this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
499 points (85.4% liked)

politics

19104 readers
3368 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
 

"Progressives should not make the same mistake that Ernst Thälmann made in 1932. The leader of the German Communist Party, Thälmann saw mainstream liberals as his enemies, and so the center and left never joined forces against the Nazis. Thälmann famously said that 'some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest' of social democrats, whom he sneeringly called 'social fascists.'

After Adolf Hitler gained power in 1933, Thälmann was arrested. He was shot on Hitler’s orders in Buchenwald concentration camp in 1944."

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

These posts are always missing the point. Voters will vote third party. Your moral claims won't change that, but your candidate's policies could. Also, most of us don't live in swing states. Don't pretend our vote matters when it never did.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Voters will but they can't do so under the delusion that a) they are making any sort of change or b) that they aren't hurting the actually viable candidate closest to them.

The winner of the election in every state will be the Democrat or the Republican, full stop. You can choose to help or harm the one closest to your opinion.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

He can write executive orders all day long but unless he's repealing a previous order, it requires Congress to fund them.

And you might think he'll just blunder along like last time, and I'd like to point out he did a lot of damage last time, but I believe he is FULLY aware of Project 2025 and I think he would try his best to enact much of it because it involves loyalty to him and enriching him. Either way, I'm not interested in finding out.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TrippyFocus@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

If you live outside the ~5 swing states that decide the election you can go ahead and ignore stuff like this saying you can’t vote third party.

Shoutout PSL

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (22 children)

So people who don't live in swing states should vote third party until there's enough of them that the state is in danger of going to trump (or whoever)? If they're successful at some point that's a threat.

How do we actually get third party candidates to win, not just "oh, Ross Perot Jr got 3% of the vote"?

However you slice it, we're looking at like a 20 year struggle minimum to get election reform, and it would be at least the same length to elect a third party candidate to the office of president, but that's a one off thing. (Or more likely that third party would be the new one of two parties)

If we're committed to the struggle of improving things, we might as well improve a reusable process rather than have a single go at a third party presidential candidate.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Depends on how "safe" the states are. If its by just 100,000 then that's not as safe as you think. If it's by 600,000 then yeah that's pretty safe. But at the same time why vote for a party that won't win?

Also, the PSL is not your friend. Back in 2020 they realized they weren't gonna get the Peace and Freedom nomination in 2020, so instead of having solidarity with their fellow socialists, they threw their weight behind the joke candidate Roseanne Barr. They blatantly sabotaged their fellow socialists because they realized they weren't going to win. They are not a party worth your investment.

Here's a great article about them and their shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›