this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
74 points (68.0% liked)
Memes
45558 readers
949 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If your goal is to have a third option to vote for, the best way to help is to support independent candidates on the right as well. If the fascist vote is split (say between Trump and Liz Cheney) then a vote for (Cornell West for example) is less likely to be a vote for fascism.
Third party candidates will never be the answer. They exist only to dilute resistance. The answer is to raise awareness and outrage until it can't be ignored.
While I agree third party candidates are not really the solution, what exactly is rage and outrage that can't be ignored gonna do? How is that gonna change things? Do you think the lawmakers and people in power and gonna just gonna fix the system that put them in power just cause some people got mad? More importantly changing all that would take time, way more time than we have before the next election, so what do you recommend we are suppose to do right now?
Please be a bit more specific than "get mad", cause trust me, a lot of people have been mad for a long time, just getting mad doesn't fix anything
We were on the verge of forcing real change before the neolibs convinced the middle class that they won by electing Biden. The people in the streets fighting cops is always the beginning of change. Spreading information, and not accepting the premise that Biden is the solution is how we get people back in the streets.
If one is a leftist and wants a third party just so we'll be represented at all, then supporting right wing independents could backfire. Their corrupt corporate moderates are costing the right just as much support as they cost us. There's a lot of religious folks out there who - if united - would usher in the Handmaid's Tale.
Ross Perot came very close to actually winning. In today's climate, a far right candidate just might.
Just curious... In what way did Ross Perot come close to winning? I see that he got 8% of the popular vote in 1996 but I'm not seeing that he ever got an electoral vote.
In that he got a large percentage of the total votes.
"very close to actually winning"
"8% of the popular vote"
"Very close"
...
Yes, that was only 25% short.
Yeah if only 4x more than what they actually got, they totally could have won. You do understand that 25% is nowhere near "very close"
No. I'm telling you that within 25% is close and you're trying to argue that it's not.
He would need at MINIMUM 3x+ votes more than he got in order to win. That isn't close.
We seem to agree entirely on how math works, yet disagree entirely as to how easily 25% of voters can change their minds.