Also I’d like to add while rereading the thread, I’m not sure where you see the disconnect. Everything seems pretty straightforward to me.

You are pretty darn passionate about voting and 3rd parties and that’s great. I read your comment so I was replying to your comment.

Sometimes tangents happen online, and sometimes topics change. Please understand that I am also passionate about these things, so in a Lemmy thread we can end up in many different places. No need to get upset.

That was an aggressive reply and wasn’t very Mr. Rodgers of you.

Did you learn nothing from PBS kids?

I think the challenge this argument has is that it ignores the spoiler effect that is the biggest problem in FPTP, and it assumes party changes have happened because a third party successfully unseated a traditional party in a sort of coup.

First, the spoiler effect is very real. You’ll notice the better a third party does, the worse it is for that whole faction of the electorate. It’s a bit of a paradox but you can see it with the notable 3rd party runs. Teddy Roosevelt got Woodrow Wilson elected. Ross Perot gave the election to Clinton by splitting the right. Ralph Nader solidified Bush as president. The better the third party does, the stronger the spoiler effect. It’s not a conspiracy, it’s just the math.

Next, when there is a party change, such as the fall of the federalists or the whigs, it is because they fell apart due to losing a war or their positions (such as opposing manifest destiny) became moot and they no longer had a purpose. This created a void that was then filled with a new party. This was not because a 3rd party arrived and had a David vs Goliath situation. In this metaphor Goliath was already dead when David showed up.

Some questions to ask: what does it mean to have a politically diverse election? How does FPTP or RCV have impact in a time where we have more tools for social engineering (like social media and surveillance tools)? What assumptions of the Republican and Democratic parties are we making? What assumptions are we making on the electorate that they are composed of?

You have good points and valid reasons to be upset in this election. If we don’t see change in this administration now, why should we expect it going forward?

That said, I would like you to consider a perspective shift on the impact of voting. Put yourself in the shoes of a politician. What is your bottom line? It’s to get reelected.

If you aren’t in a position of power, you can’t pass any bills. You can’t push any agendas. You can’t stop wars. You affect nothing. This is true for politicians, CEOs, Popes, dictators, board presidents, school principles, and homeowners association presidents.

In order to keep that power, you need to make your keys to power happy. In a democracy, there are a lot of keys- those are your voting blocks. The rich, the military, unions, families, students, different ethnicities, different religions- you need to calculate which blocks are most likely to get you reelected.

Now a lot of people wonder why is it that American election campaigns seem to go on forever. They take years. This is because candidates are looking to see who they can bring in to their side. Voters who they don’t please go to their opposition.

Let’s fast forward to after the election. You have won the presidency and are eager to get to work- but guess what, in 4 years you will need to do this all over again. This time, you look at the blocks who voted for you. These blocks were the ones who successfully got you in power, and you want to keep them happy. It’s easier to keep voters than to flip voters, this is the incumbents advantage.

You look at your voting blocks, and you notice there is a large chunk of your previous “supporters” (not that they like you necessarily, just that they voted for you) who want to end arms sales to Israel. If large enough, this group will be pivitol to your next victory. You may have run on a pro Israel stance, but if your electorate needs you to change, you will change.

This doesn’t mean protest sit outs aren’t effective. Michigan had a large vote for Palestine in Biden’s primary campaign. After that result came through, the administration took on more moderate rhetoric. It’s empty, but a first signal nonetheless. If this happened in Illinois or Washington State, his campaign would have ignored it, but since Michigan is a swing state, they paid attention.

In this election, I’m voting for Harris. However, down ballot I’m voting for pro-palestine candidates. Trump’s voting blocks clearly favor Israel, but Harris has a divide she needs to address, and if she sees enough voters voting pro-palestine down ballot, she is much more likely to change her course.

For a deeper look into power structures and how leaders are influenced, I’d recommend watching CGP Grey’s 20 minute video on the rules for Rulers.

There is so much nuance in this discussion that it’s difficult to put all counterpoints into a Lemmy comment while I’m sitting on the pot, but I hope this gives you some more questions to consider as you make the bridge between your values, ideal outcomes, realistic outcomes, and pragmatic strategies for getting that done.

I said it once, I’ll say it again-

Until ranked choice vote is established and the electoral college is abolished, there are no serious third parties.

The most serious third party imo is the Forward Party, only because they have one platform which is RCV, and they are quietly working in local elections only. They aren’t running any candidates in federal elections, although they had a big win in helping Alaska switch to RCV for their congressional race, which nudged out Sarah Palin.

With the forward party in conjunction with fairvote.org , they are laying the groundwork to create possibly the most revolutionary change to American politics ever.

But in order to do that, we need to have elections. Vote Harris.

Okay but here me out, what if we 10^43 more monkeys to balance out the speed?

In fact, let’s push this to an extreme. We get enough monkeys that their mass turns them all into one black hole. Inside the black hole, the laws of physics get all fucked. Next we need to somehow dissolve the event horizon as explained in This Kurzgesagt video. Once that happens and we are left with a bare singularity, anything can pop out of it, including a copy of Hamlet.

The monkeys, however, will very likely be dead.

Yep.

I would recommend folks watch this 20 minute video on Rules for Rulers from CGP Grey.

Despots, Presidents, CEOs, Deans, Homeowners Association Presidents, the guy who runs the open mic- at the end of the day they have to follow the same rules to maintain their power. The zero’th rule in the video is “without power, you affect nothing”.

I’m voting for Kamala, and I’m voting down ballot for any pro-palestine candidate. I want to send the message that in order to get reelected, she will need to change her stance.

When I see people not voting out of protest, they are giving their opposition the influence over their elected officials. Remember, they work for you, and voting is how you let them know what you want.

I’d like to do that too, but sadly that’s not on the ballot this year.

Only way I see our way out of these situations in the future is ranked choice vote and abolish the electoral college so 3rd party candidates are actually viable. I’ve been donating to fairvote.org and joined the forward party for that reason, but in the meantime I can only help damage control while I wait for the calvary of rcv.

I’m voting so the state doesn’t kill my sister if she has complications in her pregnancy.

Of course he pulls the classic “it was just a joke bro”.

That said, have dropped out of the comedy world years ago, it pisses me off to see dipshits like this get to perform for thousands while my friends who killed it at the open mics with real comedy are still struggling to get any attention. That’s showbiz I guess.

Fair, but I do like seeing the federated model thrive and prove itself as a viable alternative to main stream social media. My utopian dream would be that profit driven internet would fall apart against what we have. I hate how much power is given to so few.

Fully agree.

My take as of late is that any 3rd party candidate who runs in our two party system can’t possibly be serious. They make a huge show, maybe get a message out, but almost always torpedo the party closest to them.

With the Stein’s and RFKs in the news, it’s all sexy flashy publicity without any serious effort to have a 3rd party win.

That said, there is another 3rd party personality that you might not have heard of in a while: Andrew Yang.

I actually believe he is serious about electoral reform, in fact that’s the one issue his Forward Party is about. He and his team have worked quietly to help get ranked choice vote in local elections. He is not running for president as a spoiler candidate. He is not running for senate as an independent. He is putting in the work along with fairvote.org to make the structural changes needed to have viable 3rd party campaigns. We saw what happened in Alaska when ranked choice vote was present- they kept Sarah Palin from holding a Senate seat and elected a Democrat instead.

If we had the NPVIC and ranked choice vote, our democracy would be much more representative, collaborative, and stable.

There is one exception to the “Trump hates negative press” that I’d like to note. When Dr. Fauci was called to meet with Trump after he corrected him on live TV about drinking bleach, he found Trump in his office saying “My god these ratings are amazing, they’re better than cable”. Oddly enough sometimes Trump sees any news is good news so long as he’s the main focus.

The times I’ve seen him really go off is when the news cycle stops paying attention to him.

Also she wasn’t even really interrupting him. If you watch the clip, she was muted and he was easily heard over her. It wasn’t as if she was really steamrolling.

You can tell it got under his skin in 2020, and this was just a pathetic way to “get back” at her for being a woman who asserted herself in a debate.

For context that’s what Picasso said when he saw the ancient cave paintings of Laseaux

We have invented nothing

I stopped eating bacon because it’s $6 at Aldi, but the section over I can get breakfast sausage links for $2.

I guess the problem with that argument is that it doesn’t consider there are a variety of approaches to therapy that don’t all work on some “core function”.

Of course, Hank Green to the rescue once again!

Some therapy is designed to ignore deep trauma and rather focus on the most surface level things. We could go in circles all day about how 9/11 made you terrified of flying, but even if you found some answer, it wouldn’t necessarily help. Instead maybe some exposure therapy or psychedelics or idk some other strategies can be used here and now.

I also think that even conservatives have differing worldviews within their own, so lumping it all together as a bad worldview doesn’t work. Not all conservatives are angry and pissed off at everything and everyone. Not all liberals are the embodiment of enlightenment. When it comes to therapy, I think there is no one size fits all, and a conservative therapist may help a conservative patient in ways that a liberal therapist couldn’t.

The other thing to note is that these Republicans believe it is in their best interest to endorse Harris.

When it comes to how politicians act, I quote my old political science advisor, they say “I’m not dying in that ditch”. The bottom line is re-election. Everything else is secondary.

These Republicans, like any politician, did the calculus for their political survival and decided their chances are better speaking at the DNC- that is not to be ignored.