this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
481 points (86.9% liked)

politics

19022 readers
3335 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 hours ago

Note: Jill is literally paid to run as a spoiler, and if you look at her actual policies, lot of transphobia, ablism, and support for pseudoscience

[–] [email protected] 21 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

guys it's not that hard, all we have to do is to not vote for still jein.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

... there were people voting for stein?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago

i would hope not, but idk why else you would be running lmao

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

jesus christ this thread is a fucking nightmare bro

i feel like i've done three pounds of ketamine just scrolling through these comments.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (3 children)

I don't understand why it is taken for granted that if Stein wasn't a candidate the people who vote for her would be voting for the Democrats instead. Just as likely they would not vote at all or vote for some other protest candidate.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I saw some stats on this in another thread, most third party voters wouldn't be voting if their candidate wasn't on the ballot, and most third party voters benefit Democrats down ballot. The spoiler candidate logic has always been sketchy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

The spoiler candidate logic has always been sketchy.

it depends on how popular third party is. If they're getting 20-30% of the vote but no more it's extremely common for them to drop out to support the primary instead.

Anything lower than 10% and it probably doesn't matter much. RFK jr is a decent exmaple of this, although he was more "bipartisan" in terms of support, apparently.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

The last US Presidential election decided with more than a 10% margin was Regan. The only vote with above a 5% margin this millennium was Obama's first term.

"Anything lower than 10% and it probably doesn't matter much" is a weird take.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

this is assuming that the voter split isn't roughly at random. Jill stein is running on either extremely far left anti war sentiment, which we see among the right as well, along with cozying up to russia apparently, which only tankies and farther right people want.

That alone is pretty mixed.

Generally unless the candidate is going to pull a large enough share of the votes to the point where it enact a significant draw from the candidate hence my 20-30% figure, it really won't do anything to the voter turnout. Like i said, as we saw with RFK, it was roughly split down the middle.

Jill stein might pull more far lefties, but that's only because they refuse to vote in their best interest lmao. They wouldn't vote anyway.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 50 minutes ago

Conservative voters are not anti-war, they are anti-Russian war, and the Republican ticket already addresses that. These people don't historically vote for left wing parties, nor are they in this case.

The green party's base is pot smokers and college students who haven't gotten wise to the green grift yet.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

As in that's such a small group they are probably more dedicated to their candidate and won't vote for anyone else.

Again. You can't expect to remove candidates from a ballot and their support will all just vote Democrat. It's a false logic to assume they belong to anywhere else other than their vote block.
When you have a large base that small percentage that's willing to vote off base ends up being a larger percentage of the vote overall as well.

Currently you would have to get every single last green party voter to give up and vote Blue which is an impossible ask. So even at 5% of the vote I'm not sure they could swing an election with enough if their candidate asked nicely.
They went high with their estimate though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

yeah, my 10% figure was probably generous, but i think i would probably stand by it in most cases, as unless you're polling 20% at bare minimum you're probably dropping out of primaries anyway out of fears of "siphoning" votes. Realistically the outcome between the two alternatives here is probably marginal, if at all.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 hours ago

Because people who are disillusioned that the green party would address their concerns are generally not complete shitheads like republicans; they're decent but misled people.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 hours ago

Because a vote abstention is a vote for the person in the lead. If Harris is in the lead, then every single American who abstains from voting is essentially helping her win, but the same is true if Trump is in the lead. Convincing Green voters that it makes more sense in a FPTP system to vote Democrat as its the closest party to their preferred ideology is a statistically productive activity.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

Kamala Harris can win over all of those Jill Stein voters with a single sentence.

Stupid Jill Stein's entire campaign is based on the premise that Democrats would keep a genocide going for an entire year into election season.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Yeah remember when they were all clamoring for Biden to drop out? And he did? They just fucking moved the goalposts.

They do not give a fuck about Gaza. It's just a tool to hurt Democrats.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Republicans hate this one simple trick!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago

They really do, oddly enough, for multiple reasons.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Aint nobody voting for Jill Stein lmao

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

"Both siders" do

load more comments
view more: next ›