• Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    That is exactly the kind of dogshit strategy that disenfranchises voters, loses elections and gives republicans a majority.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      What “strategy?” That’s what the system is. It’s a two-party system, inherently.

      You have two candidates to pick from. You either pick the candidate who is closer to your ideals or you pick the candidate that’s farther away from your ideals. If you don’t vote or you vote for a “third party” candidate then you’re just throwing your choice away and abdicating it to those who do vote for one of those two options.

      If you want it to be different from that then the fundamental voting system itself needs to be changed. The current one that America operates under inevitably becomes two-party. CPG Grey did a video a few years ago explaining why this is so.

      • Victoria Antoinette @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        the video you linked called it strategic voting, and the real takeaway from that video is that strategic voting leads to voters having fewer choices and losing representation.

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          If they don’t vote strategically then they give the advantage to their opponents. The alternative is to take votes away from a party that doesn’t quite align with you but could win and give them instead to a party that can’t win, resulting in an increased chance of the party that doesn’t align with you at all winning.

            • FaceDeer@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              It’s a question of whether you want to win somewhat or lose completely. Democracy is compromise; you’re never going to find a candidate that perfectly aligns with your interests.

              If you insist that you will only vote for a niche third-party candidate under a system like America’s, then you’ve taken yourself out of the effective voting pool. Now neither of the two candidates who has a chance of winning needs to care about your interests at all.

      • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Banking on voters picking the least terrible option instead of giving them actual reasons to vote is a dogshit strategy that disenfranchises voters, loses elections, and gives republicans a majority. That dogshit strategy.

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          “Picking the least terrible option” is a reason to vote. It’s the only one that the system allows for.

          • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Relying on that is a dogshit strategy that disenfranchises voters, loses elections, and gives republicans a majority

            • FaceDeer@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Again, it’s not a choice to rely on that. It’s the physics of the system. There is no other practical way to contest an election in the United States. It’s a first-past-the-post electoral system.

              There. Are. Two. Candidates.

              Only two. You pick from those two. One of them will likely be closer to your ideals, the other will be farther away from your ideals. Pick one. Which one do you pick? The one closer to your ideals, or the one farther away?

              Or will you decide not to vote at all and just let everyone else pick for you? How is that a better strategy? You still get one of those two candidates.

                • FaceDeer@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I’m not American, I’m writing all this as an external observer.

                  What alternative do you propose to voting Democrat?

                  • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    Support local grassroots pro-working class political movements and candidates instead of voting for the least worse ghoul every 4 years? Find the local chapter of whatever you think is better? Get involved for a cause that both parties are actively harming ? Demand, by any means available, elected officials to not be pieces of shit if they want your vote? Maybe just stop defending genocide support on the internet because it makes our guy look bad.

                    Putting your vote behind someone you believe to be detrimental to your own values should not be the default position and is, at best, the worst case scenario. Screw the two US parties and everything they stand for.