The animating concept behind the Trump campaign will be chaos. This is what history shows us fascists do when given the chance to participate in democratic political campaigns: They create chaos. They do it because chaos works to their advantage. They revel in it, because they can see how profoundly chaos unnerves democratic-republicans—everyone, that is, whether liberal or conservative, who believes in the basic idea of a representative government that is built around neutral rules. Fascism exists to pulverize neutral rules.

So they campaign with explicit intention to instill a sense of chaos. And then comes the topper: They have the audacity to insist that the only solution to the chaos—that they themselves have either grossly exaggerated or in some cases created!—is to vote for them: “You see, there is nothing but chaos afoot, and only we can restore order!”

  • eran_morad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    212
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    11 months ago

    Whatever. I’m voting D no matter what, for every election, because republicans are disgusting traitor filth.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      98
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t consider myself a Democrat, but in this two-horse race, I vote Democrat because, as my father was fond of saying and said as far back as at least the Reagan era, “the worst Democrat is better than the best Republican.” Sad but true. I’d rather have a senate of Bob Menendezes and lose Susan Collins in the mix. Menendez is a corrupt bastard, but at least he votes as if he gives a shit about other people. Collins tries to sound reasonable and fair and then votes in lockstep with the rest of the Republicans most of the time anyway.

    • CaptDust
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      82
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Lol yeah I remember when I used to consider positions, evaluate the candidates, check historical records etc. GOP has made this very easy the last few years because “fuck women, gays, immigrants and the disabled. Science is fake, Jan 6 is fake, covid is fake, trump is a saint and the rich need more help”.

      Wow what a winning platform. ☑️ D

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        GOP has made this very easy

        I’m a Houstonian. I’ll vote straight ticket, but I can already tell you how the election will shake out.

        Texas will go bright red. Houston will go bright blue. My vote at the state and national level won’t matter, because its winner-take-all. And many of my neighbors will be subject to harassment, disenfranchisement, and voter caging because they’ve got African American / Pacific surnames, which flag them as easy targets for reducing D turnout. That’s before you even get into how reliable a Jane Nelson / Ken Paxton administered election is expected to be, given how frequently we’ve had rules for mail-in ballots, voter id, and county-wide voting challenged by the current state administration.

        The GOP has made the decision to vote against them easy. They have made the process to vote against them increasingly difficult.

        Science is fake, Jan 6 is fake, covid is fake, trump is a saint and the rich need more help.

        The same folks who say this shit are the ones expected to tally the results of the election faithfully.

        As the saying goes, “Its not the votes that count but who counts the votes”. Our dogged reliance on the machinery of elections in a state with a decades long history of shady election practices is naive af.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I used to be an Independent voter. I’d consider reasonable Democrats and Republicans alike. No more. Dems down the ballot for me.

    • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Same but I primary whenever I can for candidates that even entertain being progressive. Anyone who want to stop the plutocracy, treat our planet like we need it, or will act with empathy.

    • lir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      68
      ·
      11 months ago

      Too many people can’t bear conscience for voting for someone actively abetting a genocide. A lot are boting 3rd party this year, so the vote’s split

      • root_beer@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        59
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Cool. Vote third party. We’ll get Trump (or one of the other authoritarian dominionist clowns in the car), who will end up pushing for a nuclear attack on Gaza while dismantling every institution we have here, meager as they are, but people still need them. Then in 2028, don’t vote at all because you will probably lose your right to do so. At least you voted with your heart<3 though, so have a nice cup of tea and give yourself a hug.

        We do not have a system in place where your idealistic protest can do anything other than make things worse. Fix the goddamn system, put people in power on a local level who have a chance, and work up from there. Fuck outta here with any Jill Stein horseshit.

        • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Cool. Vote third party. We’ll get Trump

          If not voting Biden is a vote for Trump, wouldn’t not voting Trump be a vote for Biden by the same logic? The logic only works if you assume all third party voters would be voting Democrat which isn’t the case.

          • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            If not voting Biden is a vote for Trump, wouldn’t not voting Trump be a vote for Biden by the same logic?

            No, because you assume both sides are equally likely to switch their vote to third-parties. Right-wing voters are less susceptible to fits of conscience, and are much more reliable getting to the voting booths. They are more likely retirees, or zealous Fox News foot soldiers. The GOP knows this and that’s why mushy “both sides suck” third-party pushes disfavor democrats.

            • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              The lowest rates of voter turnout are actually in red states on average, which are 50s-low 60s, and Trump arguably won because of the 13% of Obama-Trump swing voters. Not all Trump voters are even politically engaged just like most Americans, some see the media and Democrats going crazy about him yet haven’t felt any impact of this on their daily lives so they don’t connect with the “vote for us because we’re not Trump” messaging at all. The most ignored group of Trump voters are people who just vote for him for some dumb superficial reason and don’t really care about politics, next to Obama-Trump swing voters.

              • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I hear your point, but I do think “Obama-Trump swing voters” is a defined group that is fun to talk about without any true diagnostic purpose. It captures too many different types of voters. They’re not all just those who change affiliation with the slightest breeze - many are probably people who went down alt-right rabbit holes between 2012 and 2016, or the cumulative effect of Fox News, or voters who more often vote against the incumbent party seeking “change,” and so on.

                But also, even if the lowest rates of turnout is in red states, that doesn’t mean that in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, etc GOP voters will be more reliably good foot soldiers. Turnout naturally will trend lower where the votes in fact matter the least, I’m sure that’s true for both parties. The relevant metric is comparative voter turnout in swing states.

          • root_beer@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            You know what I’m talking about. Of course not all third party voters would vote for the Democratic candidate, but how many leftists would otherwise vote for the Republican? I reeeally doubt these people are stumping for the American Freedom or Constitution candidates.

            • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Of course not all third party voters would vote for the Democratic candidate, but how many leftists would otherwise vote for the Republican

              Trump arguably won in 2016 because of the 13% of Obama-Trump voters, Bernie-Trump supporters are also a thing, and not all Trump voters are politically engaged people as aren’t many Democrats, and only about 66% of eligible Americans voted, with lowest rates in the 50s-low 60s being red states. A third party wouldn’t necessarily only “steal” Democrat voters because this isn’t a closed system with one option. The logic I presented there is perfectly valid because not everyone is a leftist, for “not voting Biden is a vote for Trump” to work you have to ignore a bunch of voters and potential voters. It’s just something people say online for people to say “yes” to that has no relevance or impact on material politics at all.

              • root_beer@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                I’m referring specifically to actual politically engaged people who refuse to vote for Biden because he isn’t progressive enough. Also, as I have not addressed it, I do get why they do refuse, as he would not be my first choice either, and I absolutely agree that Biden (and most democrats, tbh) needs to reach out to these voters because the base is more progressive than is reflected in their representation. I was aware of Bernie-Trump voters but, beyond their disdain for the establishment party politicians, I do not understand their motives; however, I will read up on it because it so baffles me.

                I do hope that you’re right about this; being a mediocre white guy, I am not really in any danger of the fallout of a Trump presidency beyond what it would mean for all of us, but I don’t want to see more of what happened to marginalized people during his administration, as I fully expect things to be even worse if he gets in, just out of spite and due to redhats becoming even more deeply emboldened to act out. Not that they won’t act out otherwise, but I expect them to see themselves as self-appointed enforcers.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Cool. Vote third party. We’ll get Trump

          Isn’t Trump’s victory predicated on an electoral college victory?

          How does voting third party impact whether or not your state’s electors vote for Donald Trump?

          We do not have a system in place where your idealistic protest can do anything other than make things worse.

          Sure we do. Look at the very origins of the Republican Party. Abraham Lincoln emerged as the frontrunner against a Whig Party that was in full collapse. It was only possible thanks to Freemont’s break from the Whigs in 1856, galvenizing abolitionists into a full formal partisan block.

          Or consider the Farmer-Laborer party of North Dakota, which controlled the state for several decades before merging with the Democrats under Roosevelt.

          Or consider the rise of Libertarian, Socialist, and Fascist candidates within the major parties. Primary insurgency candidates will routinely build a base of non-partisan support before joining the major parties as outsiders. Sanders ran as an Indie from Vermont for 14 years, before stepping up to run for President in 2016. Donald Trump himself was a Reform Party candidate in 2000 and was a staunch Democratic mega-donor/bundler in New York well, before defecting the GOP in 2012. Senators like Mike Lee and Rand Paul built their brands outside the party system before winning primaries in their respective branches.

          The split in the Dem Party in '68 gave rise to Nixon and Reagan’s Southern Strategy, which secured the Presidency for the GOP (with the exception of the narrow Carter win in '76) for the next 24 years. Great news for Dixiecrats who cared more about maintaining racial supremacy than New Deal economics and who found a way to profit handsomely from Reagan-Era giveaways to large land owners and shareholders.

          Third Party campaigns have a long and proud history in the US of paving the way for more successful general election runs in subsequent election cycles. They don’t always pay off year-of, but they can have a seismic effect on politics going on decades afterwards.

          • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Isn’t Trump’s victory predicated on an electoral college victory?

            It doesn’t have to be. If there are enough splits to deny any candidate an outright majority in the EC, the task of choosing a president falls to the congress in the ‘contingent election’ procedure, whereby state congressional delegations each have 1 vote. If 26 states have republican delegations (which seems plausible, given how many states are controlled by the gop) it’s very likely Trump wins if it goes to a contingent election.

            If anything, this supports the argument against voting 3rd party protest votes in any FPTP election

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              If there are enough splits to deny any candidate an outright majority in the EC, the task of choosing a president falls to the congress

              Well, double damn then. I’m in a heavily gerrymandered house seat so now my vote extra doesn’t matter.

              it’s very likely Trump wins if it goes to a contingent election.

              That’s heavily predicated on how midwestern states manage their house seats in the next election. Pennsylvania’s forced redrawing of maps in 2018 flipped five or six house seats. Wisconsin and Michigan redistricting fights could cost as many more, each. Dems are within range of the House (barring another landslide swing like in 2010 or 2018) if too many of these break the Dems’ way. And now that Dems appear more focused on winning state SCOTUS elections, that’s not inconceivable.

              If anything, this supports the argument against voting 3rd party protest votes

              I’m guessing you’re not a Lieberman 2008 guy. And who can blame you?

              But folks with sufficiently high name recognition can definitely win third party. Just ask Lisa Murkowski. Or Jesse Ventura, for that matter.

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Vote third party. We’ll get Trump

          i don’t think so. i voted for howie in 2020 and we got biden.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Part of the problem with the Biden Administration (and Obama before him) is that it seems content to allow guys like Abbott and DeSantis to Do As Thou Wilt in their respective states. Biden could win reelection in '24 and we’d still see a genocide of border people, entirely because his administration is unwilling to pick a fight with a powerful governor in a state flush with heavily armed state border guards.

          • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Sorry, I didn’t word that very well. I mean within our borders. The extremists on the right wing get tingly in their swimming suit areas over the idea of killing their fellow citizens, and over stupid shit like not being sufficiently deferential to their Orange Jesus (OJ), being POC, gay, an uppity woman or liberal, and so on.

            I’m assuming they are a fringe, but this kind of terrorism on a nation-state level does not require a majority. Not even all of the conservatives taken as a group are a majority. I suspect the teabaggers types are 30% or less of the population, and the ones that will gleefully cheer on/actively participate in genocide are probably less, but it’s still at a very scary point, since even 10% of them and having a government that backs them is a recipe for disaster.

          • Dojan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think the logic here is that Biden, while endorsing genocide outside of the U.S., isn’t causing it inside of the borders. With Trump you’d have it both outside and inside.

            Ergo, they see the choice as less genocide or more genocide. Both terrible but why choose more over less?

                • CalicoJack@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  In a FPTP system, that’s called voting for Trump with extra steps. The fact that it fucking sucks doesn’t change the fact that it’s true.

                • dtc@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Lol this message of ‘vote 3rd party’ is such copium for trump being the GOP frontrunner.

                  Everyone knows trump is a turd, the only hope for the orange shitbag to win is a split vote. You sloppy trolls aren’t very good at trying to fool people.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Here is why you should never vote third party in a FPTP voting system.

          This only holds when the respective parties are roughly evenly tied with one another and the two major parties have the marginally more-popular candidates.

          In a state where one party or the other is an overwhelming favorite to win, this math doesn’t matter. In a state where both parties have put up a shit candidate (say, you’re in Arizona or West Virginia and being asked to support Kristen Sinema or Joe Manchin yet again), a third party vote is the only way to clear the deck of deplorable alternatives. If you’re in Nebraska and the popular frontrunner is the indie union activist Dan Osbourn you would be foolish to vote party line as that’s effectively a vote for Deb Fischer.

          • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            No, it holds regardless. Your argument is the same as saying there’s no point in voting if you don’t win.

            Your real problem is as I said, Primary Elections, where we have EXCEPTIONALLY terrible voter turnout. The primaries are where you choose your party representatives. If you are complaining about the General election, the fight was already lost.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              there’s no point in voting if you don’t win

              This is demonstrably true, though. Hell, there’s no point to voting if you do win, when the election is sufficiently lopsided. The general election process is the tail end of a far larger and more financially involved whittling of the candidate pool.

              Even then, the focus is on building a movement rather than a single candidate’s campaign. Elections are not one-and-done. Candidates can rise and fall in iterative races based on the coalitions they built (or squandered) in prior campaigns.

              Primary Elections, where we have EXCEPTIONALLY terrible voter turnout

              Turnout hardly matters when only a few candidates have the resources to compete. This Presidential primary is case-in-point. When Trump is favored to win 60% of the primary vote and Biden is virtually uncontested, volume of participation is irrelevant. Whether turnout is 10% or 100%, the same two guys are going to move on to the general.

              I’ll spot you that primaries have an outsized influence and that entryists in the democratic process are savvy to focus their attentions on these races. But Beto O’Rourke winning the primary for Texas Senate and then Texas Governor did nothing to overcome the enormous support-deficit he suffered in the general.

              • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                So what do you propose? Do what instead of voting? Seems like the lowest hanging fruit to me. The left tends to win with turnout. The left tends to be more progressive and more conducive to evidence based problem solving. Fixing the parties at the primary level seems like the lowest effort solution for the largest pay off.

                Encouraging voter apathy is counterproductive, unless you are going to propose we do something else that’s more effective for the same energy expenditure.

                I truly believe that if every person who complained about politics spent as much time voting as they did complaining, we’d have a more representative government.

                We complain about a government that is corrupt, run by the wealthy as if we’re not the ones who put them there. Inaction is an action. Why should they represent our interests if we don’t even vote? All not voting tells a politician is that you aren’t their constituent.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Do what instead of voting?

                  Depends heavily on what kind of problems you’re facing at home. In my home town of Houston, the state government has hijacked the school board of HISD and imposed a bunch of shitty rules and regs, designed to waste money and torture kids. So I joined my local PTA. We go to meetings and harass/shame the bureaucrats involved. We reach out to the teachers and administrators who are under the gun to enforce these policies and offer them our support. There was a picket of the school district’s office in October for instance.

                  Direct action - refusing to comply with harmful public policy, harassing public officials who are advocating and endorsing this policy, and getting other parents and teachers on board with alternative policy that you can implement outside the scope of the administration - is an effective means of undermining an unelected bureaucracy appointed by a corrupt state government.

                  I truly believe that if every person who complained about politics spent as much time voting as they did complaining, we’d have a more representative government.

                  There’s more to politics than complaining. You need workable alternative and you need a popular consensus. Ten different people all pulling in ten different directions won’t affect any kind of change. But ten activists with a shared understanding and vision, pulling in the same direction can.

                  We complain about a government that is corrupt, run by the wealthy as if we’re not the ones who put them there.

                  We’re not. Far more often, it is the wealthy and well-organized interest and advocacy groups that put these people in power.

                  Greg Abbott and Ken Paxton aren’t rogue agents who just kinda bubbled up from a political morass. They are the direct beneficiaries of large social mobilizations - O&G lobbying groups paid for with overpriced fossil fuels, large religious organizations like Houston’s Second Baptist Church and Lakewood Church which galvenize masses of people along socially conservative political issues, doctors and lawyers and real estate associations and car dealership clubs who have formed cartels designed to guarantee higher salaries. One of the most politically active people in my community is Jim “Mattress Mack” McIngvale, a local celebrity businessman with a penchant for hookers and blow and QAnon conspiracy bullshit. This guy single-handedly bankrolls half a dozen talk-radio shock jocks with his advertising money and influences hundreds of thousands of my neighbors. Another is Dr. Peter Hoetz, a close personal friend of Dinesh D’Souza, who helped produce “2000 Mules” a documentary about how Joe Biden stole the 2020 election from Donald Trump.

                  Knowing who these people are and how they influence the body politick is instrumental in understanding where and how public opinion is crafted and distributed. If you’re just showing up to the polls every two years and praying that Truth Will Prevail, you’re walking to the slaughter. Only by recognizing who these assholes are, how they’re seeding conspiracy theory and bigotry into the public domain, and where they fucking live so you can put a few rocks through their windows, can you discourage them from continuing.

        • Clbull@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I think the problem is that third parties are thinking too big. You can’t just rival the Democrats or Republicans on a national level overnight.

          Let’s say hypothetically, one state becomes disillusioned with the mainstream parties and a third secessionist party starts making headway in mayoral and state elections, soon winning over the people.

          If it’s a big state like Texas, that’s well over a hundred electoral college votes lost for the Republicans.

          • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            The problem is the spoiler effect. It’s a well documented shortcoming of FPTP.

            We need to all ask ourselves what is the biggest impact I can make politically with the energy I am willing to spend. For me, energy spent voting should never be LESS than energy spent complaining about politics.

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s funny. It’s already election year and you can’t even name a 3rd Party candidate with any sort of shot. But yes, some perfect candidate will declare in late September, right?

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          The Green Party was an absurd joke even decades before Stein the Russian useful idiot came along…

          I hate it, but there is just no viable third party choice for progressives in this country.

  • Mister Neon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    136
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m tired of every election being the most important election. I want politics to be boring again, less evil too if possible.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      If politics were ever boring or less evil, it’s because you weren’t paying attention or engaged. Every upcoming election will always be the most important. Simply because all the others have happened, and the remainder are too far off and nebulous.

      Ask all the people suppressed, attacked, and assassinated in the 50s and 60s fighting for civil rights. All the ones since then too. It didn’t magically become perfect. Or all the people brutalized by robber barons before as they fought for unions, weekends, reasonable hours, and basic safety.

      Being disengaged from politics is a luxury and a privilege that most people can’t afford. Which explains why we’re in such a deficit. With so much of the American population chomping at the bit for fascism again. And much of the rest of the world close behind. Putin in Russia, Orban in Hungary, Milieu in Argentina, etc etc etc. We’ve been asleep at the wheel, enabling the worst people among us.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      Republicans are pushing for fascism, and Democrats like not having to do anything but be second worst to fascists.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It might be a few elections before that happens. There’s political turmoil and fascists have a chance so they’re gonna keep going for it until republicans understand they cannot possibly win anything with fascism

    • BoastfulDaedra@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I… I just want to get back to the days when the internet kept our attention with porn and stupid browser games… is that so much to ask!? Is it so terrible to expect congress to be no more exciting and no less humane than any other day at any other workplace??

    • cannache@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah the problem is that wide reaching policy changes is hard to sell on a country wide scale

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    Are the Democrats EVER prepared though?

    “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.” - Will Rogers, 1879-1935

    “Democrats never agree on anything, that’s why they’re Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they’d be Republicans.” - Will Rogers, 1879-1935

    • kbal@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      1879-1935

      TIL you guys have been stuck with the same two political parties since the 1850s. No wonder they’ve gone a bit corrupt.

        • EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          35
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          To be fair, no two-party system is a healthy democracy, and the way our elections are designed it’ll stay that way.

          • thisisawayoflife@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Our election system is generally bad. Elections aren’t controlled by the federal government, even for federal elections, they are run by counties (or whatever the locality calls a county - in Louisiana they are parishes) and each county runs their elections differently unless the state steps in and regulates it. Some states have mail in voting, some make you stand in line on election day. Some counties have FPTP voting, others might have STAR or RCV.

            The only way I see things changing at all are two fold: publicly funded elections with no private money at all AND abandoning FPTP voting for a broader method with an added benefit of potentially eliminating primaries. I know parties would complain, but things would be much more democratic.

            • EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              This is entirely correct. The only way to heal the nation is to take steps forward, not relying on an archaic system that ‘works’ and building out something that actually works.

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              We won’t get rid of FPTP or gerrymandering so long as we elect our representatives from geographically defines districts. We should empanel state congressional delegations in statewide elections, rather than by districts.

              In a state with 20 congressional seats, any party that wins at least 5% of the vote should have a seat. A party that wins 10% of the vote should have 2 seats.

          • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            America’s founders biggest fear were political factions forming. But when they were concerned the voters were all landowning men, how could people with shared economic interests ever form factions?

      • Kalkaline @leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s what happens with a first past the post voting system. A ranked choice would open things up quite a bit, but that would require the people elected by the first past the post voting system to change it or mass revolution.

        Someone call the French and let them know we actually do need them again.

        • hglman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          It must be a proportional system. No other system produces viable 3rd parties.

          • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            No other system produces viable 3rd parties.

            American’s lack of knowledge about Canada never ceases to amaze me.

            • hglman@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Canada has effectively the same system as the UK, both being based on fptp, are you suggesting that fptp is fine in a preliminary system?

              • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                I’ve campaigned for an NDP candidate who was against fptp as many of us are, even our current PM ran on replacing fptp which never happened of course… however we have more than 2 “viable” parties despite not having proportional representation. You can apply definitions to “viable” at your will but they have won provinces quite recently and have many seats in federal and provincial government.

          • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            It increasingly feels like that’s the single unifying trait holding the democratic party together. That’s the sole reason you see people telling everyone to get out and vote.

            It’s not “We need to get young people to vote because they care about progressive policies, and we can elect a candidate who will align with their views”, it’s “We need to get young people to vote because we can’t let Trump win another term.”

            • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Because it is the only trait. The Democrats know it. As long as they act slightly more progressive they can enjoy massive corporate and AIPAC bribes just like the Republicans do.

              Nothing will change if people vote Democrat this time. In 2028 some other Republican (or Trump again) will run and the Dems will go “Vote for us or we’re going to get Genocided for real this time unlike the other 150 last years whenever a Republican won”

      • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        The Democrats are actually way more internally organized now. About 30 years ago during the 90s both parties reached almost unanimous internal ideological consensus’ and essentially all vote as a single blocks. The state we’re in now with this polarization is part of this, and an example of the increased factionalization of US politics.

        It’s crazy to think how there were staunch segregationist Democrats in to the 70s even as the party as a whole had been (successfully) catering to younger urban demographics that came alongside industrialization. We can’t really imagine something like that occurring now. Even Biden was opposed to bussing and a lot of his “across the aisle” examples even today involve working with segregationist Democrats, not “across the aisle” as we interpret it now.

    • aew360@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      I actually like that about the Democrat Party. Shows how ideologically diverse it is because tolerance is a bedrock of the party ever since the two parties switched from being conservative and liberal. The GOP flipped within four years from being neocons to isolationists, and anyone who disagrees with the current identity is a RINO

    • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      "Ten degrees to the left of center in good times, ten degrees to the right when it affects them personally.’ - Phil Ochs, 1966

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    This has been the Republican Party’s M.O. for decades.

    “Government is corrupt and ineffective, elect us and we’ll prove it to you!”

  • huquad@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    11 months ago

    I really wish Biden would step down. I’d love a better option from the Dems. That said, no way in hell am I voting for Trump.

      • huquad@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        I disagree. An 80 year old is not the best option we have.

        • Lynthe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Certainly the best option who’s running though

  • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    That’s 11 months for heart disease to do the world a favor and get itself some good PR for once.

  • hex_m_hell@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    There is no saving America, there’s only buying time. Democrats can’t do what’s needed to prevent fascism because actually doing something about the Republican party would risk creating actual democracy. Prepare to fight fascism now because at best you’re buying yourself another 4 years. Vote, don’t vote, vote for a third party out of protest, whatever you do organize with other people and prepare for the worst.

    In the best case, I’m wrong and you’ve made new friends. But if you don’t organize now it will be too late to organize in the worst case.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Democrats can’t do what’s needed to prevent fascism because actually doing something about the Republican party would risk creating actual democracy.

      Hard fucking facts. When you look at places where liberals have carte blanche to do whatever they damned well please - your Californias and Washingtons and NYs and Minnesotas - they still can’t bring themselves to do what needs doing. No public health care. Rampant homelessness thanks to commodified housing. Food deserts. Rich-people-only universities. No new mass transit. Police budgets skyrocketing. Everyone kowtowing to tech executives for no discernible benefit.

      Meanwhile, the fascists in Texas and Florida and the Dakotas and Carolinas are creating the future of the American political system while Schumer, Jeffries, and Biden just kinda sleep through it.

      Vote, don’t vote, vote for a third party out of protest, whatever you do organize with other people and prepare for the worst.

      Voting as a panacea for organizing has really fucked the country as a whole. While movement conservatives raid school boards and throw pipe bombs at abortion clinics and do Brooks Brothers Riots and Jan 6ths any time an election is in doubt, liberals have been totally pacified. They show up ever couple of years, pull a lever, do a thoughts and prayers, and go home.

      They spend far more time gambling on Robinhood or working overtime to earn their bosses a bigger paycheck than they do throwing events for their neighborhood or organizing their offices to bargain for a bigger share of company profits.

      The American future looks increasingly grim.

      • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        When voting isnt enough learn how to grow crops like a farmer not a gardener and then practice shooting. If we’re lucky those will stay hobbies.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          learn how to grow crops like a farmer

          Historically, the smart move it own the land and have other people do the reaping and sowing. Even then, agricultural land has skyrocketed in cost as its been commodified. Idk if I’d consider “sharecropper” a savvy career change under and social conditions.

          practice shooting

          At whom? Or is the plan to just shoot everything that moves and hope for the best?

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              If you don’t have enough money to hire people to do farmwork, you sure as hell don’t have enough money to purchase productive farmland.

              • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                No on said to buy a farm. Use what’s available to you and ammend the soil, there are plenty of organic addatives that are free, low cost, or byproducts. Also make you own compost to continually add neutrients, aka grow food like a farmer not a gardener.

                The point is to know how to do it cyclically, with little if any input other than what you create. Its an investment in divesting from society, and a lesson in sufficience that you may need once the fact that China and Bill Gates own the most farmland in America becomes a more pressing issue.

                The guns are there because for any situation where food become that valuable, productive land anywhere becomes a target. Weather its pests, deers, boars, or humans.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Use what’s available to you and ammend the soil

                  A quarter acre of land in my neighborhood runs for $300k. There is nothing I can do to that soil that’s going to justify a $300k upfront investment in urban agriculture. Nevermind what this prepper nonsense is going to accomplish in the event the End of The World isn’t happening within the next five years.

                  a lesson in sufficience that you may need once the fact that China and Bill Gates own the most farmland in America becomes a more pressing issue.

                  The cool thing about farmland is that its only really useful if its being worked. And the realization that we’re ultimately going to have to come to terms with is that the folks who “own” the land are very far removed from the folks who give the land value.

                  At the same time, subsistence farming isn’t a particularly productive lifestyle in a post-industrial world. So telling everyone to run out to Iowa and become soybean farmers is not good financial advice.

    • butterflyattack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      True, that. Building mutually supportive communities is really beneficial if shit goes bad. It’s something most of us can do on a local level and it’s something most humans are pretty good at.

    • hansl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      He’s the incumbent. The last incumbents to not be reelected were Trump and HW Bush. Tell me again why Biden is unelectable.

      • trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        How about we get a president that isn’t over 70 and doesn’t require uppers to function, like biden, or literal adult diapers, like trump.

        Both options are garbage and both men need to retire.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Because Biden is a lot closer to HW Bush than he is to Obama. One of the reasons he got the nod in the first place was his promise not to run for re-election. And where we are now is why.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Oh bullshit he said that once while telling everyone around him that he was a one term president. And he continually referred to himself as a transition president or a stopgap bridge to the next generation.

            The message was received by voters.

            • SwampYankee@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129

              Another top Biden adviser put it this way: “He’s going into this thinking, ‘I want to find a running mate I can turn things over to after four years but if that’s not possible or doesn’t happen then I’ll run for reelection.’ But he’s not going to publicly make a one term pledge.”

              A top Biden adviser said Biden ruled out a one-term pledge when the issue was raised before he even entered the race. “He said it was a nonstarter,” the adviser said, adding that Biden believed it was a “gimmick.”

              In April [2019], when asked whether he would serve just one term, Biden responded, “No.” More recently, Biden has been ambiguous. In October, The Associated Press reported that when “asked whether he would pledge to only serve one term if elected, Biden said he wouldn’t make such a promise but noted he wasn’t necessarily committed to seeking a second term if elected in 2020.”

        • hansl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Last 40 years not good enough? Even with Carter the odds are better for the incumbent.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Oh it’s not that, it’s just there is so few presidents that didn’t win their second election, and you listed all of them except one particular democrat, is all.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        People don’t think he does enough. And “his son”. Basically it’s to just be edgy. Dude has taken a shit show and make it resemble an office again.

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Democrats still don’t know who they will be running against - since the polling needed to determine that are not “likely Iowa caucus goers” but “likely Trump jurors”. We don’t want to be like the Republicans in 2008 who were completely prepared to take on and tear down a Hilary Clinton nominee, only to find themselves fighting Obama.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If the Republican nominee is anyone but Trump, we’ll see Trump run as an independent and split the vote.

      • vividspecter@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Him running from jail while competing against a candidate that isn’t popular with the MAGA nuts, would be the ideal outcome.

      • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Call me a pessimist, not not likely. Trump’s narcissism is only dwarfed by his laziness. If he doesn’t win the nomination, he may still run to try to stay out of jail. But he will absolutely not run if he’s going to be pardoned and protected by a fascist leader of his choosing, and can relax into a kingmaker role with all of the prestige and none of the responsibilities.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    A lot of wackos around the world have been winning elections, so we shall see.

  • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I wouldn’t be surprised if more vicious rhetoric has been used in past elections, at least one candidate in pre-Civil War America was called a “hermaphrodite”, but the inevitable use of AI is going to make the election an absolute circus. L

  • DaBabyAteMaDingo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Please, for the love of God; if it’s a state where Biden is guaranteed, then vote third party or whatever alternative dumbass you want. If it’s a swing state, it’s your god damned duty to vote for Biden. I don’t like the AID he’s providing Israel but he’s not dropping the fucking bombs.

    We don’t need to spit in the face of our constitution to prove a point. We don’t need to tank the work he’s done getting the country back on track so you can feel morally superior. We don’t need another bad year of COVID just because your friends are saying “Biden bad”. Your friends are retarded and so are you.

    Normally I don’t give a shit what you liberal idiots do but this is seriously going to affect us in the real world. It’s not your reddit and lemmy echo chambers out here so please tighten the fuck up.

    Or tell us of a viable, alternative candidate with over a 90% chance of winning. Oh you don’t have one? Then please shut the fuck up and vote Biden.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      It’s BIDENS BOMBS being dropped from BIDENS AIRPLANES. The fact that the pilot is israeli would only matter if Biden STOPPED SENDING THEM MORE BOMBS AND AIRPLANES.

      Genocide Joe has got to go!