this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2024
-48 points (16.7% liked)

politics

19043 readers
3801 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Many Nader voters would disagree.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Nader was more popular than Stein. Stein votes this cycle will be protest votes.

If Stein wasn't on the ticket or other third party candidates, the protest voters wouldn't vote for Harris.

They'd simply stay home.

It's Palestine that will lose the Dems this election if it's lost. Or fuckery by Trump in Georgia.

Either way the biggest danger to the Dems is poor voter turnout. And it's funding a genocide that's going to cause that, not the green party.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Who is more popular doesn't matter. The whole point of Stein's candidacy is not to be popular. Stine knows that she pulls votes away on the left. And she knows she cannot win. Which was never her goal. Her goal because she knows she pulls away votes on the left is to make it easier for Donald Trump to win. No more no less.

Protest voting in national elections is not a thing. People keep talking about protest voting against Harris or Biden. If you're going to make the claim. You also need to show evidence of how it will work. I have 250 plus years of evidence that protest voting in national elections doesn't work. Do you have evidence of a single instance of it working?

No the Democrats stance on Palestine will not lose them the election. If the Democrats lose the election someone with a worse stance on Palestine will win. So tell me how when they look at that they're supposed to understand that their stance was bad therefore they lost when someone with a worse stance won. If you want someone to learn to be better. Someone better than them needs to win. If someone worse than them wins. That means they need to adjust their tac to better match the views of the ones who won.

This bullshit myth of protest voting in a national election is exactly why things have gotten worse. Ignorant uninformed people flailing politically only succeeding and injuring themselves.