• JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    They aren’t wrong. At least not in spirit. In a non-stupid system they’d be correct at every level.

    Https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo

    Until everybody in the conversation understands the contents of that video, you aren’t at the point where you can have the conversation meaningfully. It changes the whole game.

    And once they understand it, the remaining conversation may just be a mutual nod of understanding. First past the post is a third party killer, and not because the idiot populace lacks the will. The actual voting math itself is the problem, and ranked choice (or similar) solves the voting math problem in a way that third, fourth, fifth parties can exist and win, instead of debuffing allies and by so doing helping their enemies.

    • Dragonstaff@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      If Democrats really cared about beating Republicans, they would be fighting hard for ranked choice voting. Instead, their primary concern is setting up a scapegoat so they can blame "the left’ if they lose.

          • ReiRose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Idk. Tbh for me this was a huge turning point of distrust. They had the power and couldn’t get a $15 minimum passed. I’ve since kind of fallen down the “the system is working exactly as designed” rabbit hole. From where I am, I don’t believe a vetting process will really help.

            • Dragonstaff@leminal.space
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I had this thought after Obama removed the “public option” from the ACA.

              I can’t conclusively prove that the Dems claim to support progressive policies but always offer up a Sinema to take the heat for failing…but in the last 15 years I haven’t seen anything that contradicts this theory. When banks need money it’s an emergency and we had better shovel cash out the door without discussion, but when people need help we kick them a month’s rent and then bitch about it for years.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      We all already understand how it works. Every single third party voter hears this stuff constantly, from literally everyone. It is impossible to not hear it while telling people you’re voting third party, even if you tried as hard as you could to block it out.

      • chaogomu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Maybe someday you’ll actually understand then.

        Your little party literally cannot win at anything beyond the local level.

        Has your third party run for any local positions? No? They only show up in presidential election years?

        That tells us they are horrible people who know damn well that they’re helping Trump.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          I understand already. The problem is that none of you understand or have any interest in engaging with what third party voters actually believe or why we reject your arguments, you just want to repeat the same BS over and over in hopes that we fall in line.

          The only people who are helping Trump are Trump voters, because that’s how votes work.

          • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            That’s not how votes work. And I’m not going to explain it to you because EVERONE here already has. You have absolutely no intention to argue in good faith at this point.

            In FPTP, any vote not for one, is an assist for the other. Period. End of story. Case closed. No more debate on it.

            That you’re here to continue arguing with people illustrates that you’re not here to discuss it in good faith at all.

            Therefore, I’d ask anyone reading along to just disregard this person as a bad faith actor and don’t engage with them any further on this.