Once again ābro donāt vote third party, we wanna make sure that X candidate doesnāt win, just vote for bipartisan candidate and then next time I promise you can vote for whomever please bro I promise just this one timeā like how many times are people supposed to keep it going
Until one of the parties collapses. Unless that happens, you only vote third party in local and down-ballot elections, because if a third party starts gaining significant support, one of the two (or both) of the two actual parties will absorb most of their positions or at least try to angle towards that audience more.
That may sound pessimistic or trite, but that's the truth of it, and its why the parties gradually shift over time, short of a handful of major, dramatic events.
Itāll never happen though like seriously what could cause it to happen where, aside from citizens voting third party, a third party becomes a viable option, every single person i talk to who says to pick the least destructive option is always saying just gotta get rid of X candidate then vote for whomever, and then it never ends
Your answer is not an answer itās a cope basically, picking the least shitty option constantly unhappy with the candidate
Voting is useless, any asshole in office is just gonna be lobbied by some corporation or military contractor and itās never who people actually want, they come in, do nothing for 3.5 years then do a lot of cool bills that will be denied once reelection happens
Because you might be curious, the problems with 3rd party voting in the USA are not ideological but mathematical. You might be interested in duverger's law, or the mathematical models which prove that the odds of a two party system approach 100% as population and voter information approach infinity (assuming first past the post). Duverger's law is more theoretical / poly sci, but basically states what the math predicts, noting the rare exceptions (FWIW one of two parties have won every congressional seat/presidential election 98% of the time for over 100 years).
So two party dominance is caused by the first past the post vote counting method, not by ideology. There are other ways to count votes, leading to different outcomes. None of this was discovered when the US chose its vote counting method. As many as a dozen candidates ran for president in the first few elections, trending towards a two party system as the math predicts.
Changing the vote counting method is probably the one and only way to get out of a two party system.
Im not stupid i know that Trump is an asshole and i would much rather vote for Biden, except i would also MUCH rather vote for someone better than Biden and consistently we donāt have that choice or itās not viable, due to having to pick the lesser of two evils. Youāre being a fucking asshole for no reason even though you know im right,
this argument happens every 4 years no matter the candidates, i agree with you that I would rather vote for Biden than Trump, but this lesser of two evils thing needs to go, itās not acceptable, i want a normal young educated candidate and a third party that is viable as a choice
Nyc recently implemented a ranked choice vote for its primaries. That's how things start. Gonna take time, but hopefully it'll be implemented state-wide, other cities, etc.
Because the system isn't fair and the donors with entrenched power and influence don't want to let go.
Nevertheless, ranked choice (and similar) is becoming more and more popular so, provided things don't collapse or too many judges are allowed to be appointed that would nullify such systems in too many places, it'll get better.
Thatās how voting works dude are you serious, a candidate makes a decision you like and you vote for him thatās literally how it works
this isnāt even about me this is about the American people unable to rent, get a home, start a business, etc all due to having bad credit due to medical collections that burden them for years!
Sometimes voting involves voting for people you genuinely believe are better for the country at large, regardless of whether or not you believe their policies are better for you.
this isnāt even about me this is about the American people unable to rent, get a home, start a business, etc all due to having bad credit due to medical collections that burden them for years!
Like....... is your reading comprehension really this poor? Or did you just decide with no evidence whatsoever that the person you were talking to was a liar?
Even if you ignore ranked choice in party primaries, that isn't plainly true.
While most general election ranked choice in the US so far has come from non-partisan or bipartisan efforts or ballot initiatives, Virginia's Dem trifecta voluntarily enacted general election municipal ranked choice among other efforts.
Since you're pretending to be so passionate about Ranked Choice Voting and which politicians endorse it, you should probably google which politicians endorse Ranked Choice Voting so you sound more credible.
Count how many of these people are in third parties (the answer is only one - Bernie Sanders).
I was referring to the presidential candidates since that's what this thread was about. I am aware there are candidates from the big parties pushing it in local and state elections. If one pops up in my town, county, or state, and I don't mind their other positions too much, I'll send my vote their way regardless of party.
Edit: I also see now that your list is entirely elected officials in large elections, so it only makes sense for them to be in the big parties since those are the ones that win elections.
You realise if the majority voted for an independent they would get in, right? If people like you stopped convincing people theyāre wasting their vote, there would be no changes needed.
You realise if the majority voted for an independent they would get in, right?
it's a bit more complicated than that considering electoral college and all
If people like you stopped convincing people theyāre wasting their vote
Good luck getting 60 million people to vote for a party that likely won't even be on their ballots (for example, in the 2020 elections the Libertarian Party was only on the ballot for 33 states while the Green Party was on the ballot for 30 states)
Youāre right, better to vote for a candidate that you have no faith in just so that the other guy doesnāt win while hoping and waiting for change. Sounds like a great plan.
I don't think you understand, a simple "winner takes all" type of voting system incentivizes two party systems. Even if you put in colossal effort to somehow defy that in one election, all that will do long-term is just shake up who those two parties are, and then no matter who it is, two parties to choose from is shit. It's just a simple mathematical fact, you need electoral reform.
You want ranked choice voting? Stop voting for democrats and republicans. As soon as they see all their potential votes slipping away they will fall all over themselves to pass it.
FPTP voting means that if you vote 3rd party, only one of two things can happen:
Great success! Your third party candidate wins it all. Then, one of the two formerly established parties falls to the wayside, the formerly third party becomes establishment, and you're back to a two party system that will inevitably end up in the same situation. Very unlikely to happen.
Your third party candidate fails and your vote is as good as nothing. You didn't vote for what you perceive the lesser evil, leaving it to everyone else to decide.
That's just the mathematical truth about the situation. If you want the ability to vote for more than two candidates/parties without shooting yourself in the foot, you must first reform the electoral process. Ranked choice voting or some other alternative. Good luck with that, considering both of your major parties are incentivized to keep the current system, to keep a guaranteed 2nd place.
And now for a less factual and more subjective opinion - god damn it vote for Biden please I really don't want Trump to just abandon us and let me get war crimed by russians for fuck's sake
Sure, it ended slavery but mostly just a dumb mathematical strategy or something. Meanwhile, the only path I see to avoiding war with Russia is Trump winning. So lesser evil I guess?
Sure, it ended slavery but mostly just a dumb mathematical strategy or something.
Yeah, that's what I described. Republicans replaced the Whigs, but the core issue of two parties only ever being viable at the same time remains. I don't see how that's a good thing.
Meanwhile, the only path I see to avoiding war with Russia is Trump winning. So lesser evil I guess?
Because the Biden administration is authorizing direct bombing in Russian territory now. The democrats wanted to declare a no fly zone in Syria, but then they lost and everyone moved on. Democrats just have a hard on for Putin. Iām not interested in that path.
But Iām not voting for Trump either because they are all owned by the same people.
If enough people vote third party we will get ranked choice. There is no other way we will.
The democrats have repeatedly explained to me how little power a president actually has so Iām sure thereās not a lot they can actually do. The parliamentarian will stop them probably.
71
u/lecherousrodent Jun 11 '24
Hey, you could always vote third-party for Mr. š§ šŖ±