes, in a long-term scope it will never work.

So, first you said it can't work. I provided an example of it working. Then you moved the goalposts and said it's biting Republicans in the ass. I pointed out that they gained power, not lost it. And now you've moved them again and said it can't work long term. I didn't say it needs to.

If it's vital to the very continued existence of Democracy that Trump loses this next election, why are we not trying to get every vote we can, even from people who you consider irrational? It certainly never stopped the Democratic Party from moving to the right to court the few remaining irrational moderate Republicans who stay with that party even after what it's become. Why is it always the left that has to think about the short term when we're being screamed at to vote for the candidate who will maybe consider temporarily forestalling fascism because eventually the party will totally start listening to anyone to the left of Manchin? Why does the party never have to think about the short term and court people who it considers beneath their contempt so that they can forestall fascism?

That said, in the context of presidential elections. One should NEVER consider 3rd party candidates until one of 2 things happen. First past the post voting is replaced with something better. Or said 3rd party has a presence in state or federal legislature of 10% of US states.

At no point have I suggested voting for a third party. To the contrary, I think the Democratic party should work to get those votes back, because it needs them. But for some reason, that never works because of wherever you decide to put the goalposts this time.

Criticize Democrats all you want.

Sure, if you happen to like wild accusations.

this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
86 points (73.4% liked)

politics

18898 readers
3153 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.
  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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS