this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
360 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19088 readers
3578 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  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] 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Oh, I'm all for ranked choice voting, but in order for it to have any meaning we also need a plurality of parties. They also need time to build and I'm sure these two would start a good one if allowed.

Although the likelihood of political parties having any weight at all past January is anyone's guess..

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

Without rank choice voting any progressive party would act as a spoiler for the Democratic Party. Debilitating ourselves in this way isn't particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 56 minutes ago (1 children)

Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?

Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?

Debilitating ourselves in this way isn’t particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.

Oh thank god Democrats don't throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 minutes ago

Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?

The FPTP voting system ensures that they do not have a reason.

Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?

The FPTP voting system and entrenchment of neoliberalism in the minds of the American public for over 40 years from both mainstream political parties starting with Regan. This is may be the case for western countries and democracies more broadly as well. Currently, neoliberal ideas cause a contradiction when a person encounters progressive or socialist ideas. Along the lines of:

Why would we fix our institutions if they are flawless? What's the hurry to solve our problems if we are at the end of history?

Some useful and correct resolutions of these contradictions are:

Our institutions are flawed because they were made by us, flawed humans. The time to advert climate change, fix systemic inequalities, the reduce the wealth gap is now. Incremental changes will run out the clock, as they don't address the root causes. There will be hundreds of millions if not billions of causalities unless these issues are addressed sooner rather than later.

Neoliberal ideas must be pulled from the minds of Americans like a weed. Or like one of those radishes in Super Mario Bros 2. Then people will be able to embrace ideas like systemic change to institutions and wealth redistribution from the rich to everyone else.

When asked about socialism, if a person responds with 'socialism doesn't work' or 'the Soviet Union collapsed' those are the tells that a person needs to full internalize neoliberalism as a scam.

And maybe a history lesson about how the Soviet Union was actually an authoritarian communist dictatorship and not a socialist country. The government owned the means of the production, not the people, and the government wasn't representative of the people.

Oh thank god Democrats don’t throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.

It's better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps. Neoliberals in office aren't going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them. Like educating people and co-opting the Democratic Party in one of their primaries. Like Trump did to the Republicans and Bernie tried to do to the Democrats.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

A few weeks ago, I'd have agreed with you, but now? The Democratic party that just lost 10 million votes.. We'll spoil that party? The one that just lost a fair election to a convicted felon? You want to protect them from being spoiled?

We have 4 years, which is, again, the most time we'll ever get to try something like this because that's how 4 year election cycles work. What is it exactly that they're doing successfully you don't want to spoil?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

We’ll spoil that party?

Yes, running third party candidates in a FPTP voting system is how the spoiler effect works.

You want to protect them from being spoiled?

Because of the FPTP voting system our democracy will always trend towards a two-party system. Until we enact systemic change, we will be stuck with the Democrats and the Republicans. As long as the Democrats are further to the left of fascism we should vote for them and avoid limiting our power with third party candidates.

We the people and our interests are what avoiding the spoiler effect protects.

What is it exactly that they’re doing successfully you don’t want to spoil?

The Democrats are neoliberals. They are easier to push on social issues and the environment. The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans. But more to the point, they do not want to kill minorities and destroy the environment.

Rather than seeking a moral victory over Democrats we should look for ways to leverage power for the people Republicans want to hurt. Doing otherwise makes the harm done to minorities the cost of doing business.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 54 minutes ago (1 children)

It's adorable that you expect anyone to buy that the Democratic Party is movable after they just spent a whole ass year refusing to budge on fucking genocide.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 18 minutes ago

The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans.

This is the key part I recommend you read.

Also, this is off topic, but Harris did pledge to end the war. It was in the news. She called for a ceasefire at least three times. If you care about the Palestinians, then voting for the party that wants to end the war is more useful than allowing the party that wants Israel to finish the job to take power.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I mean yes, that's been the playbook for 8 years. More like 16 if you count what people actually thought Obama was going to be (and had record turn out). Try, try again?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 59 minutes ago* (last edited 57 minutes ago) (1 children)

The lives of millions of minorities and the Earth's climate are at stake now. Minorities will notice the difference in the short term, but we will all notice the difference in the long term. Assuming we still have elections and a Democratic Party going forward, yes. We delay fascism and co-opt the Democratic Party. edit: typos

[–] [email protected] 1 points 44 minutes ago

Look, I don't know if you guys haven't been paying attention but places have been getting ravaged for decades because of what we've been doing. Everyone around me was flabbergasted with what happened in the NC western mountains. They videos were exactly like those I've been seeing in the Philippines and other countries that we just completely ignore when there's a natural disaster (maybe a 30 second blip in the media headline for 80% of it if they're in a really poor region).

The Western mountains were devastated because of the infrastructure in natural valleys and huge amounts of sediment deposited by centuries of mining those mountains out (you can see the natural rock formations that returned, lots of people know the land they built on wasn't there before it was developed). The hurricane wasn't man made, but everything fucking else about that catastrophe was because of our activity.

I don't know what the answer is, but I've been waiting for the democrat heroes to save the day since I started voting during Bush's administration that I was thoroughly against and thought our invasion of Iraq was a war crime. Now we continue to this day with a never ending war machine and a corporation first politics that hasn't ever changed. I'm all for us talking about some alternatives and pushing for everything and anything right now, not waiting to form something later to help "sway" the democrats policies (which it really didn't in the long run did it?)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

The Tea Party did not spoil a GOP election. The GOP caved and adopted their platform.

The Democratic Party will do the same thing with the Guillotine Party.