this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
-4 points (25.0% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2538 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

They've hired Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow to try to force their way onto the ballot in Nevada, a swing state. They're so obviously compromised.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Heavens no, not ballot representation!

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

True representation would be an electoral system without the spoiler effect.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Why are you fighting so hard to retain the spoiler effect?

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I'm explicitly wanting to get rid of the spoiler effect.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No, see jill stein wants to get rid of first past the post. Democrats fight to keep competitors off the ballot because they benefit from first past the post. You are explicitly fighting to keep it.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

No, see jill stein wants to get rid of first past the post.

And I want to be able to jump over entire buildings with a single bound, and shoot lasers out of my eyes.

Talk is cheap when you've lost every single presidential election you've entered, especially losing so bad as to never get any electoral college nominations.

You are explicitly fighting to keep it.

No, I vote in the primaries at every chance to get as left of a candidate nominated as possible. The way to move forward is to take over the DNC. That starts at the ground level.

Just going for the presidency is a failed strategy. So all we can do at this time is harm reduction at that level.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Talk is cheap when you’ve lost every single presidential election you’ve entered, especially losing so bad as to never get any electoral college nominations.

wait.... she's won non-presidential elections? (has Stein even participated in non-presidential elections as a candidate?)

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

No, she's never won an election outside of her party's nomination.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

You vote exclusively for candidates that actively support and benefit from first past the post, and are fighting against a candidate that actively supports getting rid of it. You cant claim to want to get rid of it

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm curious.

How does a federal elected official- of any variety- get rid of FPTP voting? States run and manage their own elections. short of a constitutional amendment, no US president or congressperson can get that done.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

You vote exclusively for candidates that actively support and benefit from first past the post

That isn't true, and I just told you. This sort of change happens at the local level, at the lower ranks of government.

The president is not the only elected position in government.

and are fighting against a candidate that actively supports getting rid of it.

Not really. Stein is probably barely even on the Harris campaign's radar. The actual, real fight is against Trump.

You cant claim to want to get rid of it

Sure I can, just watch me:

I want to get rid of the spoiler effect, and will help to do so by voting for candidates at the local level who support better voting methods, when such candidates are available.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Such candidates are available, youre arguing they shouldnt be allowed to run because theyll spoil the party that benefits tremendously from first past the post.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

youre arguing they shouldnt be allowed to run because theyll spoil the party that benefits

No I'm not. I'm saying it is almost always a waste of a vote to give them your vote. And anybody running as a 3rd party candidate should do so strategically, in places where there is actually a chance to win without causing ideologically furthest opponents from winning.

Huge swaths of races in the U.S. go unopposed, largely at the local level. Third parties could easily and cheaply target those races, but they don't.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Sorry, im mixed up in several posts specifically about barring third parties from running. This one is just criticism.

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

Isn't if funny how posters here are saying she and her party are not competent or important, but they are working hard to keep her off the ballot?

So she hires a lawyer, then they cry about that.

It seems like there’s a lot of effort being made for something they’re supposedly unconcerned about. lol

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

Doesn't bother me at all.