🇳🇱
I cant in good conscious support a party that is pro-genocide. Never mind Harris's horrible history of women's and trans rights.
I plan to vote for the good guy (shocker I know)... chase oliver is my top pick for the moment. Green party's Stein might get my vote if i change my mind.
I just cant imagine anyone supporting the level of evil the democrats and republicans have demonstrated, not to mention incompetence.
@unabogie @freemo
I'm begging you Doc Freemo ( @freemo ) don't do that. I'm sure you know history of U.S. elections is replete with examples of how casting a protest vote is not a protest at all. This is very evident in swing states.
Had Hillary garnered those "protest" votes and independent voters, she would have won. We wouldn't have the situation we have with the Supreme Court to the degree that it is now. We wouldn't have the tax cuts that were given to corporations. Roe vs Wade would not have been overturned. Covid wouldn't have been politicized as much as it was.
Now if you live in Texas (like me) Florida, Tennessee, Oklahoma or any other deep red state... then more power to ya. But if you live in a swing state, this trans girl is begging you... please do not throw your vote away on the Libertarian or Green Party candidate. Please don't.
https://rollcall.com/2019/07/29/how-third-party-votes-sunk-clinton-what-they-mean-for-trump/
@WrenArcher @CoachMark @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews > Well, I've got a little more.
Always welcome a respectful discussion, please feel free.
> I'm begging you Doc Freemo ( @freemo ) don't do that. I'm sure you know history of U.S. elections is replete with examples of how casting a protest vote is not a protest at all. This is very evident in swing states.
It is not a protest vote. It is the only kind of vote anyone should ever cast, it is a vote for the best candidate, plain and simple.
> Had Hillary garnered those "protest" votes and independent voters, she would have won. We wouldn't have the situation we have with the Supreme Court to the degree that it is now.
While not having Trump in office would have certainly been a good thing, having Hilary there I doubt would have done us any good. I mean sure the supreme court has some wackadoodles on it since Trump had his way, but with Hillary we probably would have been knee deep into WW3 by now. Replacing one incompetant man with another (or woman) wont fix a damn thing.
> We wouldn't have the tax cuts that were given to corporations.
I'm kinda neutral on that, our taxes are pretty high but i dont mind it either way rteally
> Roe vs Wade would not have been overturned.
Roe v wade should have never been the way we protected abortions. From a legal standpoint it made no sense and using privacy as a means to protect abortions was always a plan doomed to fail. The democrats should have been pushing for a amendment to protect abortion from years ago. Ask yourself why they never proposed such a thing ever? Because having abortion be at risk is exactly what the democrats want, it gets them elected. Same for republicans, gets them elected.
> But if you live in a swing state, this trans girl is begging you... please do not throw your vote away on the Libertarian or Green Party candidate.
I am not throwing away my vote, I am voting deliberatly and with intent for the person who is objectively the best canddiate, nothing more, nothing less.
@freemo @WrenArcher @CoachMark @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews your SCOTUS take is only one an extremely self absorbed male would hold.
If that were true you'd discuss the why and how in a constructive way rather than resort to the insults I'd expect of a toddler.
@WrenArcher @unabogie @freemo @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews FL, TX, and TN all could be in play...if enough women, minorities, and young people register and vote. I believe that the LGBTQ+ numbers are much higher than are assumed. I think the whole age spectrum matches the 20+% of the under 25. I think the rest of the age groups are still in the closet.
@Ralph058 @WrenArcher @freemo @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
I liken voting to vaccination and herd immunity. People don't vaccinate because everyone else is. Likewise, anyone who claims to "already live in a blue state" is only enjoying that status because other people are voting on their behalf. It's selfish and immature.
Agreed, we have to do away with blue states all together, it is selfish and immature to be in such a state and let others throw away their vote in support of a two party system, one of the most harmful things to society and america is the two party system, the false narrative keeps evil people in power even when we have good decent choices right there on the ballot.
@Ralph058 @WrenArcher @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@freemo @unabogie @WrenArcher @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
Until the third parties get seats in Congress, voting for a third party is throwing your vote away. Even IF the third party won, you would have 438 members of the House and 100 members of the Senate voting against everything they tried.
US will continue to be a two party system until the third parties get real.
Nah, that would be the people voting for Harris and/or Trump. If they would refuse to vote for evil people then Trump wouldnt get into office (or Harris).
Remember, a vote for Harris is a vote for Trump (2-party voter logic).
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher DNAZBSIUMJQFJVIKARNOMdentnews@friendica.opensocial.space Oh dear God no! You do realize that in throwing your vote away you’re potentially dooming us to the horrors of the return of OMADPK, DXMOXLUKCWWM and FXHABUHVP and the end of democracy as we know it. Nobody is more horrified about Gaza than me but, really, Genocide Joe? (1/2)
We really, really need to play the hand we’re dealt, not pretend we have other cards in our hand. The stakes are way too high. (2/2)
Agreed, the stakes are too high.. which is why people need to get off their ass and stop voting for one of the two evil parties and start voting for someone who isnt evil. The stakes are too high to be voting for Harris or Trump.
@freemo
The thing is... that's not going to happen. It simply is not going to happen in this election or anytime soon.
Those who are policy nerds and news/politics junkies aren't that high numbers. Bread and circuses have made the general public comfortable/entertained enough they don't give two shits about the election.
That's why voter turnout is the way it is. Like Kevin said, "we need to play the hand we're dealt."
@Thumper1964
> The thing is... that's not going to happen. It simply is not going to happen in this election or anytime soon.
Irrelevant... "This evil person is so popular its unlikely people would pick someone who isnt evil" is a very very poor argument to convince someone to support evil people in positions of power.
Moreover the value of a vote is **not** if my vote matches who won. The value of a vote is if your vote had an **effect** on the outcome that is positive, or some future outcome. There are two ways your individual vote makes a difference 1) if it changes the numbers enough as to make people think int he future something (like a third party win) is more possible or 2) the election is an exact tie and you happen to be the deciding vote. If we consider point #1 then a third party is best choice because it fixes the problem you stated that no one would vote third party, it proves third party is more viable by showing higher support numbers that will swing support in future elections. For #2 a third party is also your best choice, as your vote is a much larger percentage of the share for the underdog, therefore the chance your one vote will make a difference in your local election is much higher since you represent a much higher share of the vote.
So yea if you actually care about your vote having a positive effect you would vote third party.
@freemo So you’re voting for Trump. @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
Nope, Chase Oliver.. Only way I would be voting for Trump is if I voted for Harris.
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
In a majoritarian, first-past-the-post voting system, you’re not at all voting FOR a 3rd party candidate. Use your thinker. If you want to change things, change the voting system itself.
There are 40 countries that ellect with FPTP and I dont know of one of them that claims a two-party system. So that is a bit of a myth that is easily enough debunked.
The 2 majority parties have also been replaced by a new major party 8 times in the history of the USA. We even within the USA we know we arent locked in to two parties.
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews when was the last time a POTUS was voted in who wasn’t one of the 2 at-the-time-current majority parties?
The 8 times I was talking about was specifically the presidential election. Moreover not only did a third party win, but in every case except for one the third party became the new majority party and the majority party that lost went out of existance. So 8 times.
The fact that it hasnt happened recently should tell you that it has nothing to do with FPTP (since we had that for our whole history and had 8 transitions) but rather something more recent to blame.
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews so each was on its way already to becoming a majority party and entrenching itself. Gotcha. And WHEN was the last one?
My only point was that THIS election, a 3rd party vote is nothing but a not-D and not-R vote, because there is no 3rd party groundswell.
Maybe you’ll luck out and get a political quake with a 3rd party rushing to the fore again, which most likely would be the MAGA party, as separate from the GOP. Would you like that?
@godofbiscuits @freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
Hello. In ALL American elections, "third party" "protest" votes are empty. They do nothing substantive.
Had we a parliamentary system, they could be used with good effect to build other parties.
That is not our system.
And, a reminder: ALL ELECTIONS for the next 50 years are going to be about unseating Fascists & electing w/#ProDemocracy candidates.
> Hello. In ALL American elections, "third party" "protest" votes are empty. They do nothing substantive.
A common, but very much inaccurate myth. They arent protest votes, they are votes for the best choice, nothing more, nothing less.
Second, there is no rational argument to claim a vote for someone who happens to win, when your vote does not decide/swing the result, somehow has more value than a vote for someone who looses. Since in both cases your vote didnt change the result, there is no argument either vote has more value than the other.
That said there **is** an argument for value for a third party vote, and that value exists regardless of who wins (as I explained earlier in the thread). So there is a very clear argument for a third party vote.
@godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@freemo @beccanalia @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
You’re just ignoring structural reality of the election system. And you should know better. Without proportional representation, extreme minority votes are erased. By definition of majoritarian counting.
So what part of all that do you feel developed in recent times but was absent in the past (when parties were switching more often)?
Seems to me I ddint ignore that all, those inequalities for minors were **worse** int he past, suggesting we would have had a 2 party system back then too, yet we didnt.
@beccanalia @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@freemo @godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
There is absolutely no value to a third party vote when US democracy hangs on the line and the margins of winning are so very narrow.
For, indeed, Biden won some states in 2020 by mere thousands of votes. Every vote counts.
As you're living in the Netherlands, you have no skin in the game re who wins the WH and re the perpetuation of US democracy.
Have you read PROJECT 2025? It's a promise.
@beccanalia @godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews > There is absolutely no value to a third party vote when US democracy hangs on the line and the margins of winning are so very narrow.
And yet, unless that vote comes down to a single vote, the choice of vote I make will have absolutely no change in the winner. So while a vote for a major party wont have any net positive good, a vote for a third party would, regardless of if they win (for the reasons I previously explained).
> For, indeed, Biden won some states in 2020 by mere thousands of votes. Every vote counts.
And yet even if i was one of those "mere thousands" of votes that Biden won his margin by... even then no matter who I voted for would not have changed if Biden won, thus produced no net good.
> As you're living in the Netherlands, you have no skin in the game re who wins the WH and re the perpetuation of US democracy.
No as I explained I live in the USA and the Netherlands, until recently also Israel. Right now I spend more time in the USA than the netherlands as this is where my company is.
> Have you read PROJECT 2025? It's a promise.
Yea, I am aware of the project, I know it was done without any input from Trump (supposidly) and Trump has denied any connection with it. That said I I would expect him to do things as bad or worse. Which is why its a good thing I am 1) voting against him and 2) ensuring my vote focuses on tearing down the 2 party system in the hope that once we accomplish that we will never see another person like Biden or Trump again.
@godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@freemo @godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
Wrong. Your vote IN ADDITION to millions of other votes MATTER.
That's what the process IS, the accumulation of votes that create a block of support in whatever is your home county / city from which you receive your ballot.
All votes matter. They matter so very much that the Now XoFascists (formerly the Republican Party) has spent the last EIGHT YEARS passing voter suppression laws.
Your vote matters!
a/
@freemo @godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
PRACTICALLY., the perpetuation of democracy means that then we may ALL have a little more time to elect Progs to power in our cities and states --well, and Congress, of course.
We will have the chance to elevate Progressive candidates to power and keep them there to build needed majorities of those voices.
And so we build in each successive election, denying Fascists power & building strong #ProDemocracy majorities.
> Wrong. Your vote IN ADDITION to millions of other votes MATTER.
IU never said your vote doesnt **matter**... i said your vote wont cause any different outcome to occur if you vote priumary party, but CAN have a positive impact if you vote third party... What "matters" is a philosophical thing, I care about action and effects. The effect of my action of voting red or blue is that it effects no change of any kind, whatever decision I make the outcome is the same. In contrast the effect of my action of voting third party is a positive effect (as I descrived in my lead in) regardless of who wins the actual election or if i effect it.
@godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@freemo @godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
This is a good conversation.
Alas, I need to sleep.
Until later, Folks.
> so each was on its way already to becoming a majority party and entrenching itself. Gotcha. And WHEN was the last one?
No actually not at all. In every case where a new party came in and took over a majority party it had <1% support int he previous election. These new parties that come in and replace existing majority parties in 7 out of 8 of the cases all happened over the course of a single election. In the one outlier it was over the court of 2 elections.
> And WHEN was the last one?
Quite some while back, Its about a generation back, something like 80 years ago. Which again is to my point, the fact that it has happened 8 times already and has not happened **recently** means the underlying cause is something recent and not FPTP which we had through that entire time.
> My only point was that THIS election, a 3rd party vote is nothing but a not-D and not-R vote, because there is no 3rd party groundswell.
As stated in virtually all cases of a switch of parties there was no building "ground swell" in all cases the switch of party was abrupt and over the course of just a single election.
Moreover as stated earlier, its a pointless argument because there is no rational argument that a vote for a candidate that wins, particularly when your vote does not swing the outcome, has any more value than a vote for a canddidate that looses, again, when your vote wouldnt have caused the swing. Since votes never really come down to a single vote, your vote will never swing the outcome, so there is little incentive for you to pick a canddidate you dont like as much simply because you think they would win.
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
First off, 80 years is more like FOUR generations.
Second, the last non Democratic, non Republican President was Millard Fillmore, who was elected not 80 years ago, but *173* years ago in 1850, and he was a member of the Whig Party, which collapsed shortly after Fillmore was out of office at the end of his only term, after which the Republican party, which rose from the ashes of the Whigs, the Free Soil party and similarly-driven Democrats, took its place.
So, you were saying?
@godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews > First off, 80 years is more like FOUR generations.
True usually when people talk about generations they talk about the time to average child bearing age, not the length of time of a lifetime. What I meant here was a single persons lifespan.
> Second, the last non Democratic, non Republican President was Millard Fillmore
To be clear here I didnt actually answer your question, because I misread it as being applicable to my claim.
I claimed the majority party changed 8 times and the last time was 80 years. That is **not** the same as saying a non-majority party won all those 8 times. Some of those 8 cases represent presidential wins, some of them simply represented a new majority party pushing out an old, but not corresponding with a presidential win during that year (and by some future point when the new party does win has now been established as a majority party so wouldnt count by your criteria).
Specifically in the case of 80 years ago, we are talking about a third-party becoming one of the two majority parties, but not becoming the winning party,. 80 years ago was also the one time out of 8 that I had mentioned that the thuird party did not retain majority status after wards. In all other cases, 7 of them, the new majority party remained a majority party and I beleive in all cases eventually had a presidential candidate in office.
@freemo @godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews you’ve lost me. What happened in 1944? There were Dixiecrats in 1948, George Wallace’s party in 1968, and Perot’s Reform party in 1992. I vaguely recall a movement around 1980 but blank on the Candidate - Anderson maybe? But all of these are examples of one-and-done movements, I’m lost regarding the idea of a third party becoming significant.
@CoachMark @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews @WrenArcher @godofbiscuits @freemo Well oops. I should not have commented on this thread. I joined @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews for a community of Harris supporters, not to get into an off-topic discussion on the historical viability of third parties. Anyone know a good way to filter the feed when it’s a firehose? I have only so much time and energy!
@JCzachurski John, the main 3rd-party provocateur has been booted from the Harris group — the convo should be more on-topic now. Hit me up if you encounter any more problems. And meanwhile, Harris-Walz FTW!
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
Hello. Your impression of Harris' record on LGBTQ and Women's rights is absolutely factually wrong.
Her presence as POTUS is WELCOMED by both communities and by the organizations that are constantly fighting for the civil rights of those groups.
https://19thnews.org/2024/07/kamala-harris-lgbtq-support/
https://www.advocate.com/news/kamala-harris-pulse-pride-reception
https://www.washingtonblade.com/2024/08/05/kamala-harris-represents-hope-for-lgbtq-indians/
https://glaad.org/fact-sheet-harris-jobs-economy-housing/
https://womensmediacenter.com/news-features/the-impact-of-vice-president-kamala-harris
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/23/harris-voice-abortion/
There are more articles.
So we just going to ignore the SESTA act she supported that denied trans women of the hormone or all the danger she put sex workers in more generally from that act? Yea ok....
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
She owns up to it and stands by that decision. However, she is STILL accepted by the LGBTQ community and is WELCOMED as a POTUS candidate. I TRUST THEIR decisions re who they choose to support.
Her history of LGBTQ support reaches back to 2004 -- earlier & more constant than Pres. Obama's at that time.
This is a good article about her history with the LGBTQ community and issues that concern them the most: https://19thnews.org/2020/08/kamala-harris-complicated-lgbtq-choice/
@beccanalia @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews > She owns up to it and stands by that decision.
Exactly, which is why she is an absolute disgusting human being. If she actually apologized and recognized it and many of her decisions were wrong, if she showed an ounce of humility she might have stood a chance with me.
> However, she is STILL accepted by the LGBTQ community and is WELCOMED as a POTUS candidate.
The fact that an abusee praises their abuser isnt an argument that will hold much weight with me. Also speaking about the LGBT community as if its a monolithic thing with a single opinion is just not accurate. I certainly know some LGBT who support her, and an huge number who dont as well. Most who support her I find buy into the 2-party system myth rather than due to actually liking her (most of the time).
> Her history of LGBTQ support reaches back to 2004 -- earlier & more constant than Pres. Obama's at that time.
Her "support" is words, her actions shows very much the contrary.
> This is a good article about her history with the LGBTQ community and issues that concern them the most: https://19thnews.org/2020/08/kamala-harris-complicated-lgbtq-choice/
Does this aerticle contain only praising references or does it include a mix of both her good points and her mistakes? I dont mind reading an article but based on how you talk it sounds more like its going to be a propaganda piece and ill be wasting my time listening to someone tell me why I should be as bias as they are and find nothing wrong with her of any kind. If the report is honest and includes good and bad in an actually objective sense, then ill be happy to read.
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews a wasted vote that helps DonOLD.
Then why are you posting in this group for Harris?
None of us care if you want to bring about genocide, misogyny, and bigotry because you would rather feel good about who you vote for than the effects of what your vote actually causes.
Go for it. I’m sure there are lovely echo chambers on here just waiting for you.
@JasonPerseus @freemo@qoto.org Ignore them. They've chosen to make themselves irrelevant by not voting, so take them up on it.
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher
unfortunately you have to play the hand you are dealt, and not the one you want.
either trump or Harris will be president. you can choose to stay out of it and accept the majority vote, or cast ur vote for the person that better aligns with your goals. two thirds of eligible voters don't vote, and could easily make a difference if they did.
for me the choice is a no-brainer.
@freemo @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
Your concern for trans rights is so strong that you're helping enact Project 2025 that promises to harm trans people?
Amazing.