Trying to build viable third parties by voting for them in presidential elections is like trying to build a third door in your house by repeatedly walking into the wall where you want the door to be.
Trying to build viable third parties by voting for them in presidential elections is like trying to build a third door in your house by repeatedly walking into the wall where you want the door to be.
You're viewing a single thread.
Why do you care if the person you voted for wins?
Outside of "not letting the other person win", you should vote for who you align with, or who represents you best.
If more people stopped caring about voting for "the viable candidate", we'd probably see a third party in American politics...
Why do you care if the person you voted for wins?
Because it's an election with consequences, not an online fandom.
Because it’s an election with consequences, not an online fandom.
Not to most of these people pushing third-parties.
All elections have consequences. I know that Americans like to be dramatic (especially on Lemmy, Reddit is far more tame in this regard), but voting for someone that wants to promote policies that you support is how those policies are promoted.
I say this time and time again on here, but America isn't special. Many countries have two main parties, but while third parties don't always see power, they maintain Influence everywhere. Hell, you can argue that the Tea Party, Brexit, Irish Unification, MAGA, Immigration reform in Germany, all of this is due to influence outside of the main parties.
Why are you in this thread if you're not even American? This is obviously about the US elections.
I personally care because most of my family is American and because Canadian politics often echo what's going on in the U.S. Pierre Polievre wouldn't be seeing as much success if he didn't have Trump's culture war nonsense to use as inspiration. A lot of people outside of America still care very much about U.S. politics because it does have an effect on global affairs.
I hear you on that.
Because Lemmy isn't a US-only social network?
This post is obviously about US politics.
Ok?
Disregard these gatekeepers.
This is an online discussion forum for public discussions.
I see these comments around here, like wtf people getting policing what and where people are commenting.
Childish behavior.
Why do you care if the person you voted for wins?
Someone is trying to gatekeep, that's for sure.
You...clearly misunderstood my initial post, and that's really funny.
My point isn't that you shouldn't care if they win or not. That's absolutely ridiculous. My point is that you shouldn't choose to vote for someone purely because they have a chance of winning, over someone that aligns better with your political views.
Sometimes I can't believe this app is free...
Which country do you seriously think this post is about?
Other people are entitled to have opinions about US system and participate in discussion as they see fit.
Not if they're telling people what to do, or giving out misinformation they don't.
It's honestly a little embarrassing to see Lemmy struggle so much with this kind of thing. Even Reddit was never this bad...
You're an embarrassment
People here actually care about the future of their country.
Because the policies those people put into effect have very real consequences for citizens. Especially when one candidate is openly hostile towards significant marginalized groups in society and wishes to bring them harm. This isn't a team sport. This is a struggle for survival for many who stand to lose a lot of rights and freedoms for simply being who they were born as.
So yes, we should care who wins. Those two people are your options. Third party is not.
That's not what I mean. What I mean is that people won't vote for a candidate they agree with because they're not going to win.
That should be painfully obvious. Similar sentiments are obvious on Reddit, Twitter, even Mastodon. Why is Lemmy so tone-deaf and blinded when it comes to opposing opinions?
we’d probably see a third party in American politics…
No, we wouldn't. There are still people who's closest candidate is one of the two main parties.
That's the argument, no?
I don't give a fuck if America has more than "two" parties, but either one of two things is true:
- Americans are more aligned with the two parties than people would like to believe.
- Many people won't vote for a third candidate because they feel that their vote would be "wasted", because it wouldn't contribute to one of the "likely" parties to win.
If I had to guess, the former is probably more true than people on social media and the left would like to believe.
but either one of two things is true:
It's worse. It's both, which is in part why third parties don't ever work.
And the solution is election reform, not yelling "just vote for what you believe". Because people just voting for what they believe causes spoiler candidates to spoil elections.
I don't disagree that reform is needed, but I do disagree that voting for a third candidate is useless, purely on the basis that they work elsewhere. My point is that America isn't special, and a party that won't necessarily win can affect policy without ever truly seeing power.
purely on the basis that they work elsewhere.
Do you mean working elsewhere, with elsewhere being other levels of government, or elsewhere being other countries?
Either way I disagree, but I want clarification first.
This is the dumbest thing I've seen anyone say here yet. Congratulations.
Well, you're the country with two parties... The Greens run my area.
Ok?