950
submitted 1 week ago by Confidant6198@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

yes, obviously. but the point stands: there wasn't just two candidates, and you don't know what you're talking about.

[-] StThicket@reddthat.com 2 points 1 week ago

I understand what you are trying to say. Ultimately, there are only two to vote for. Ideally, there should be more than two parties, and more than two candidates. That's how democracies work. What you have is a dysfunctional system that divides people in two groups, and there are no incentives to cooperate between parties. Proper voting is also suffering due to the two-party system.

https://youtu.be/yhO6jfHPFQU

In my country, the parties with the majority of votes and the ability to cooperate gets to form a government. We also try to make it easy to get people to vote, insted of your system of gerrymandering.

there are 6 parties, but only two of the six are large ones at the moment.

[-] StThicket@reddthat.com 0 points 1 week ago

Yes I know, but the voting system favours the two largest. Thats why they are large. Small parties have 0% chance og getting representatives into the houses, so they are basically irrelevant.

just as long as you know you're wrong. ๐Ÿ‘

[-] StThicket@reddthat.com -1 points 1 week ago

Yes, it's important to defend the only thing you know, even how bad it might be. ๐Ÿ˜„

this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
950 points (92.0% liked)

Memes

44134 readers
2294 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS