• @griD@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    118 minutes ago

    Even for tiny, tiny social media platforms like the fediverse, the current propaganda/misinformation campaign is tailor-made for the expected audience.
    E.g., on Facebook it might be enough to post AI slop depicting Trump as a saint. Here, that won’t fly. You have to understand that a lot of lefties and educated people reside here, so you just have to point the undecided to a third party. Maybe you’re not even after the actual undecided, spreading FUD is usually good enough. And a healthy dose of “both sides”!

    Of course, it’s vital to omit the fact that FPTP systems always devolve into two-party systems (a fact well understood), and you’re good to go. Easy rubles probably.

  • @AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    32 hours ago

    These morons at the bar were talking about how they plan to vote 3rd party to “show them” they’re sick of two party.

    We’re all sick of two party but voting 3rd party right now doesn’t magically fix it. And in this particular election it could possibly mean you never get to vote again.

  • BarqsHasBite
    link
    fedilink
    029 minutes ago

    Voting 3rd party for progressivism is the biggest self own in history. And repeatedly too.

      • BarqsHasBite
        link
        fedilink
        0
        edit-2
        7 minutes ago

        That’s not strange, that’s how it works. Especially if there’s a strong ‘anyone but Palin’ contingent.

        Star and approval look fucking terrible and is way out of line of the ‘one person one vote’ system we have and I think we want.

        *For anyone wondering about Alaska, there were two Republicans, including Palin, and one Democrat running for house seat. The other Republican was eliminated in ranked choice. Essentially his votes split to both the Dem and Palin, instead of all going to Palin like the Palin people wanted, and the Democrat won. So the GOP there is now mad.

        • @qqq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          20 seconds ago

          The GOP was maybe mad, but more importantly to me the people who actually study voting systems for a living were “mad”, and the people who hurt their favored candidate by voting for them were likely upset.

          Ignoring that the outcome was maybe what I would have wanted, it is definitely pathological that you can hurt a candidate by voting for them. Quoting the Wikipedia:

          The election was also a negative voting weight event, where a voter’s ballot has the opposite of its intended effect (e.g. a candidate being disqualified for having “too many votes”). In this race, Begich lost as a result of 5,200 ballots ranking him ahead of Peltola; Peltola also would have lost if she had received more support from Palin voters.

          What do you find wrong with those other systems? RCV is also not “one person one vote”. Approval voting is used in the UN and neither seem to have some of the pathologies of RCV.

    • @quink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      11
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Which will never happen because the Republicans are dead set on never changing any system in any way that’s not directly in their benefit and no one else’s. Until that moment arrives, which is never, the only option is to pick your particular flavour of straight-up fascism (Republicans these days) or anything else (Democrats) in the party primaries.

      • @PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 hours ago

        One of the few advantages of our splintered system of states is that voting is done on a state level. We can implement ranked-choice voting in states where Republicans are weak, and in doing so, allow states that aren’t filled with fascists to choose between multiple non-fascist ideologies, instead of just fascists and ‘whoever is left’.

      • @ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        22 hours ago

        Don’t fool yourself. The DNC also doesn’t want ranked choice voting. Neither party wants any competition. The entire system is built to make it virtually impossible for a third party candidate to win. Unless they actually hit 270+, even if they were a clear majority winner, they wouldn’t be elected.

  • @TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    214 hours ago

    I will be voting for Kamala, because I do think it’s very important that Trump not get reelected. I hope she wins, but her winning alone will not be enough. We need to do a better job of figuring out why America is in the state that it is in, so that we can come up with ways to fix it (assuming it can be fixed).

    • @PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      153 hours ago

      Absolutely. Voting is incredibly important, but on its own, it just buys time. Without time, we can do nothing - but if we are determined to do nothing, all the time in the world won’t save us.

    • RubberDuck
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Well, the absolute freedom of speech might be a thing to look at, as blatant lying and fascist rhetoric are not countered by more speech. Especially not if money = speech. As this gives the robber barons unfair advantage.

    • @yankturdscum
      link
      14 hours ago

      Kamala was the VP when the US sent weapons shipment to a genocidal country.

      You should be trialed for conspiracy to commit genocide. Or incitement at the very least.

  • @SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    63 hours ago

    In a democracy, you only get a voice if you vote. Voting IS the protest. When you don’t vote, or spoil your vote, you abdicate your voice.

  • kubica
    link
    fedilink
    96 hours ago

    In the current situation you could try to pretend that your vote is useful by not voting or voting third parties. But that it is not the reality of the consequences.

      • @Wilzax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        16 minutes ago

        Mathematically, it’s still exactly one half as bad as bad to not vote than to vote for the Republican party, regardless of who you are. A vote Republican swings the count 2 points relative to voting Democrat. No vote, 1 point relative to voting Democrat.

  • manucode
    link
    fedilink
    68 hours ago

    Technically, there can be a difference, but only if you are a Trump supporter

  • zanyllama52
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -75 hours ago

    The idea that voting for a third-party candidate is somehow “helping” one of the major party candidates is based on the assumption that the third-party candidate’s voters would have otherwise voted for one of the major party candidates.

  • @callouscomic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -4
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Blanket statements don’t work. How each state allocates votes to electoral college votes varies, and each states political leaning varies.

    There are times when not voting or voting third party effectively has no effect or the opposite effect.

    These oversimplified takes are tiring and pathetic.

    Get better arguments.

    • @FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      95 hours ago

      Ideally just get proportional representation with something like ranked choice voting and make it possible for 3rd party votes to count for something.

    • Todd Bonzalez
      link
      fedilink
      44 hours ago

      Explain how voting third party could have the “opposite effect”. Opposite of what?

    • @huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      13 hours ago

      Oh my God an image macro posted to the political memes board doesn’t have 60 pages of nuanced footnotes explaining how if you’re in Nebraska then your voting system works differently I’m going to literally shit my own pants out of rage