440
this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
440 points (83.3% liked)
politics
19072 readers
5262 users here now
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Excellent. Which 3rd party candidate do you expect will appeal to about 50% of voters in enough states to get 270 electoral college votes?
Maybe none this year, but a big enough percentage of voters going third party would show the big two that we're sick of their shit. It would also help get this false dichotomy mindset out of the majority.
Okay, how many election cycles of Republican majorities in the house and senate along with a Republican president will it take before the major parties change their platform to suit your needs? Or how long until a 3rd party candidate can garner enough votes to get elected?
What percentage will be needed? Do all of us that are involved with your scheme have to vote for the same 3rd party candidate, or can we each vote for the one we like best?
I'd love to break the two party dichotomy, so let's figure out how all of voting party will actually make that happen.
Going by the numbers in the article, ~48% of all voters don't like either candidate. That puts the ratio of people who like their candidate to the people who don't like either at about the same as the Republican/Democrat split. If everyone voted for a candidate they actually like right now (assuming they find a third party they like), there's a chance it could happen this year. Even if it doesn't, 48% of people voting for a third party would show everyone else that it's a viable option.
I think that's a pretty big assumption, but okay.
I'm not sure how 48% of voters voting for n number of different 3rd party candidates shows that 3rd party candidates are a viable option. That's kind of what we have now. Two main party candidates getting enough voter share to win the election, followed by a lot of 3rd party candidates getting an insignificant number of votes.
Maybe voting for 3rd party candidates will encourage main party candidates to adopt watered down versions of the 3rd party platforms in an attempt to lure their voters. They probably couldn't adopt their full platforms because it would alienate other voters that don't share the 3rd parties extreme views.
Republicans don't care. You're just giving them more opportunities to prevent you from voting again in the future.
The time to push for 3rd party is not when someone who admits to wanting to be a dictator has a legitimate chance of winning.
Better than voting for either turd we get to choose from
Nope, voting for your favorite turd is the only adult action in a general election for president. It sucks but it's what FPTP forces on us.
Spoken like someone who has a favorite turd.
Most people don't like turds at all.
It'd be pretty fucking amazing if I didn't have a preference between the two but regardless of my preference I'd prefer if you voted for your favorite turd regardless if it's the same as mine. Unfortunately the final stage of our executive office election that will happen in November uses a completely fucking broken system.
I believe in a democracy and not that my opinion must be held by everyone else - if you vote third party in our broken ass system you're effectively removing yourself from the voting base.
I absolutely didn't vote for either turd in the primary though, because they're both fucking awful.
I don't have a favorite turd. I resent having to vote for a turd.
You believe in your favorite turd.
I've been on this train for a long time, but this election is really making me question that position. Personally, I think both the major party's candidates are dismal at best so it feels terrible to consider voting for either - I don't want to tell either party, "hey, I like your guy and your platform." For literally decades, I've been of the option that is a party wants my vote then they need to present me with a platform and candidate that I agree with - regardless of what party that actually is.
The problem is, if I vote 3rd party this time around then my greatest hope would be to contribute towards some party finally reaching 5% of the vote in order to receive federal funding for the next presidential election - in 4 years. There's zero hope that my 3rd-party vote is going to somehow result in a shocking 3rd party presidential election victory though, which means the winner is still going to be one of the two major party's candidates. I don't care about voting for the "winning team" or whatever, but I do get the distinct impression that one of the two major party's candidates has a much higher disregard towards our form of government and could pose a more significant threat to our daily lives as a nation. Thus, for the first time ever I feel myself gravitating towards voting for the "lesser of two evils." Don't get me wrong, I think there's a lot of things the Democrats get right on various party positions (and I think there might be a couple Republicans do, too?) so the "lesser of two evils" phrase isn't meant to suggest both options are depraved - just that I don't personally particularly align with either. I am definitely feeling like I have to choose a side though, lest a "greater evil" pull off a win and jeopardize our entire democracy.