“Yes don’t vote at all to get rid of fascism”
You must log in or register to comment.
tankie looking at Kamala Harris and Donald Trump standing next to each other ‘im seeing double! four liberals!’
Using the term “tankie” while defending a party carrying out a modern day holocaust is quite something.
Defending and arguing that the two parties aren’t the same isn’t the same thing. Just check out last week’s news involving trump. Just last week. And then multiply that by 50. Nobody said the democrats are good. Just that the republicans are 10 times worse, that’s all.
When Democrats win next election they will spend the whole election carrying on Trump’s policies and therefore normalizing them. Republicans go farther right, people like you say that’s proof they’re worse and we should back the Democrats, Democrats win and do all the same policies and therefore normalize it, which then allows Republicans to go farther right.
while defending a party carrying out a modern day holocaust
Oof. You should really think twice before posting a comment this dumb. There’s a delete option. Do yourself a favor and use it.
holocaust deniers should not bother replying because they will just get the instant block
There’s two sides to this argument, and one is wrong and the other is right.
One says “Both sides do it, so it’s okay that my side does it.”
The other says “Your side does it. A few on my side do it, too. But it doesn’t matter, we should stop both sides from doing it.”
“It happens on both sides! you don’t condemn it on your side, isnt that hypocritical?!”
“I… Actually condemn everyone doing it and I think me and you should look for and support people who don’t support this heinous thing.”
“…”
“So, do you condemn the people on your side doing it as wel-”
“But look at this person who has done it on your side!”
People have a hard time with percentages, propensity, likelihood, etc. They can only think in binary terms. I used to think it was the right but looks like it’s everyone.
Can we just rename this instance from politicalmemes to tankierants
In Sweden the far-right tried to play this game. They started chirping about the social democrats being rasist and made a list on like an A4 with names and events. Then the same was done to them, matching the font, their list was taken up a skylift and holding one end they folded it out to the ground in a television program.
In the US, the ‘left’ would just amplify the voice of the far-right.
Good on Swedish voters for being less stupid than we are.
Well, I would not give them that much credit. The majority governing coallition is with the far-right. They were clear before the election they were going to work with the far-right. They have a common platform with the far right which has a large overlap with e.g. Trumps; mass deportation of immigrants (like for reasons like being a victim of a crime), slashing government agencies, extreme restrictions on free speech, and so on. It is just a bit slower here when it comes to reaching their goals.
Based
Nah, delete this
People who refuse to vote when there is a clearly superior option deserve whatever the greater evil brings forth when they win.
Aka “have the day you voted for”.
Even when there isn’t a clearly superior option; there’s no excuse to not vote in the U. S. when the right to vote is such a pivotable portion of your history. We are barely over a half century away; only a mere 60 years. Unconscionable.
Non-voters are beneath Trump supporters in my opinion. They’re the lowest of the low. A complete failure to understand their civic duty that a ton of people died to allow them to have. At least Trump supporters get involved. In the worst, dumbest possible way, but involved nonetheless.
If voting is a right, then surely not voting is also a right. You seem to be confusing it with the word “responsibility.”
Considering I never said that one doesn’t have the right to not vote, I don’t believe I am; but you are correct that I consider it a responsibility.
On the one hand, corporatist party, on the other, literal fascists. Yes, clearly there is no superior option.
You seem to be deriving meaning unstated in my comment.
Then maybe vote for a third party.
A vote for a third party in presidential is not a vote.
It is a vote, and over 1.5 million Americans (excluding those for RFK) made such votes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election#Results
IMO, progressives (who’s not too bothered by Stein’s cozying up to Russia a bit) from California, most of New England, DC, Maryland, Hawaii, or Washington (state), and yet yammer on about how bad third parties are because they split the Democrat vote, are probably stupid, or at least ignorant, and should give some of the time they spend watching CNN or Vaush to reading election stats.
how bad third parties are because they split the Democrat vote, are probably stupid, or at least ignorant, and should give some of the time they spend watching CNN or Vaush to reading election stats.
Hey, I don’t need to comment because you said it all for me.
Election stats? You ever hear the phrase “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics”
Stats on their own given a poor analysis of an average joe/jane can mislead just as much if not more than a talking head can.
The core fact remains that voting for a third party under a first past the post system is risking permitting the greater evil to win.
Yes, I think it’s from Twain.
I backed my assertions with stats, however poor you think they are as analysis.
What do yo back up your assertions with, other than lame DNC, CNN, and Vaush talking points?
I simply cannot grasp why some people believe voting 3rd party in a presidential election isn’t one of the dumbest possible things you can do in life.
Like, beyond the fact that the 3rd party candidate with the most votes in 2024 got a whopping HALF OF A SINGLE PERCENT of the total votes cast, meaning a 3rd party literally cannot win, there’s still the reality that even if they did win, no 3rd party has A SINGLE MEMBER IN CONGRESS, so if a 3rd party presidential candidate actually won, they wouldn’t be able to do shit, because they’d have literally ZERO allies in Congress.
I’m pretty sure anyone voting 3rd party for president has absolutely no clue how our government works. They have no concept of the reality they live in.
I simply cannot grasp why some people believe voting 3rd party in a presidential election isn’t one of the dumbest possible things you can do in life.
You might want to say that to Michiganders who voted for Stein (and Oliver) because of Gaza and the US presence in the Middle East.
The 2024 Presidential election isn’t the only one in US history: there have been 57 others.
Trump had few allies in Congress before 2016, but now members are the Republican caucus are falling all over themselves to curry favour from him.
I’m pretty sure anyone voting 3rd party for president has absolutely no clue how our government works. They have no concept of the reality they live in.
You are so correct—as members of the herd generally are. I like people who resort to exaggerations, over generalizations, and distortions.
People who voted for the lesser evil is still voting for evil
And not voting is the greatest evil.
Given that you can act (in this case vote), your hands are more dirty permitting the worse evil to win through inaction.
You don’t get to clean your hands of things when you have the power to act to effect the outcome.
So saying “People voted for evil” is a selective self-benefiting myopia. Vote abstainers are not virtuous, they are a narcissists.
Lol. You sweet summer child.
“I would proudly vote for Hitler if slightly to the right of Hitler was on the ballot”. Good fucking job, you’re voting for Hitler. If you vote for Hitler you also deserve slightly to the right of Hitler.
Exactly
And people who didn’t vote for the lesser evil could have helped avoid the greater evil, but chose not to.
Can we just stop having this discussion? It’s so boring. Both sides misrepresent the other. Tankies are stupid. Also nobody is a tankie. The Biden administration sanctioned a genocide. Every other US president is a war criminal. This discussion never goes anywhere.
So you propose ignoring the propaganda and hope it’ll go away? Doesn’t sound like a very good plan.
You mean the two party system propaganda?
deleted by creator
“both sides are the same” for example. Do you really need me to list all the propaganda they repeat? Just go to .ml or grad and you’ll see. The discussion is not pointless because ignoring them and not responding to their bullshit isn’t gonna work.
This isn’t entirely new or unique to America, but the dynamic is essentially:
Party A improves the odds fascism is successfully implemented.
Party B implements it.
Reducing the conditions for fascism to take hold is strictly off the table for both A and B.
Fundamentally changing the system of Party A (or B for that matter) through voting alone would at least require a Party C.
But even so it is the internal party politics prior to and outside of elections that are keeping this fascism paradigm in place. And that’s where people’s frustrations tend to lie.
It becomes a trolley problem at some point too.
Do you do nothing and watch fascism implemented or physically support and fund the genocide just so fascism is implemented 2 years later without anyone opposing this time?
Another lemmy.world banger
“both sides”= a disengenious comment by conservative mainly also uses the same thing to say thier not as bad.
“Both sides” also used by liberals to tell you it doesn’t matter they voted for genocide because trump will do the same
Funny words coming from the fake “progressive” that claimed boths sides and sat at home or threw away a vote.
both sides is primarly used by conservatives, 100% of the time, lol. its pretty obvious even on reddit. thier talking points often are right wing in nature and pretty disengeniously disguised. i have never seen a “liberal” if there is anything left of center right in america, say that at all.
Does third party count then? One bar is a bar
Another classic:
Me: gives my definition of tankie Tankie: so <name of leftist who doesnt match the given definition> is a tankie too?
And ofc: Shunning a dictatorship and pointing out their horrible doing, means you obviousely cant be left, nooo you must be a libertarian or fascist.
And one of my favorit tankie talking points: "Democracy is when you have to be approved by the government in order to even get on a list. That you can either vote for the state party or “no”, like it was in east germany, and 99.4% voted for the state party but then suddenly after the dictatorship fell, 4 years later they dropped down to 16.4 %. aah yes seems legit. Truely a grand democracy.
two words: third parties
Instant runoff voting, then third parties
and the run-off in 2024 would be Trump versus Harris, and in 1992, Bush versus Clinton.
If we assume the first round goes the same, but without a spoiler effect third parties would do better in the first round.
IIUC, in neither the 1992 nor 2024 Presidential elections did a candidate win a (popular) majority.
If those who voted for Perot instead voted for Clinton, Clinton would still have been elected, probably with a majority. If they voted for Bush, then he’d been elected, probably with a majority, and those-more-left-wing-than-Republicans would have been (more) disappointed.
If those who voted for 3rd parties last year instead voted for Harris, she still would have lost the first round, including Michigan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election#Results_by_state ). I doubt she would have won the run-off.
I suppose run-offs are interesting when there are strong 3rd party candidates. As this is not currently the case in the USA, it’d mean little—the 2 party-state continues (and multi-millionaire Democrats would still complain about Stein, Greens, and/or other alternative parties).
two words: third parties
Two words: NOT VIABLE
Unless you completely, or mostly, agree with Trump or Harris—and I repeat, agree, not just consider one the lesser evil—then no one is viable.
A vote for Harris in a non-swing state was a vote wasted.
Tell me you don’t understand American politics without telling me you don’t understand American politics
Let’s say that if in every Presidential and Congressional election from 2028 to 2058, everyone who’d otherwise vote for 3rd parties instead voted Democrat, and Democrats always won the White House, >45% of the House and Senate each, always had a majority in at least 1 house, and at least 1/2 the time won majorities in both houses.
Do you think the US would be any closer to voter reform—e.g. proportional representation, ranked ballots, whatever, even re-drawing districts more sensibly?
wp:2024 United States presidential election#Results by state
If 1.5 million Californians who voted for Harris, instead voted for Trump, Harris would have still won that state;
or,
If 3 million Californians who voted for Harris, instead voted for 3rd parties (e.g. Stein), Harris would have still won that state.
4 835 250 Texans voted for Harris. That’s more votes for Harris than any other state besides California. It was still over 1.5 million votes less than what Trump got in Texas.
If those who voted for Harris in Texas instead voted 3rd party, Harris would be no worse the loser in terms of Texan Electoral votes.
But yeah, I have no understanding of American politics.
(minor correction about 20 minutes after posting: for 3rd party into for 3rd parties)
The best a third party can hope for us to split the vote from whatever majority party they are most like and allow the other side to win. And only one time in our history has a third party gotten more votes than the party it split from. Teddy Roosevelt, Bull Moose Party, 1912
The best a third party can hope for us to split the vote from whatever majority party they are most like and allow the other side to win.
Progressive Democrats in non-swing states can vote 3rd party and scare future delegates and contenders into being more progressive. Also, they could support Libertarians and Constitutionalists a little in non-swing states.
source for pic: wc:File:Progressive Moose walking.png
The Progressive Party, popularly nicknamed the Bull Moose Party, was a third party in the United States formed in 1912 by former president Theodore Roosevelt after he lost the presidential nomination of the Republican Party to his former protégé turned rival, incumbent president William Howard Taft. The new party was known for taking advanced positions on progressive reforms and attracting leading national reformers. The party was also ideologically deeply connected with America’s radical-liberal tradition.[2]
wp:1912 United States presidential election
In 1848, it was just the Democrats and the Whigs.
Then in 1856, the Republicans ran their first candidate for President: John C. Frémont;
and in 1860, it was Lincoln.
(minor correction about 3 hours after replying: “and in 1856, it was Lincoln.” to “and in 1860, it was Lincoln.”)
Lol. Why would I support Libertarians? They’re dumber than Trump supporters and have about as many solutions when you inquire.
See, you actually think that there’s a good 3rd party worth voting for.
There’s not.
Trump got 312 Electoral College votes, while Harris got 226.
If Trump lost 44 of those votes to Harris, she would be President today.
If you got 120 000 Georgians, 60 000 Nevadans, 121 000 Pennsyvanians, 90 000 Michiganders and 30 000 Wisconsinites who voted for Trump last year to instead vote for wp:Chase Oliver, Trump would have lost 46 Electoral College votes to Harris.
I think firewitch’s point was that third parties almost by definition have zero chance of getting a candidate elected in a first past the post system. This is pretty common knowledge.
I don’t think it’s zero, but it’s quite unlikely for the next few decades at least.
My point is if an American is in a non-swing state, then wt:thons vote counts for little: so thon might as well vote for thons heart, and maybe the number of votes might get attention.
Ah, I see, you have done the math. Ok, this is the only condition which I would consider voting 3rd party not morally dubious. Thanks!
Right, and not voting at all is the surefire way to make third parties happen. Sure.
I vote for 3rd parties, but people say I should vote for the lesser-evil wing of the 2-party-state.
I vote for 3rd parties
I applaud you if you vote 3rd party in local/state elections. But if you’re voting 3rd party in a presidential election, you’re dumber than the chair you’re sitting on right now.
As a Canadian I don’t vote in US elections,
but please, tell me why those who voted for Presidential candidates other than Trump or Harris in non-swing states, or who are very much concerned about Palestine, the US military-industrial complex, or IP (i.e. “intellectual property”) trolls are dumber than chairs.
That is because you are effectively throwing your vote away.
Or you don’t care or want to give the more evil of the two dominate parties a small advantage while telling yourself you are good. I guess you do you.
Please read my other reply ITT: https://lemmy.world/post/29892234/17151202 .
Thanks, yes, in this case I think it makes sense to vote third party.
So, ultimately this whole thing hangs on how possible or likely is making the rise of a significant third party
