I have. And you’ve said you’ll vote for the Democrats be cause you think that votes against the GOP.
I don’t think it does, but regardless, they don’t care why you vote for them. You’ve made it clear they have your vote no matter what, and so your questions don’t matter.
You say they don’t care why you vote for them but said you voted third party to send a message or whatever. Seems like you feel that they care about how you vote but not anyone else.
You haven’t really convinced me your strategy will be effective.
Seems like you feel that they care about how you vote but not anyone else.
That’s not what I said. I said they don’t care about why you vote for them if you do.
They might very much care about why you don’t vote for them. That’s why the Democrats always tack to the right, btw - the most marginal voter controls the platform, and Democratic leadership believes that the imaginary moderate Republican is more marginal than the left.
And that’s why voting third party is a much more effective thing than not voting (as plenty of people did not in 2024). Voting for a non-Democratic candidate shows exactly what they’re losing and why. It’s quantifiable and can’t be argued.
Democratic loyalists often want to claim that third party voters lose elections for them. They don’t - but if they actually do, then the answer to that problem becomes obvious. Per Duverger’s law, how it’s worked since the collapse of the whigs, is that the party needs to either adopt those positions, or die.
I feel that wasn’t an effective tactic I’m the last election and is something that can be worked towards, but the amount of support third parties get isn’t substantial enough to make an impact on democratic policy as things are now.
That’s why I feel it’s imperative to focus on ranked choice (or something similar) from local and up, because of the aforementioned Duverger’s law. This could eliminate both establishment parties. Until we fix that, people know that third parties don’t win elections, especially not national ones, and you can’t do anything unless you actually get into a position of power.
Local governments are much more likely to listen to constituents and it’s a lot easier to get stuff on the ballot for local issues than State and national elections. Making that the norm locally can influence the state, and three federal elections are run state by state instead of nationally.
Between the Democrats and the Republicans, who do you think is more likely to? If your city was in Republican control, the party that’s notorious for trying to take away voting rights, do you think they would actually let that through? At least with Democrats pretending to care about people, it’s a platform they can run on, and on the individual level means they are more likely to get elected/reelected.
Between the Democrats and the Republicans, who do you think is more likely to?
Look at the 2016 primary. It’s mainly due to the McGovern 72 campaign, but the GOP has actually less top down control than the Democratic currently. It’s why the Dem leadership was able to stop Bernie twice, while the GOP couldn’t with Trump.
The Democratic Party has likewise been involved in many more legal efforts to get especially the Greens removed from ballot lines than the GOP.
So while neither of the major parties is going to support ranked choice (why would they?), the Democrats are more active in their currently opposition.
You’re kidding right? Republicans are trying to make it so anyone who changes their name, even married women, can’t vote. They’ve historically fought against black and poor people from voting for decades. Just the policies flying around now are nuts. I haven’t heard of armed Democrats hassling people in line to vote.
Dude if you think I’ve got “unquestioning support of Democratic failures” you really haven’t read a single thing I’ve written.
I have. And you’ve said you’ll vote for the Democrats be cause you think that votes against the GOP.
I don’t think it does, but regardless, they don’t care why you vote for them. You’ve made it clear they have your vote no matter what, and so your questions don’t matter.
You say they don’t care why you vote for them but said you voted third party to send a message or whatever. Seems like you feel that they care about how you vote but not anyone else.
You haven’t really convinced me your strategy will be effective.
That’s not what I said. I said they don’t care about why you vote for them if you do.
They might very much care about why you don’t vote for them. That’s why the Democrats always tack to the right, btw - the most marginal voter controls the platform, and Democratic leadership believes that the imaginary moderate Republican is more marginal than the left.
And that’s why voting third party is a much more effective thing than not voting (as plenty of people did not in 2024). Voting for a non-Democratic candidate shows exactly what they’re losing and why. It’s quantifiable and can’t be argued.
Democratic loyalists often want to claim that third party voters lose elections for them. They don’t - but if they actually do, then the answer to that problem becomes obvious. Per Duverger’s law, how it’s worked since the collapse of the whigs, is that the party needs to either adopt those positions, or die.
I feel that wasn’t an effective tactic I’m the last election and is something that can be worked towards, but the amount of support third parties get isn’t substantial enough to make an impact on democratic policy as things are now.
That’s why I feel it’s imperative to focus on ranked choice (or something similar) from local and up, because of the aforementioned Duverger’s law. This could eliminate both establishment parties. Until we fix that, people know that third parties don’t win elections, especially not national ones, and you can’t do anything unless you actually get into a position of power.
Why would the Democrats ever support ranked choice voting?
Local governments are much more likely to listen to constituents and it’s a lot easier to get stuff on the ballot for local issues than State and national elections. Making that the norm locally can influence the state, and three federal elections are run state by state instead of nationally.
Between the Democrats and the Republicans, who do you think is more likely to? If your city was in Republican control, the party that’s notorious for trying to take away voting rights, do you think they would actually let that through? At least with Democrats pretending to care about people, it’s a platform they can run on, and on the individual level means they are more likely to get elected/reelected.
Look at the 2016 primary. It’s mainly due to the McGovern 72 campaign, but the GOP has actually less top down control than the Democratic currently. It’s why the Dem leadership was able to stop Bernie twice, while the GOP couldn’t with Trump.
The Democratic Party has likewise been involved in many more legal efforts to get especially the Greens removed from ballot lines than the GOP.
So while neither of the major parties is going to support ranked choice (why would they?), the Democrats are more active in their currently opposition.
You’re kidding right? Republicans are trying to make it so anyone who changes their name, even married women, can’t vote. They’ve historically fought against black and poor people from voting for decades. Just the policies flying around now are nuts. I haven’t heard of armed Democrats hassling people in line to vote.
Either way the strategy I put forward stands.