275
all 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] lemmydividebyzero@reddthat.com 15 points 4 hours ago

Only in a broken democracy...

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago

Yes. That's what we are stuck with at the moment, though.

[-] Shard@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

Either you play the have you're dealt or you don't complain when you forfeit the game.

[-] nothingcorporate@lemmy.today 2 points 2 hours ago

There are way more options than playing or forfeiting when you find out the game is rigged...like flipping over the table chasing the dealer with a whip. Jesus style.

[-] griD@feddit.org 3 points 3 hours ago

Even for tiny, tiny social media platforms like the fediverse, the current propaganda/misinformation campaign is tailor-made for the expected audience.
E.g., on Facebook it might be enough to post AI slop depicting Trump as a saint. Here, that won't fly. You have to understand that a lot of lefties and educated people reside here, so you just have to point the undecided to a third party. Maybe you're not even after the actual undecided, spreading FUD is usually good enough. And a healthy dose of "both sides"!

Of course, it's vital to omit the fact that FPTP systems always devolve into two-party systems (a fact well understood), and you're good to go. Easy rubles probably.

[-] normalexit@lemmy.world 39 points 7 hours ago

We need ranked choice voting, so you can vote for who you actually support without throwing your vote away.

[-] quink@lemmy.ml 14 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Which will never happen because the Republicans are dead set on never changing any system in any way that's not directly in their benefit and no one else's. Until that moment arrives, which is never, the only option is to pick your particular flavour of straight-up fascism (Republicans these days) or anything else (Democrats) in the party primaries.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

One of the few advantages of our splintered system of states is that voting is done on a state level. We can implement ranked-choice voting in states where Republicans are weak, and in doing so, allow states that aren't filled with fascists to choose between multiple non-fascist ideologies, instead of just fascists and 'whoever is left'.

[-] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 4 hours ago

Don't fool yourself. The DNC also doesn't want ranked choice voting. Neither party wants any competition. The entire system is built to make it virtually impossible for a third party candidate to win. Unless they actually hit 270+, even if they were a clear majority winner, they wouldn't be elected.

[-] TrueTomBombadil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

The local Democratic party literally opposes the ranked choice voting bill on my local ballot. So do the Republicans surprise surprise. They agreed on something! Bipartisanship!

[-] qqq@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Ever since reading about some strange properties of RCV -- which ended up being displayed in Alaska's first election using it and caused it to be repealed in Vermont -- I've been a bit suspect of it. Systems such as STAR voting and approval voting seem better.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

That's not strange, that's how it works. Especially if there's a strong 'anyone but Palin' contingent.

Star and approval look fucking terrible and is way out of line of the 'one person one vote' system we have and I think we want.

*For anyone wondering about Alaska, there were two Republicans, including Palin, and one Democrat running for house seat. The other Republican was eliminated in ranked choice. Essentially his votes split to both the Dem and Palin, instead of all going to Palin like the Palin people wanted, and the Democrat won. So the GOP there is now mad.

[-] qqq@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

The GOP was maybe mad, but more importantly to me the people who actually study voting systems for a living were "mad", and the people who hurt their favored candidate by voting for them were likely upset.

Ignoring that the outcome was maybe what I would have wanted, it is definitely pathological that you can hurt a candidate by voting for them. Quoting the Wikipedia:

The election was also a negative voting weight event, where a voter's ballot has the opposite of its intended effect (e.g. a candidate being disqualified for having "too many votes"). In this race, Begich lost as a result of 5,200 ballots ranking him ahead of Peltola; Peltola also would have lost if she had received more support from Palin voters.

What do you find wrong with those other systems? RCV is also not "one person one vote". Approval voting is used in the UN and neither seem to have some of the pathologies of RCV.

Bit of a late edit here, but isn't "one person one vote" basically the description of our current problem with voting? All of these systems are trying to solve that issue.

[-] TrueTomBombadil@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

only if you're in a swing state. In which case vote tactically. If you're not in a swing state do not vote trump and do not vote Harris. Instead vote third party there to maybe get a 5% national representation and therefore get more funding for em.

Voting tactics woo.

[-] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 0 points 57 minutes ago

Also if enough people in California, NY, etc. Vote third party they may deny Harris a popular vote win while still allowing her to win in EC. This would both send a message about ignoring the left and might make it so Republicans start supporting getting rid of the electoral college too.

If both of the parties had an election stolen from them in less then a decade due to this dumb antiquated system maybe they'll muster some political will to get rid of it.

[-] TrueTomBombadil@lemmy.world 1 points 38 minutes ago

A great point. Republicans will never vote to remove the EC unless it hurts them and theoretically this could.

Screw Republicans by voting literally whoever besides trump and Harris in Cali

[-] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 28 points 6 hours ago

I will be voting for Kamala, because I do think it's very important that Trump not get reelected. I hope she wins, but her winning alone will not be enough. We need to do a better job of figuring out why America is in the state that it is in, so that we can come up with ways to fix it (assuming it can be fixed).

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 17 points 6 hours ago

Absolutely. Voting is incredibly important, but on its own, it just buys time. Without time, we can do nothing - but if we are determined to do nothing, all the time in the world won't save us.

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Well, the absolute freedom of speech might be a thing to look at, as blatant lying and fascist rhetoric are not countered by more speech. Especially not if money = speech. As this gives the robber barons unfair advantage.

[-] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 hours ago

These morons at the bar were talking about how they plan to vote 3rd party to "show them" they're sick of two party.

We're all sick of two party but voting 3rd party right now doesn't magically fix it. And in this particular election it could possibly mean you never get to vote again.

[-] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 7 points 5 hours ago

In a democracy, you only get a voice if you vote. Voting IS the protest. When you don't vote, or spoil your vote, you abdicate your voice.

[-] DrSteveBrule@mander.xyz 1 points 1 hour ago

I don't completely disagree with you here. But when you only get 2 real options that don't align with what you really want, then do you actually have a voice? It feels like to me we can pick x, y, or if we want to waste our vote then z. Z is what some people really want, it's not gonna happen, but that's what they want. But they must settle for x or y. How is their voice being heard?

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 hour ago

Fixing that requires long-term thinking and action. Something that the Greens and others refuse to do. If Stein, hypothetically was elected, at best, it would be a lame duck presidency because she would have no support from any other branch (except for things supported by Putin).

Local elections, primaries, and congressional seats are needed for actual change. That doesn't have the immediate gratification though of visibly pretending to do something, regardless of if it actually helps.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world -2 points 3 hours ago

Voting 3rd party for progressivism is the biggest self own in history. And repeatedly too.

[-] Wilzax@lemmy.world 13 points 9 hours ago

Wrong. One is exactly twice as bad as the other.

[-] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

One is way better than the other if you're a Trump supporter!

[-] Wilzax@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Mathematically, it's still exactly one half as bad as bad to not vote than to vote for the Republican party, regardless of who you are. A vote Republican swings the count 2 points relative to voting Democrat. No vote, 1 point relative to voting Democrat.

[-] kubica@fedia.io 8 points 8 hours ago

In the current situation you could try to pretend that your vote is useful by not voting or voting third parties. But that it is not the reality of the consequences.

[-] manucode@infosec.pub 5 points 10 hours ago

Technically, there can be a difference, but only if you are a Trump supporter

[-] zanyllama52@infosec.pub -4 points 7 hours ago

The idea that voting for a third-party candidate is somehow "helping" one of the major party candidates is based on the assumption that the third-party candidate's voters would have otherwise voted for one of the major party candidates.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago

Well, it's based on that assumption if you're a leftist. Harris has spent the last two months tailoring her message to center-right Republicans, but if they vote for Trump or the Libertarian candidate, the centrist Dems aren't going to blame them. However, if the leftists that her campaign has been deliberately ignoring vote third-party, then they're entirely to blame.

Anyway, if you live in a swing state, you should vote for Harris, harm reduction, etc., etc. But if the Democrats are going to exclusively target centrists, it would be nice if they blamed the centrists for not voting for them.

[-] natebluehooves@pawb.social -1 points 3 hours ago

By not voting for harris in FPTP, you assist trump, the only other viable alternative.

This includes not voting.

[-] callouscomic@lemm.ee -2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Blanket statements don't work. How each state allocates votes to electoral college votes varies, and each states political leaning varies.

There are times when not voting or voting third party effectively has no effect or the opposite effect.

These oversimplified takes are tiring and pathetic.

Get better arguments.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 9 points 7 hours ago

Ideally just get proportional representation with something like ranked choice voting and make it possible for 3rd party votes to count for something.

[-] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 4 points 7 hours ago

Explain how voting third party could have the "opposite effect". Opposite of what?

[-] huginn@feddit.it 1 points 5 hours ago

Oh my God an image macro posted to the political memes board doesn't have 60 pages of nuanced footnotes explaining how if you're in Nebraska then your voting system works differently I'm going to literally shit my own pants out of rage

this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
275 points (84.3% liked)

Political Memes

5391 readers
3981 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS