this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
535 points (85.5% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2263 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 129 points 1 month ago (23 children)

[email protected]

Any third party that's telling you to vote for them under FPTP, but isn't heavily promoting RCV to fix the system, isn't trying to win. They're trying to spoil the FPTP election.

RCV is already law in a surprisingly large number of places. It may change the majority in the house in this upcoming election, because the difference in vote-counting within the two states that use it for US congressional elections might be enough to change the razor-thin outcome.

RCV is on the ballot, in one form or another, in 7 states and DC this year. Go vote. You might be able to fix the system, and move toward the future that all the people in this thread who are being vocal about Jill Stein say that they want. Remember back when marijuana was illegal? That changed. This can change too, and it would be glorious, for a lot of important goals that a lot of people claiming to support Jill Stein claim they're supportive of. It would be practical and realistic. It would work.

Anyone in this thread who is saying Jill Stein is extremely important, but haven't been saying anything about ranked choice voting or changing the voting system to make third parties realistic: Why? What's your goal, why did you make that decision about your priorities?

The answer is obvious, of course. But it's fun to ask.

@[email protected], why?

I'll add more @s as more people pipe up. They always do.

Register and vote, for RCV as well as for Harris. We have 25 more days.

https://www.vote.org/

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The most important youtube video in politics:

Https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] [email protected] 72 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

2016 Michgan election results

Michigan 2016

I can’t post more than one image because Lemmy/Memmy makes the images fall apart into a 2 mile long scroll.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Can't believe Johnson handed the election to Trump like that.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Even without him, Stein had it handled by herself. Why do you think she’s back? Jr, who was funded by a Repub PAC, dropped out. Then Stein re-appeared.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Hillary was a terrible candidate. She lost because of that.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 month ago (38 children)

"Once noble party" - ffs.

Jill Stein is a bad actor in this election, she understands how the electoral college works and she understands she's weakening the democratic party position. But let's not blame shift - the Democrats could be much better on climate change then they are today and if they were better Stein's BS wouldn't have such an easy time attracting voters. I dislike the title posing it as "Stein may hand Trump the whitehouse again."

[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 month ago (16 children)

Even if the argument about getting X% of votes was true, the states to campaign heavy in would be the deep blue/red states. Especially since they tend to get ignored by candidates.

Instead she sticks to the states where <30k votes could decide the election and the market is saturated with the most expensive ad costs

It's blantantly obvious what's she's doing.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 month ago (66 children)

Jill Stein is polling at litterally less than measurable numbers.

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3913&stream=top

"Undecided" represents at least twice the voters Stein appears to be garnering.

load more comments (66 replies)
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Note: Jill is literally paid to run as a spoiler, and if you look at her actual policies, lot of transphobia, ablism, and support for pseudoscience

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

This shouldn’t surprise anyone considering her source.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

2016 Pennsylvania results

Pennsylvania 2016

I can’t post more than one image because Lemmy/Memmy makes the images fall apart into a 2 mile long scroll.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 month ago (1 children)

guys it's not that hard, all we have to do is to not vote for still jein.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

... there were people voting for stein?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 month ago

Jill Stein has my vote! Seriously, she took it. Can someone help me get it back?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

2016 Wisconsin election results

Wisconsin 2016.

I can’t post more than one image because Lemmy/Memmy makes the images fall apart into a 2 mile long scroll.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (23 children)

I don't understand why it is taken for granted that if Stein wasn't a candidate the people who vote for her would be voting for the Democrats instead. Just as likely they would not vote at all or vote for some other protest candidate.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (11 children)

It was nice to see the World News community finally realize that the DNC has been doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot for a year.

Maybe this community will finally catch on and connect the dots between a random ass 3rd party getting blamed for stealing votes away from the Democrats, and Democrats not actually meeting the core demands of their constituency.

Or maybe not....

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

jesus christ this thread is a fucking nightmare bro

i feel like i've done three pounds of ketamine just scrolling through these comments.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Its the genocide thats the problem-- Steins numbres are small.. And Jill Stein owes the dems nothing, she can run if she wants. Thats what democracy is about. So the new republic can suck it.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

Everything you said is true. But it has nothing to do with the article. It's about how her campaign seems to be more a grift than pushing green policies, and aimed at taking votes from Harris in swing states than actually trying to win any election.

She can obviously do what she wants, but it doesn't appear she is being genuine.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›