• agamemnonymous
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    Because one stands a chance of winning, the other does not.

    • blazera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      whichever side we support stands a chance of winning. They aint gonna compete in a game of skill in November, they’re gonna ask us who wins and we decide.

      • agamemnonymous
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes, “we”, consisting of statistically significant factions of the voting population. Campaigns take time and money, neither of which any candidates besides the two front-runners have enough of to be competitive. They’re not gonna ask you who wins, you don’t decide. I don’t see 70 million Americans shifting to anyone else at this stage.

        • blazera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          you’ve got a paradox going where me supporting a better candidate is pointless because my vote is worth nothing and I cant change anything.

          but also that I have to support your candidate because my vote matters if its for them.

          my vote matters and I’m giving it to a better candidate.

          • agamemnonymous
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Is it a paradox to say that driving in circles around a roundabout is pointless because it doesn’t get you anywhere, but driving along the route to a destination does? Driving is driving, does it work or not? Paradox! Smearing food on your belly doesn’t satisfy your hunger, but eating it does. Does food satisfy hunger or not? Paradox!

            If we had approval or ranked choice voting, voting third party would accomplish something. Since we have First Past the Past elections, voting third party is as effective as smearing food on your belly or circling a roundabout for hours.

            • blazera@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              Its pretty irritating everytime someone brings up ranked choice voting. They know its a good thing, they want it to happen. But its getting brought up to try and criticize my choice of candidate. You want ranked choice voting? You know who supports ranked choice voting in their election platform? My candidate! I am well aware of how shit FPTP voting is, Im not the one promoting it.

              • agamemnonymous
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                I’m not promoting it either, that doesn’t change the fact that it is what we use. Voting for a candidate that supports RCV doesn’t basically mean that the election you voted for them in becomes retroactively RCV, you act based on what the system is, not what it should be.

                • blazera@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  You are promoting it with your vote for candidates that support it, that are only in power because it exists.

                  • agamemnonymous
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    That’s not how the system works. All voting third party does is equivocate approval for the two front runners. Do you approve of the insurrectionist fascist and the neo-liberal equally? Are they exactly the same to you? Do you think they are equally supportive of election reform?

                    The fascists with minority support only have power because kids who don’t understand the electoral system either abstain from voting, or vote third party. If everyone held their nose and showed up to vote lesser evil, the Republican party would wither away into being a third party themselves and a progressive party could actually gain footing.

                    Your candidate doesn’t stand a chance precisely because people like you keep pretending the system works differently.

          • Arcka@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Don’t forget that it’s not ok to vote for your candidate because they don’t already have enough support, therefore there’s no way to ever reach the threshold where it’ll be ok to vote for them.

            It’s only ok to vote for the neolibs that the billionaires approve after a promise that nothing’s really going to change.

            Even in a state that’s so blue the Dems have no chance of losing, voting for or writing in someone left of the incumbent will still be deemed a vote for the red team.