You don’t understand first past the post voting. Only two options can win. but those two options don’t have stay the same forever and ever. If you want to change the options (by voting) you can’t vote for either of the two current options and eventually one will be replaced. You can also attempt to reform the voting system, which should be done in parallel. But in the meantime the LEAST you can do is not vote for the current options.
Obviously the two parties can change. But you are already in a situation where the system has collapsed into two stable parties.
So voting for a third party is going to guarantee a victory for the party you like least, because of the spoiler effect.
And with how incumbent both the Democrats and the Republicans are, and given how the Democrats actually do have a stable core voter-base who would not follow leftists over to a progressive party, you aren’t actually going to dislodge the Democrats within a reasonable amount of time. You would be guaranteeing that the Republicans win the next 3-4 cycles at least, with zero contest. And those losses would lead to the progressive party losing votes back to the larger Democratic party, extending the difficult transition period.
That’s why third parties are basically impossible. It requires an electorate to be willing to militantly vote to lose to the fascistic party for over a decade before there is even the possibility of replacing the incumbent neoliberal party.
Your only hope is forcing voting reform. Which… I mean good luck.
You want to address the rest of my comment, genius? The giant elephant in the room that you would be voting to lose every election for at the very least the next decade to the Republicans, with zero contest? While trying to convince neoliberals to vote for progressives?
In a democracy we vote for who we want to win. If you want genocide and fascism, then you would do well to vote for the parties of genocide and fascism. If you don’t want genocide and fascism, there are plenty of other options on every ballot at all levels of government that don’t support genocide and fascism. Try them out! It’s one of the cool parts of a democracy you get to choose.
Thanks for showing you don’t know anything about me. I think Netanyahu is a fascist executing a genocide. I just also understand that the electoral system is currently designed to make it impossible for independent candidates to get into the white house. Fuck Biden, fuck Trump. But those will be the only real options.
The way to dismantle a first past the post voting system (by voting) is to not vote for either of the current choices. Obviously in addition the voting system should be reformed, by other means. But in the meantime, not voting for the current two options is the LEAST you can do.
This has to be the dumbest take I’ve read in a LONG time.
Like yeah, those in power are going to say “oh my, people are throwing their votes away and helping me solidify my grasp? Oh dangit, I’ve been foiled!”
Fun fact. If “those in power” do not get voted for because people didn’t vote for them, then they don’t get to do shit anymore because they are no longer “in power.” One of the parties will collapse, and a new one will take it’s place because that is how first past the post has to work. The only thing you have to do is vote for anyone but the two parties that are the current top2. That’s it. It’s easy, it costs you nothing.
So, all you need for your plan to work is to coordinate some 100 million folks to agree on a third party and vote on it. You see nothing nonsensical about this plan?
Everyone is dumber for having read your scribbles.
Problem: We have a broken voting system that two entrenched parties benefit from.
Solution: Continue to vote for the entrenched parties? That doesn’t sound right. Maybe try something else?
The solution is to keep some people from setting the ship on fire for a few more years, while we build lifeboat communities with alternate care systems so that we can withdraw our money and labor from the sinking ship system in a more gradual way that minimizes global and local pain and suffering and death.
What work can we do to get that system? We aren’t allowed to vote for it and neither party is interested in more competition. French-style protests might work, but our list of grievances is so long. We’d have to unite under something big…it just all feels like a long shot for our society.
I very much disagree. We need to create public pressure to force politicians to choose a multipolar electoral system and vote for people that want to change the electoral system to be more democratic. Not voting as a protest doesn’t create any incentive to change the system. Voting is the least effective means of change, but it’s also the easiest means of change.
I’m not talking about voting for public pressure. I’m talking about community organizing, protests, calling legislators, creating draft bills, etc. Civic engagement goes far beyond voting. I’m never going to discourage people from voting for their preferred candidate, but voting for independent candidates is not public pressure.
I agree, which is why not voting for the current two parties is the least you can do. Absolutely do other non-voting stuff too. But for voting, do not vote for the current two parties. Simple.
Tldr; you’re ineffectual and always will be until you drop your holier than thou ways :)
Ahh yes working with what works is the same as liking genocide. Very astute. You do know you sound like a petulant child right now, yeah?
You’re the type of kid who can’t answer the trolly problem because, in the end, someone gets hurt. There’s nothing wrong with feeling the way you do, but being a judgemental whiny bitch about it is not how you get people to work together.
What the fuck works with our current “democracy” you idiot? The trolly problem has nothing to with whatver tortured analogy you are trying to make, and certainly has nothing to do with a first past the post voting system.
I mean, the options are literally center-right liberal or neonazi fascist. I know what I’d pick.
Actually there are lots of options that are neither of those things. But you actually like genocide, you just aren’t comfortable going mask off yet.
Except mathematically, no, there are not other options. One of those two options are going to win, as much as none of us like it.
You don’t understand first past the post voting. Only two options can win. but those two options don’t have stay the same forever and ever. If you want to change the options (by voting) you can’t vote for either of the two current options and eventually one will be replaced. You can also attempt to reform the voting system, which should be done in parallel. But in the meantime the LEAST you can do is not vote for the current options.
No, you don’t understand FPTP voting.
Obviously the two parties can change. But you are already in a situation where the system has collapsed into two stable parties.
So voting for a third party is going to guarantee a victory for the party you like least, because of the spoiler effect.
And with how incumbent both the Democrats and the Republicans are, and given how the Democrats actually do have a stable core voter-base who would not follow leftists over to a progressive party, you aren’t actually going to dislodge the Democrats within a reasonable amount of time. You would be guaranteeing that the Republicans win the next 3-4 cycles at least, with zero contest. And those losses would lead to the progressive party losing votes back to the larger Democratic party, extending the difficult transition period.
That’s why third parties are basically impossible. It requires an electorate to be willing to militantly vote to lose to the fascistic party for over a decade before there is even the possibility of replacing the incumbent neoliberal party.
Your only hope is forcing voting reform. Which… I mean good luck.
Hmm, I wonder how the two stable parties can change? Do you think they are more likely to change by voting for them or not voting for them.
You want to address the rest of my comment, genius? The giant elephant in the room that you would be voting to lose every election for at the very least the next decade to the Republicans, with zero contest? While trying to convince neoliberals to vote for progressives?
In a democracy we vote for who we want to win. If you want genocide and fascism, then you would do well to vote for the parties of genocide and fascism. If you don’t want genocide and fascism, there are plenty of other options on every ballot at all levels of government that don’t support genocide and fascism. Try them out! It’s one of the cool parts of a democracy you get to choose.
You are being very evasive. People are pointing out the obvious flaws in your plan, and so far you have offered nothing in response.
Thanks for showing you don’t know anything about me. I think Netanyahu is a fascist executing a genocide. I just also understand that the electoral system is currently designed to make it impossible for independent candidates to get into the white house. Fuck Biden, fuck Trump. But those will be the only real options.
The way to dismantle a first past the post voting system (by voting) is to not vote for either of the current choices. Obviously in addition the voting system should be reformed, by other means. But in the meantime, not voting for the current two options is the LEAST you can do.
This has to be the dumbest take I’ve read in a LONG time.
Like yeah, those in power are going to say “oh my, people are throwing their votes away and helping me solidify my grasp? Oh dangit, I’ve been foiled!”
Goodness gracious you silly goof.
Fun fact. If “those in power” do not get voted for because people didn’t vote for them, then they don’t get to do shit anymore because they are no longer “in power.” One of the parties will collapse, and a new one will take it’s place because that is how first past the post has to work. The only thing you have to do is vote for anyone but the two parties that are the current top2. That’s it. It’s easy, it costs you nothing.
So, all you need for your plan to work is to coordinate some 100 million folks to agree on a third party and vote on it. You see nothing nonsensical about this plan?
Everyone is dumber for having read your scribbles.
No. Just stop voting for the current two parties. That’s it. No other coordination. It’s the least you can do.
It’s always funny to see how liberals won’t do the barest of minimum things with the meager amount of power they are granted.
That’s even dumber! Are you just jerking my chain?
In a fptp system, winner takes all. So now your plan is that all those people miraculously outvote both of the dominant parties?
This is starting to feel like I’m bullying a kid with developmental disabilities so I I’m done here.
Have a good night.
How would that dismantle the system? Like literally how? Are you just trolling or do you seriously believe that?
Problem: We have a broken voting system that two entrenched parties benefit from.
Solution: Continue to vote for the entrenched parties? That doesn’t sound right. Maybe try something else?
The solution is to keep some people from setting the ship on fire for a few more years, while we build lifeboat communities with alternate care systems so that we can withdraw our money and labor from the sinking ship system in a more gradual way that minimizes global and local pain and suffering and death.
People like you have been trying that since Carter. Stop supporting fascism and genocide at the ballot box. It’s the least you can do.
Work for ranked choice voting. That’s the only way.
What work can we do to get that system? We aren’t allowed to vote for it and neither party is interested in more competition. French-style protests might work, but our list of grievances is so long. We’d have to unite under something big…it just all feels like a long shot for our society.
Ranked choice has been put into place in some states for some elections.
Worth plugging into what some orgs are doing like fair vote
https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting/
I very much disagree. We need to create public pressure to force politicians to choose a multipolar electoral system and vote for people that want to change the electoral system to be more democratic. Not voting as a protest doesn’t create any incentive to change the system. Voting is the least effective means of change, but it’s also the easiest means of change.
Voting for someone besides the current top two IS creating public pressure. what else would you call it?
I’m not talking about voting for public pressure. I’m talking about community organizing, protests, calling legislators, creating draft bills, etc. Civic engagement goes far beyond voting. I’m never going to discourage people from voting for their preferred candidate, but voting for independent candidates is not public pressure.
I agree, which is why not voting for the current two parties is the least you can do. Absolutely do other non-voting stuff too. But for voting, do not vote for the current two parties. Simple.
deleted by creator
Lol, what would the internet be without its edgelord tweens?
Someone had to be the obligatory goof on this post, thanks for stepping up I guess.
Tldr; you’re ineffectual and always will be until you drop your holier than thou ways :)
Ahh yes working with what works is the same as liking genocide. Very astute. You do know you sound like a petulant child right now, yeah?
You’re the type of kid who can’t answer the trolly problem because, in the end, someone gets hurt. There’s nothing wrong with feeling the way you do, but being a judgemental whiny bitch about it is not how you get people to work together.
What the fuck works with our current “democracy” you idiot? The trolly problem has nothing to with whatver tortured analogy you are trying to make, and certainly has nothing to do with a first past the post voting system.