759
Harris picks Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate
(www.cnn.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
759 points (98.6% liked)
politics
19090 readers
3969 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
I'm a registered libertarian. Despite the craziness, I don't plan on changing that. I wouldn't have voted for Biden, strictly because I live in a state that has 0% chance of flipping, BUT I routinely vote for democrats in senate/house/local races where my vote actually does make a difference. I also encouraged friends with similar mindsets in battleground states to vote Biden.
I think the democratic party needs to fracture, it just needs to fracture AFTER the republican party.
All of that is a setup to say: I also am excited, and if someone like me is excited, I think that's a DAMN good sign. I cannot wait to piss and moan about a Harris admin. It is a big damn country, I look forward to disagreement returning to the point it doesn't result in erosion of fundamental rights and democracy itself, not to mention godamn violent insurrection.
The only thing that can fracture the two party system is ranked choice or alternative voting systems. FPTP guarantees two parties.
The problem is that FPTP massively benefits democrats and republicans so they're unlikely to want to vote against it. So, to get it passed you'd need to get a third party in power that doesn't benefit from FPTP. But, you can't get a third party in power because FPTP makes it virtually impossible to elect third party candidates.
It's a catch-22 situation.
In Canada the Liberal party made an election promise that they would scrap FPTP if elected. They're one of two main parties in Canada, along with the Conservatives. Of course, as soon as they won the election, they backed out of that promise.
Wasn't Maine or some state experimenting with it?
And I can't wait. I am firmly in support of ranked choice. I think it's absence is the root cause of a lot of issues and should be a single issue voter issue... second ONLY to the fact that there is a "candidate" in the running who is responsible for a Temu quality coup.
Again (not for you but others), I know the issues of my party. It's my party not my religion. I am uncomfortable with the compromises democrats make. The thing about coalition governments and multi-party systems is they allow compromises to happen while keeping support and acknowledging they are compromises in the name of pragmatism. It's the way it should be, it's how we get the best of all ideas.
There are things that should never be compromised. I'm a libertarian because Obama was in favor of "strong civil unions", renewed the patriot act, and kept Guantanamo open. In a coalition government, I maybe could have understood that, but that's the issue: without a coalition, and without ranked choice, those are now principles of the democratic party.
And again, it's all secondary to being able to vote at all in 2028. Harris is going to have a hell of a time, but I'm excited for it.
In the the absence of Ranked Choice, we likely would need to get involved at the Primary level in order to fundamentally change the party. Primary turnout rates are like 10% or something absurdly low.
Giddyup. In the meantime I'll vociferously vote for the folks who 1) aren't seditionist assholes who call my friends non humans 2) don't use passing point 1 to do other heinous shit. Voting in primaries is paramount, it makes people scared.
that is not the correct analysis. the correct analysis is that strategic voting in a fptp system leads to party consolidation. the solution is values voting
Oh you did it! You solved the spoiler effect! Let me know how that works for you.
Killing the GOP is in your best interest if fracturing the Democratic Party is what you want. Progressives have been ready to bail since 2016. It's not likely to make American politics any less statist, though.
Significant electoral reform is the only other path, and any constitutional amendment is not happening without a major cultural shift in partisanship.
By the way for anyone reading that wants the end of the Trump era, I'm also in a 0% chance state, and this will be the first time I vote for the Democrat on the presidential ticket since moving here, and I encourage others in similar positions to turn out and do the same. I always vote third party to give them extra relevance, but this is a year where the popular vote total will matter. Running up the score will be necessary to make false election integrity claims irrelevant.
'nuff said. Right there with you. As per the rest, like I said I vote out idiots when I can, and I'm avoiding naming the state because it's the internet, but we do pretty well in terms of workers rights, civil rights, and healthcare (yes there are libertarians who support MFA etc), so I think it's important to indicate that, especially for local issues, the national issue of the party means less.
But I hear you and you do you. I'm pretty damn far from accelerationist, but if we really can't keep to clear cut things like the EC... well... we've got far bigger issues.