Ranked choice voting eliminates the concept of spoiler candidates/parties.
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
796 points (85.9% liked)
Political Memes
5357 readers
3195 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I might risk voting 3rd party if this election wasn't a choice between boring corporatists and 100% concentrated evil.
The stakes are just too damn high to risk letting Trump get back into the White House again.
it's not worth it until first past the post is removed.
Until then it's mathematically impossible for a third party candidate to win. Focus your energy instead on removing first past the post, then you have a chance
This is the way.
G.R.E.E.N.
GET
REPUBLICANS
ELECTED
EVERY
NOVEMBER
Don't mind me, just sweeping þrough to prune ð propoganda weeds on ðeir latest block/ban dodge accounts!
These numbers are ~~not~~ correct according to NY Times
Edit: I can’t math
I double checked the subtraction with the NYT numbers you linked to, and the numbers look correct to me. Which numbers are wrong?
I can’t math and I think I looked at the wrong state for Michigan
I think maybe he means numbers themselves are wrong? I mean look at 7. That number is just all kinds of fucked up. Don't get me started on 23.
If you don’t like stein, consider voting party for socialism and liberation instead.
They’re running Claudia de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian statehood and an end to arms shipments to israel.
I found out recently that they’re on the ballot or have official write in status in 42 states, so unless you’re in Alaska, Nevada, Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Georgia or Pennsylvania go for it!
E: forgot Nevada. They’re not officially recognized in Nevada.
I’d advise that no one buy into any of this nonsense. De la Cruz has a mathematically impossible chance to win, and at this point will serve only to siphon votes and spoil the election. Knowingly or not, this is what is happening.
Think about it: Ever wonder why you’re really only hearing about them recently? Where were they four years ago? What have they done to prove they will even do as they say? They have no track record to stand on, but for some reason, these people seem to think they can sneak into an election and have a chance to win on unproven, untested policy with no practical or effective way to make any of it happen?
Make no mistake- there is no good intention from anyone asking you to throw away your vote on these people this late in the game- NONE.
Were it a year or two ago, I could maybe see it. But weeks away from what might be the most important election of our lifetime- to even think to request people not do everything they can to stop a racist rapist traitor to America from forcing our own militarily against us, systematically removing the rights of our LGBTQ+ friends and family, and the rights of women to have body autonomy is as shamelessly in bad faith as one could possibly be.
DO NOT LISTEN TO THESE PEOPLE.
I might be misremembering the electoral values of the states here, but I think the combined value of the states they’re not official write ins or on ballot is only 64.
That leaves 474 electoral votes that psl could get, so they very much could win.
The history of the party is easy to find. They’ve been around for a little while now.
I’d choose a party with no track record over one with a consistent track record of genocidal violence and extrajudicial killings, but luckily psl has a track record of grassroots activism that’s pretty consistent, so I don’t have to take a gamble.
It’s a bit absurd to call opposition to genocide and apartheid unproven, untested policy.
I’m swiftly climbing the ladder of age and my whole life people have been saying “well, you should have been advocating for this or that last year, it’s too late now, this is the most important election of our lifetime!”
The best time to vote (and do groundwork for) psl was last year, the second best time is now!
I agree with the last part though, don’t listen to people peddling tired cliches and misinformation trying to manipulate you into voting one way or the other!
News flash genius…. Most everyone here is opposed to genocide. As has been said before, you’re not part of some fringe grassroots group that figured out that genocide was bad ahead of everyone else.
Stop with that shit. I don’t believe you’re here in any good faith to help anyone in any way.
If most everyone is opposed to genocide then I agree with them and want to help them find parties and candidates that oppose it too, like psl!
What party in opposition to genocide do you support?
I’m not going to stop politely and courteously advocating for the party and candidate I think is appropriate in threads where it’s on topic in a political comm.
It might not be a good idea to accuse people of bad faith when you open up with a sarcastic insult. World is pretty strict about that stuff, it’s like their number one rule.
I accused you of bad faith because that’s what I think you are. And I think the PSL is hot garbage and that’s why no one is taking them seriously.
Is there an argument I could make from my position that wouldn’t read as bad faith to you?
You’re here trying to garner support for the hopeless psl within weeks of an election, so….
No.
I was trying to garner support for the psl here months before the election too, and years before it in real life organizing.
Just for the sake of completeness, if you can’t see a persons position as having a good faith form, doesn’t that mean you’re the person here in bad faith? If you truly believed there was no earnest true believer doctrinaire communist that was committed to their party of choice because they really thought it was the best use of their and everyone else’s time, wouldn’t you just report me as misinformation or whatever and move on?
I’ve always considered bad faith to be not the person I disagree with but the person who isnt willing to engage with anything I’m saying, to assume that there’s a human being on the other side of the capacitive predictive text thumb pad and that they have reasons behind what they’re saying that are worth listening to.
That makes an assumption that all or a big majority third party voters would prefer Harris over Trump.
Just for clarifying the logic here.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I remember 2020 where Trump did not win. All problems are fixed now.
If this were true then American politics really are terrible. Minority should hold seats. America needs to revisit representation.
It’s actually not entirely true, it only counts stein as the only 3rd party (the libertarian candidate in PA got 3x as many votes as her, I’d bet those 3rd party votes wouldn’t have gone to Clinton) AND doesn’t report factual numbers.
It’s just not true.
That said unfortunately voting for a 3rd party candidate is largely useless in the USA and the forces trying to get their opponents voters to vote 3rd party are probably more overwhelming then the forces actually compelling folks to vote 3rd party.
FPTP needs to die in the USA.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›