If you would prefer a socialist party candidate the most logical choice is to pick whatever Democratic/Republican candidate is most willing to enact voting method reform, e.g. ranked choice voting.
Because voters are incentivized to pick one of two main parties in the current method, third parties are essentially guaranteed never to get off the ground.
PSL is a Marxist org, and thus revolutionary, and isn't trying to win the presidency but delegitimize the electoral system and advertise their platform.
The issue with voting reform is that it doesn't really work, anything allowed to pass is weak enough that it won't change anything.
Feck off.
You're not going to be able to kick Marxists off of Lemmy, especially not on an instance run by Marxists.
Marxist created Lemmy too 🤣
Yep, and maintain it.
This is not accurate, CT does not count write ins. There's a field on the form but it's not counted, it's as if you left the field blank. I assume there are many others like that.
You are literally spreading disinformation.
CT has an official write-in candidate application and in the form it mentions that they do get counted.
Edit:
If a candidate has so registered, a vote may be cast by write-in ballot for such candidate by writing in the last name of the candidate for President and the last name of the candidate for Vice President or only the last name of the candidate for President; such write-in ballot shall be counted, and shall be in all respects effective, as a vote for each of the presidential electors representing such candidates for President and Vice President.
That's a change then, as of 2012, they did not. And I'm sure a non-0 number of other states still do that.
19 states... 220 Electoral College votes. 50 short of the presidency if they win every single one of them.
Pro-tip: They will win 0.
You've been explained this before, but PSL is a Marxist org, and thus revolutionary, and isn't trying to win the presidency but delegitimize the electoral system and advertise their platform.
Really don't know why you keep pulling this out like it's a gotcha when everyone else knows and the target audience doesn't care.
I can't speak to Georgia election law, but I live in Pennsylvania and the Democratic Party doesn't have any authority to kick anyone off an election ballot.
They took the case to court and paid lawyers and worked with Republican judges to take them off the ballot.
So duly elected judges ordered them removed from the ballot.
Democrats took them to court and paid for the lawyers for that to happen. The lawyers also being democrat.
Since judges are not in the habit of doing things just because they were asked to by a lawyer, especially Republican Pennsylvania judges at the behest of lawyers for the Democratic party, I went and looked up the case.
They used ineligible electors to get on the ballot.
I don't see how it's the Democrats fault they weren't up to the task of following Pennsylvania election law.
To be more specific, in the state of Georgia the requirement was 7500 signatures to get on the ballot. After volunteers got 17,000 signatures, the democrats sued saying that it was actually 7500 per elector not per candidate, so we would need a total of 120,000 signatures (7500 for 16 electors) and a republican appointed judge ruled in their favor. I believe we are still on the ballot as by the time that ruling had came down the ballots had been made at least for early voters but no votes cast for Claudia de la Cruz will be counted.