politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Yep.
We legitimately have zero options besides voting for Biden.
And I sincerely hope enough voters realize that, because trump will be worse.
The only thing we can do till 2028 is make a lot of noise about how this shit is unacceptable and Dems need to do better
Unfortunately the DNC knows that while we say it's unacceptable, we still have to vote Biden or risk trump.
Which is why the DNC has spent 30 years drifting further and further right. They have captive voters and are willing to risk Republican rule so Dems can be as rightwing as possible.
If they stop funding israel and stop giving them arms, would it not get those votes back? are all of you really thinking biden would risk trump winning by refusing to halt arms and cash to israel and let the UN come to a ceasefire resolution? if its so dire, i think THEY have a responsibility to us and the palestinians. for one, all the money going to israel could go to be put to fixing our infrastructure, not destroying gaza's. two, aren't we going to need all these missiles and bombs for when we inevitably go to war with russia?
but just like every other election cycle, they will get their votes, continue on w/ biz as usual and then try to win our hearts again and/or fearmonger us again at the next election. with aipac and other big money donors doxxing and ousting progressives, i don't foresee a functional left after this election, regardless. however, people are mobilizing over this issue and rightly so, its fucking genocide. there is no acceptable amount of genocide and there is no justifiable reason to continue funding and arming it.
I'll be voting for Trump. I was in favor of his tough stance on illegal immigration, and I still am. Bring out the pitchforks Lemmy!
Did you know Biden deported more illegals than Trump did?
Why are you even here?
Isn't this the Politics community? I mean, are all politics allowed...or, ONLY Left an Democrat politics? Smells very...Redditish to me....
There isnt a single positive thing on your profile, even on other boards, why would i assume you are here in good faith?
I'm here because I like to discuss politics. However, just like Reddit...it seems as if this community only leans one way. Sorry to inform you that politics in America is very broad...it's not just about Democrats and Liberals.
This is honestly the best take on the issue I've seen so far.
I am the first person to say we need to break the two-party stranglehold on politics. We need independent candidates in office yesterday. But this election is the abso-fucking-lutely worst time to make a run at that, because that third party vote WILL be a vote for Trump. And if you firmly believe that third party or independent politicians have a place, elect them to your local city council or school board or state legislature. That is where they will make a real, actionable difference.
A vote against Biden, no matter who for, is a vote for Trump. No amount of TikTok "well ackshually" will change that reality.
last election biden and harris were on the working families party line which is third party. i'm not sure this time around but do y'all even know how third party works?
>that third party vote WILL be a vote for Trump.
I object to the characterization of candidates as "third party, but as far as I know, no one calls the Republicans a third party.
Please familiarize yourself with nomenclature before joining in on the conversation. It's important we're all on the same page to avoid confusion. Objecting to semantics is fine but doesn't really add to anything in this context. It's really just a distraction.
>A vote against Biden, no matter who for, is a vote for Trump.
this is election misinformation. a vote for anyone except trump cannot be counted as a vote for trump.
The election is a tug of war. Trump and his supporters are pulling on the right. Biden and his supporters are pulling on the left.
When you vote for an independent candidate, you are removing force that could have been used to pull against Trump and redirecting that force towards a candidate who has zero chance of winning. A vote for an independent candidate is a vote for Trump.
The only valid retort to this is "well I wasn't going to vote anyway" and anyone who feels that way can shut the fuck up about everything.
No. It is a vote for an independent candidate.
Which will remove yet another barrier to Trump becoming president.
I'm all for breaking the two-party stranglehold but do it in a local election where it will make a difference. This year is the absolute worst year to try a failed presidential run.
I never advised anyone to vote for an independent candidate. I am simply correcting your misleading rhetoric.
Good advice on focusing locally for third parties.
The rhetoric isn't misleading. When voter turnout is low, ergo the total number of votes for Republicans and Democrats are low, Republicans fare better. The US uses a first-past-the-post system of voting which devolves into a two-party system. This means that voting for a third party removes votes from the total number of ballots cast for one of the two actual candidate parties, which means fewer votes for Republicans and Democrats, which usually benefits Republicans far more than Democrats.
All this to say that when you vote for a third party, Trump is more positively impacted than Biden, so you're effectively increasing Trump's chance of winning.
I agree with your general point that third party votes don't matter nationally. This is kinda blunt, but you are making the false assumption that Party politicans are entitled to everyone's votes. You can't remove a vote that was never casted for a particular candidate.
"The rhetoric isn’t misleading."
It is to me. A vote for an independent candidate does not in any way, shape, or form count as a vote for Trump. They are not the same thing.
It is a fact that a vote for an independent candidate is not tallied the same as a vote for trump. It is nonsense to say they are the same. It's like saying a vote for Hawaiian pizza is a vote for Pepperoni Pizza. It is hokum.
Do you understand that some words mean something beyond their literal, exact definition? If someone says "it's raining buckets", would you come in and say "that rhetoric is misleading, I looked outside and no buckets are falling from the sky"?
Of course. The problem is that when someone says one thing is another thing, that is not obviously metaphorical. Maybe you'd be able to tell in person but not through text where the message is monotonized and broadcasted to the entire internet.
A vote for a 3rd party candidate is IN ESSENCE a vote for Trump. There, fixed the literal reference.
>When you vote for an independent candidate, you are removing force that could have been used to pull against Trump
Jill Stein and Cornel West are running against trump.
That’s nice. They’ll lose, and the momentum put to that independent candidate is momentum that could have been used against Trump. Voting for either of them is a vote for "I am not interested in what happens in this country, and sincerely hope Trump wins. Because instead of voting against him, instead I choose to throw away my vote by making some kind of 'statement' that will never be heard by anyone."
> instead of voting against him
voting for someone who is not trump is voting against him.
Not in any way that matters.
telling people their vote doesnt matter sounds like voter suppression.
You sound like a teenager who has no concept of how voting in this country works. Yes, voting for a 3rd party candidate is not literally a vote for Trump, but the net effect is EXACTLY that. You may as well write in Bernie Sandwrs for all the good it will do.
Don’t try and gaslight with your “SoUnDs LiKe VoTeR sUpPrEsSiOn” comment.
>Don’t try and gaslight with your “SoUnDs LiKe VoTeR sUpPrEsSiOn” comment.
it's not gaslighting. it's actually what you're doing.
>voting for a 3rd party candidate is not literally a vote for Trump, but the net effect is EXACTLY that.
so does that mean voting for trump is like voting twice? no. you're spreading misinformation.
>A vote for an independent candidate is a vote for Trump.
no, it's not. stop spreading misinformation
There you go again with no concept of how politics works in this country. You are either a shill, or a completely naive person. A vote for a 3rd party candidate is as effective as not voting in the national results. Can you at least see that? When electoral votes are tallied, and NONE go to a 3rd party candidate, those votes are wasted.
I wish this country had a different voting system other than first past the goal posts, but it doesn’t so you need to be realistic in your vote.
if voting for an independent candidate counts as not voting (that's a lie), and not voting is the same as voting for trump, does that mean that if i vote for trump, it is 2 votes? no.
you're spreading misinformation.
It absolutely is. You're removing a vote that could have been used to stop Trump and throwing it into a candidate who will not win. You are, quite literally saying, "I am completely fine with another Trump presidency".
you can vote for cornel west or Jill Stein.
You misspelled "Trump".
no, they are running against trump
That's nice. They'll lose, and the momentum put to that independent candidate is momentum that could have been used against Trump.
Voting for an independent candidate for president is standing on your rooftop and screaming "I LOVE TRUMP AND HOPE HE BECOMES PRESIDENT IN 2024".
It's simply the logical thing for them to do, in the present state of things.
The far left / moderate left voters are captive for the reason you note. The party is closely aligned with center-left viewpoints, so they have their votes. The far / moderate right voters are all voting republican. It's the swing voters / true centrists / center right voters who are up in the air, so those are the people the dems have to appease. So they drift further and further towards their viewpoints.
Unfortunately we can't fix this situation without a healthy show that they don't have the far left / moderate left votes guaranteed, and need to start paying attention to what we want, too... but we can't do that without accepting a republican president, which we certainly can't do right now. So we're stuck. And it'll just keep happening that way, because as dems drift further left, the republicans are just falling off the right end of the scale, and they keep falling further every year.
Except the last time we had a true progressive campaign...
A lot of those 1/3 of voter showed up. And we flipped a bunch of "red states" that the DNC had given up on those.
It's not that those people won't vote, they just won't vote for candidates like Biden and Hillary.
But they turned up for Obama in 08.
We found something that worked, and the DNC's response was to tighten down primaries so there wouldn't be another upset.
Which has progressed to them straight up removing an entire states delegates.
I disagree.
I think if a moderate loses because they don't get the progressive votes, then nothing will change. They'll say that progressives are unreliable and this means they need to go further right.
Because we have decades of recent history that shows even if they still get the "lesser evil" votes, they'll still say the same thing if they lose.
The only option is primaries, which is why I'm so pissed the DNC just vetoed a state primary by yanking delegates away.
If we don't even have the primaries where the DNC openly say they can ignore results...
We're kind of out of options.
And I legitimately don't know what the path forward is. Or why everyone else isn't shitting bricks right now.
If the DNC doesn't get substantial pushback, they're not going to just give up on this veto they just decided they'll have.
Hell, Republicans will probably keep control of NH's state goverment for the next four years, if they don't agree to the DNCs demands about primary order, will NH Dems not get a say in 2028 either?