How about "Putin's Useful Idiots"?
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2024
-3 points (0.0% liked)
politics
19101 readers
4850 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They're a spoiler party.
They’re a spoiler party.
Calling them a spoiler party only reinforces the power of the two-party system that stifles real choice. Third parties actually push important issues into the spotlight, challenging the status quo. And they give voters more options. We need more than this duopoly that we are under.
You mean: it clarifies the reality of the situation - that the spoiler party has zero chance of winning.
You call it a "spoiler" party because it shakes the chains of the very system you're too comfortable in.
The reality of the situation is that this so-called "zero chance" is exactly what terrifies the ruling class—because it’s a reminder that the people are waking up. Spoiler or not, the fight is about breaking the stranglehold of the two-headed beast that’s been robbing workers blind for generations.
Third parties actually push important issues into the spotlight, challenging the status quo. And they give voters more options.
Jill Stein has run for public office a total of 8 times. Of those she was successful in getting elected and completing her term one single time. This office was: Lexington Town Meeting, a representative town meeting, the local legislative body in Lexington, Massachusetts. 3 years later she ran for the same office and won again...but then resigned during her term. source
This doesn't look like a realistic candidate interested in a political career to change policy. How is this giving voters more options?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Calling them a spoiler party only reinforces the power of the two-party system that stifles real choice.
No, I mean that being spoliers is their function. They exist to siphon votes off Democrats, not as a side effect of gaining votes for a sincerely held belief in any cause, but as a cynical and deliberate attempt to decrease their chances and increase Republicans' chances.
No, I mean that being spoliers is their function. They exist to siphon votes off Democrats
It's absurd to claim that third parties are nothing more than tools to weaken the Democrats.
Many of us who champion third parties do so out of a fierce belief in the need for real, transformative change—not to play into the hands of the Republicans.
I'm beginning to think that maybe your real aim is to keep people shackled to the same two-headed beast that fears any challenge to its power.
And now I think you're just another mouthpiece for the duopoly, terrified of the revolution that true independent voices could spark. And you are only saying this stuff to confuse people and make them second-guess themselves.
A 23 day old account desperately shilling for third parties and telling everyone else they are a “mouthpiece”…
Really?
How long should I have an account before I can start posting stuff I am interested in? I didn't see a timing reference when signing up.
Can’t say before posting inflammatory shit.
Something to consider before posting inflammatory shit… It’s almost like your content means more than your age… but you’re focused on what?
Can’t say before posting inflammatory shit.
So because I am not voting for your candidate, and I believe in workers rights, this is "inflammatory shit"?! Say what, brother?!
but you’re focused on what?
I've already posted my opinion and views. I'm not sure what you seem to be unclear about. What can I help you understand, friend?
Substance and content matters? Maybe your posted “opinion” is disagreeable?
What can I help you understand as everyone downvotes you?
Maybe your posted “opinion” is disagreeable?
Oh, I am very sure what I post is disagreeable to you. It's quite obvious that you don't want the Duopoly Regime to change.
What can I help you understand as everyone downvotes you?
Ah, the downvotes—proof that I've struck a nerve in the belly of the two-headed snake you seem so enamored with.
If my words shake you to your core, it's because they expose the rot of a system that thrives on keeping us divided and powerless.
I don't need your help, friend; it's clear you're too busy worshiping the duopoly to see the truth staring you in the face.
And I'm still not gonna vote for Harris. Nor are many of my friends. You haven't changed my mind at all. :)
Keep telling yourself who I worship as everyone downvotes you. The “duopoly” is your issue… everyone else works in the real world as you keep on that duopoly… I’m sure decades from now you’ll make a difference. Just like decades before folks saying the same thing have made… Maybe just maybe… I’m not the enemy.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It’s absurd to claim that third parties are nothing more than tools to weaken the Democrats.
I didn't say third parties. I said the Green Party in particular.
Who is a third party and doesn't changed anything in my reply. It seems to me that you're trying to stir up confusion and discontent because you fear the change that threatens the status quo. What party do you really work for?
To hear centrist Democrats say it, I'm a shill for Putin himself because I don't like the Bidenyahu genocide. To hear you say it, I'm a shill for Democrats because I don't like your spoiler candidate and her spoiler party.
To hear centrist Democrats say it, I’m a shill for Putin himself because I don’t like the Bidenyahu genocide. To hear you say it, I’m a shill for Democrats because I don’t like your spoiler candidate and her spoiler party.
Sounds like you're caught in the crossfire of a broken system that labels anyone who challenges the status quo as a "shill" for one side or the other. Welcome to my world.
But let’s be real—standing against genocide and calling out the failures of the two-party system doesn’t make you a shill for anyone. It makes you someone who refuses to accept a false choice between two evils.
Whether you support third parties or not, the real fight is for a democracy that represents all voices, not just the ones convenient for those in power.
But it’s hard for me to feel sorry for you when you’re so adamant that Jill Stein is a shill for the Russians and Republicans, parroting the same baseless accusations that keep real change from happening. And those are the same accusations that you’re now facing yourself.
Acknowledging the reality that third parties cannot win under the current system is more useful in moving towards the alternatives you want that endlessly banging your head against the wall by running and supporting futile campaigns.
It’s not that we haven’t found the right moment or candidate. The electoral system in the US simply prevents third party candidates from being functional alternatives. You need to reckon with and change that reality if you want real alternatives.
Recognizing the flaws in the system is crucial, but waiting for the "right moment" without challenging the status quo only ensures nothing changes.
I personally think that supporting third parties is part of the fight to break down those barriers and push for the alternatives we need.
How do you see these campaigns leading to reforms needed to break the two party stranglehold? Are these candidates working together to raise awareness on the issue? Or are they just looking to boost their own brand without actually achieving anything? To me it looks like the latter.
There are organized movements to get rid of the electoral college and first past the post voting. But I haven’t seen any of these candidates participating. Why not spend your energy posting about those organizations instead?
Breaking the two-party stranglehold isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution, and while I don’t have all the answers, I do know that raising awareness and running independent campaigns are crucial parts of the struggle.
These candidates are out there challenging the system, putting pressure on the establishment, and inspiring others to question the status quo. Just because they aren't always front and center in every movement doesn't mean they aren't contributing to the fight.
It's a multi-front battle, and every effort counts in pushing for real change, even if it doesn't fit neatly into one box.
Brother, it's not a matter of choosing one battle over another—it's about fighting on all fronts.
I can raise hell about the stranglehold of the two-party system while also supporting efforts to abolish the electoral college. Revolution doesn't demand we pick and choose our fights—it demands we fight them all, with everything we've got.
I'll stick with calling them naive.
Are they building a coalition toward ranked choice?
They are naive at best… BUT malicious in appearance.
The fight for ranked choice voting is crucial, but it shouldn't be an excuse to dismiss third parties. Supporting third parties now is how we build the momentum for change, including reforms like ranked choice voting.
The more we challenge the status quo, the more pressure we put on the system to evolve.
Sub out the term “affect”.
Sub out damn near anything… “Change” should matter more than your BS rhetoric. Where can you point to change?
What change have you affected? What’s your accomplishment?
What have third parties done, other than fail at every goal?
load more comments
(7 replies)
Well, at least you’re not calling me—or anyone else—a Russian asset today. So, brother, I’ll take your "naive" comment in stride. I genuinely respect and support your right to your opinion, even if we see things differently.
I don't really see the Russian asset thing as being real. It seems like Stein made some dumb choices in terms of travel and meetings but I think we'd see it more in her policy if she were a Russian asset. I remain suspicious of Tulsi Gabbard and Donald Trump's Russian ties.
Stein is clearly an asset to Russia. As is trump. You could be an asset to Russia as well. Being an asset doesn't mean that you're an agent of. Just that your actions are beneficial to them.
By that logic, anyone that is critical of Harris in any way is a Russian asset. I suppose I should just quit talking to anyone just in case it benefits them? (I will still vote for Harris regardless)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Until there's a third party that can get more than 1 to 3% of the vote, they are all "Independent Parties".
Most folks just don't understand the scale involved.
Party registration:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_strength_in_U.S._states
Democratic - 48,019,985
Republican - 35,732,180
Independent - 34,699,567
After that, literally every other party is an "also ran". The largest of the independent parties is less than 1.5% the size of the Democrats. 1.490%. The Greens are 1/3rd of THAT size.
This isn't even a comprehensive list, "No Labels" is absent, likely due to their complete inability to function.
American Independent - 715,712
Libertarian - 710,123
Independence Party of New York - 388,779
Green - 240,198
Independent Party of Florida - 195,333
Independent Party of Oregon - 134,996
Constitution - 131,901
Independent Party of Louisiana - 110,653 b
Peace & Freedom - 110,576
Independent American Party - 58,331
Working Families - 55,352
United Independent - 20,976
Alaskan Independence - 18,983
Common Sense Party - 17,322 b
New Jersey Conservative - 16,104
Independent Party of Delaware - 9,807
Socialist Party USA - 9,198
Natural Law - 6,549
Reform - 5,900
Women's Equality - 4,468
Approval Voting - 4,046
Independent American Party of New Mexico - 3,889
Unity - 3,215
Better for America - 3,180
Oregon Progressive - 2,928
Working Class - 2,693
United Utah - 2,285
Party for Socialism and Liberation - 1,369
Bread and Roses - 1,127
Ecology Party of Florida - 1,108
The power of third parties lies not in immediate victory but in challenging the status quo and pushing the political conversation forward—every movement starts small.
They are technically a third party though.
Yeah, but I think she’s highlighting how there’s so much hate and vitriol directed at third parties that people should change their mindset and see them as independent voices.
Yes, they're essentially the same thing, but lately, the term "third party" has been unfairly tainted by negative connotations from both major parties.
That's called legitimate criticism. And it's not unfair, she just doesn't like criticism.
load more comments
(1 replies)
call them whatever you want but they are only viable in Maine, Hawaii and Alaska. i wish more third party candidates would run in disguise as Democrats or Republicans and push for Rank Choice Voting vs running third party. But I understand their value as to platform ideas and influence the two main parties, but that is so slow.
I mean we have Tactical Voting in the primaries why can't we have tactical running. Hell the Republicans do it all the time look at Tulsi and those two parties that are the opposite. Where is the Greens (Jill excluded) I would call that a coalition under a different name. sometimes you have to do it out in the open sometimes you got to do it 5th column style.
I’m with you on this—while I lean more socialist, I think you’re right. The Green Party needs to step up and make some real progress, and a stealth mode campaign is smart.
That said, I love how our third-party options seem to send the duopoly into a frenzy, exposing their fear of losing control.
view more: next ›