politics

Plus we keep using this outdated first-past-the-post voting system in the 21st century.

Hitler didn't win because he beat Hindenburg after Thälmann split the vote. He lost to Hindenburg, the center-right candidate endorsed by the social democrats, then won anyway because Hindenburg appointed him Chancellor.

The social democrats were the ones who refused to back Thälmann, the only anti-Hitler candidate in the race. And the same way that the communists called them "social fascists," the social democrats used similar rhetoric, frequently saying that the communists were no different from the Nazis, that there was no difference between the far left and the far right.

But also, we don't have to keep rehashing 100 year old grudges from another continent.

Do not forget that in '32 the SPD backed Hindenburg... who then nominated Hitler as chancellor.

Thälmann was foolish, but even if he didn't run, Hitler would still get into power. If the far right is strong enough, mere electoralism will not stop them. Fighting them must happen on the street level.

The liberals fucking won that election and it was the liberal Hindenburg appointing Hitler to the Chancellorship that facilitated his rise to power, not anything the KPD did. This is disgusting historical revisionism that a search engine could dispel in 5 seconds, but you choose to warp history to make it look like Hitler actually won the election and make the liberals who enabled him seem blameless. It is, in effect, apologia for Nazi collaborators. Exactly appropriate for someone shilling for Dems while they gleefully subsidize genocide.

We could avoid this with ranked choice voting.

We desperately need more real third-party participation in politics, but voting for third parties in presidential elections doesn’t make that happen—the US voting system isn’t a business that adapts its products to meet consumer demand.

You need ranked voting

Blaming progressives for not aligning with centrists instead of blaming centrists for siding with Nazis to lock out progressives is a weird take.

Just a note, while ranked voting is much better, the people who are influenced by parties that game the system and a gullible ignorant base usually consolidate themselves into one big party that still does everything to undermine the rest of the coalitions as long as it makes them look bad even if it's worse off for society as a whole and that like a tumor can keep growing until it goes past the midpoint for toppling the democracy that elected it. It's part of the solution, but not all of it, societies act like headless chickens when things get bad enough, regardless of who was responsible for them. For example, Brexit.

I feel like we need something like the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact that is aiming to eliminate the electoral college, but for Ranked Choice.

Passing this federally is too hard. We need do to this state by state.

Until I can vote for a third party with RCV, then I might as well be saying that I have zero preference about the GOP and DNC options on the table.

I’m not voting for Harris. I’m voting against Trump via Harris.

Not a single party on the face of the earth is gonna switch to an alternative voting system. Democracy devolving into 2 parties is a problem in nearly every country and unfortunately the ones who can make the change are the ones who benefit from first pass the post voting

No "democratic" party is gonna switch to STAR or a similar voting system unless the citizens start being very loud.

On other hand, radicalizing people to support alternative voting is also very hard, because it is hard to explain and hard to understand for majority of people and its often viewed as if the supporter is trying to benefit from the said change and trying to sabotage democracy, when in reality, they are the ones who want real democracy

Republicans are not going to suddenly stop being evil, so what's the solution? Just endlessly comprise and never accomplish anything? Fuck that. I refuse to be held hostage. If Democrats want leftist votes then they have to deliver leftist policies. Otherwise they're just as responsible

There's a lot you can say about how broken US electoralism is, but using this as an example is just not accurate.

1. Hitler wasn't elected by people, he lost to Hindenburg in 1932 and was appointed Chancellor later.

2. The Nazis who appointed him Chancellor had the majority, meaning more than every other party combined. Meaning third parties didn't syphon the Hitler vote

3. Hindenburg didn't want to appoint him, but meetings with industrialists made him change his mind

4. Hindenburg then gave Hitler more powers after the Heischtag fire.

If anything, it's an example of what happens when you reach over the aisle and compromise with nazis.

He can write executive orders all day long but unless he's repealing a previous order, it requires Congress to fund them.

And you might think he'll just blunder along like last time, and I'd like to point out he did a lot of damage last time, but I believe he is FULLY aware of Project 2025 and I think he would try his best to enact much of it because it involves loyalty to him and enriching him. Either way, I'm not interested in finding out.

These posts are always missing the point. Voters will vote third party. Your moral claims won't change that, but your candidate's policies could. Also, most of us don't live in swing states. Don't pretend our vote matters when it never did.