politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
What you and others miss is that while you have a right to advocate for whatever political positions you wish, we have a right to call them out and point out that in the system we have, the Jill Steins spoil the election for Donald Trump, just like the Libertarian spoils Trump (though realistically, Libertarians can take votes from both Major Parties for different reasons). You do NOT have the right to push your agenda unchallenged.
I disagree with the civility rule because there are Republicans and Russians posing as far-Leftists to push enough left-leaning voters to vote third party so that Trump can steal enough states by hook or by crook to win it and subject all of us to Project 2025. The civility rule has us fighting with one hand behind our back against factions that see no problem with being uncivil to us and will use our rules to censor our speech about them.
Since I can't call people out on this sub, the only answer I have now is to point out every single time one of you people pop in with this 'nuh, we aren't spoiling it' is my example of how, yes, you are. So, here it is again.
This poster would have you believe that your vote cannot result in you getting the worst possible outcome. Allow me to make it clear that yes, you can screw yourself and those you care about if you make the wrong choice on your vote.
Let's take a class of High School students. The class is pretty evenly divided between Jocks (49) and Nerds (51), and there's an election for the SGA coming up. Looking at the numbers, it looks like the Nerds have a good chance of winning, by two votes, but let's say that this isn't as clear as the numbers show.
The candidates are pretty distasteful for a lot of students at the school. On the Nerds' side is a geeky boy, with square glasses, buck teeth, and a taste for pocket protectors. This kid is stereotypical Nerd, with the personality to match. He's vaguely unpalatable, being too much into D&D and video games, but he's also really damn smart, and his platform are things the Nerds would really like -- pushing the school to fund after-school activities like Book Swap, the D&D Club, Debate Team, Chess Club, and so on.
On the Jock's side is a pretty blonde cheerleader, the Homecoming Queen and heart-throb for many a boy in that school. But she's a massive jerk, with an entitlement streak a mile wide, known for throwing temper tantrum(p)s when she doesn't get her way, and a platform that includes taking all the money that would have gone to the nerdy after-school activities and putting it into prom and sports.
Of course, this stereotypical school of the 1980s will use the voting system used by the USA back in the 1980s, the classic voting system of First Past the Post, where all the votes are counted, and at the end, the one with the most votes wins.
In a 49 to 51 election, it's clear that the Nerds win by a squeaker, but that's not how elections work in the USA, and Cheerleader has a secret weapon. Most of her friends are of course fellow cheerleaders, dance team members, and athletes. But counted among her number is a bookish girl who is good with her studies, someone that were you to glance at her, you'd assume she's with the Nerds. But she and Cheerleader have known each other since they were toddlers, and while Bookish Girl is smart, she's also desperate for attention and acceptance. Bookish Girl is Cheerleader's key to victory.
Cheerleader and Bookish Girl sit down after school and go over strategy. It's clear that the numbers don't support Cheerleader. All 51 Nerds are pretty sweet on that whole "Nerd After School Activities" thing. But they aren't all as firmly dedicated to voting. For one thing, Nerd Boy is not well liked, with no social skills what-so-ever. He's the kind of guy that doesn't get a girl easily, and is awkward around girls and does things that can easily be styled as being demeaning and degrading to girls. Nerds are also notoriously flakey when it comes to making appointments when those appointments collide with what they would rather be doing.
Bookish Girl suggests three strategies to Cheerleader. They are:
Let's say Election Day, 3 gamers skip out on the vote, one of the feminists stay home on the accusations, and the other, plus two more Nerds, vote for Bookish Girl. The tally of votes comes out to:
Remember what the rules were? The one with the most votes wins. Those 7 kids ended up denying themselves and the 44 other kids the Nerd Boy's platform. Hopefully they'll enjoy the prom they'll be excluded from and the constant bullying and teasing by the Jocks, because there will be no book club to go to, or D&D night to play in, or so on.
Really, all Cheerleader needed was for Bookish Girl to run, with a side dose of that other cheerleader's accusation (let's just call her Tara Reade...), and it's 49 to 48 to 3, which is STILL a win for Team Jock. And that's how narrow our elections are today.
You may think that Harris is a lockin to win, and you're convinced by someone like this poster that you can vote third party. The problem is you can't know how many Jocks and Nerds are in this school. Are there 55 Nerds and only 45 Jocks? Can you vote for the Bookish Girl over the Nerd Boy because Nerd Boy did something you don't agree with in Junior High, or because he dissed your favourite pop culture icon, or he's a GURPS player rather than a D&D player, or so on, and Bookish Girl is idealic? How will you feel when you wake up the next morning and come to school and see that Jocks won 45 to 44 to 11, and you and 10 other people are absolute dufuses who let the nerd activities go by the wayside?
And to make this REAL...how will you feel come the next morning if you wake up, see your State went to Trump, and thus gave Trump the 270 EVs he needed to win. Remember, Trump's Jock-favoured activities can be read about in Project 2025...
In conclusion, you shouldn't listen to dufuses like this poster. We saw what happened last time we let them poison our minds. Your vote CAN get you the absolute worst outcome, and the only people who want that to happen are accelerationists and Trump Plants. I'll leave it to you to determine what THIS poster is.
As I have noted in my previous comment, the vast majority of my posts are for workers rights, socialist causes, union issues, and education. I've contributed over 200 posts and comments to the Lemmy socialist community I created and that I mod. I'm a member of the Socialist Workers Party, and I support them financially. You can check out the sub here:
https://lemmy.world/c/socialist
and see my post history here:
https://lemmy.world/u/UniversalMonk?page=1&sort=New&view=Posts.
Don’t you get it?
This poster is a Mormon Satanist Transracial Socialist Workers Party Kopimist Monk. Debt-free, Alcohol-free. Drug-free, Caffeine-free, Woke-free (famously something a leftist socialist would say).
It’s in their bio so it must be true.
Satanist, I could respect, although Satanism is a rather comical religion: basing the name of your religion on the villain of the holy book of another religion is pretty funny. But regardless, at least they're pushing back against fundamentalist Christians in a way no other religion is.
The rest of it is cringe, and the "woke-free" is a dead give-away, as you point out. The combination is disconcordant, which reinforces my suspicion this is a propaganda account.
The only people who truly believe in Satan are christians.
You'll have to enlighten me, because I know very little about modern Satanists (I read some Crowley and his ilk decades ago), but doesn't the Church of Satan (Satanists) believe in Satan? I thought they did, they just had their own version of the Bible where (the Christian) God is a bad guy and Satan is really the good guy.
Aleister Crowley included barely Satan or Satanism in his writing, in the Church of Satan they believe Satan is "a name for the reservoir of power inside each human to be tapped at will", Anton LaVey (the founder of the Church of Satan) says he Satanist's concept of a god is described as the Satanist's true "self"— a projection of his or her own personality, not an external deity. Satan is used as a representation of personal liberty and individualism.
The Satanic Temple is a satirical religion that was established in reaction to the "intrusion of Christian values on American politics".
Your argument is steeped in fear and defeatism, assuming that the only way to navigate this broken system is to bow down to the two-headed snake that has dominated our political landscape for far too long.
What you fail to see is that every vote for a third party is a stand against the status quo, a demand for something better, and a refusal to be complicit in a system that continually fails the people.
While you’re busy trying to silence voices of real change, I’m fighting for a future where our choices aren’t limited to the lesser of two evils.
I support and respect your right to vote for whoever you choose, just as I expect you to respect my right to do the same. You're absolutely entitled to disagree, and that same freedom applies to me as well.
And I have a right to disagree with you.