🎓 Doc Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@qoto.org

@Raccoon What do you mean off? They are almost exactly at what was predicted.. Vegas had Harris at 43% and 57% chance for Trump winning, which lines up quite well.

You mean with a specific pole or something maybe?

@cobratbq

And no, you arent stealing my time. I can always not answer :) All good.

@cobratbq

Obviously a dictatorship of a single party is worse than a looser dictatorship run by two parties..

One of the reasons to oppose a 2 party system is because its the step right before full dictatorship.

@timorl

Thank you.

@ABScientist

@ech

Yes the "there were always 2 parties" is the illusion I spoke of.

In a FPTP system if the underlying real support for parties is red: 40% blue: 39% lib: 21% then the vote will come out as something like red 51%, blue 49%. However in the next election if the real preference shifts than the vote will immediately and drastically change as well to reflect the new party.

In other words, while the votes themselves will give the illusion of a two party system by converting true support to a 2-party vote outcome not reflecting true support. The real underlying support will not reflect a 2-party system and there will be **no** preference for the same 2 parties to win from one election to the next.

We see this with the historic changes in parties, in every election where a new third party becomes dominate within a single election a previously near 50% party shoots completely down to less than 2% and the third party immediately shoots up to near 50%. In other words the numbers move rapidly and shifts in primary parties easily change.

So again this doesnt reflect a 2-party system, just an illusion that reinforces the myth and thus is self fullfilling.

@cobratbq

@timorl

I was unaware of that. Have any links?

@ABScientist

@ech Its all I got :)

@robryk

Seems you are correct and I mistook the SESTA act for her campaigning to deny trans women gender-afirming care as the attorny general. Her office fought pretty strongly to deny gender-afirming care to trans women in jail, which came to be a big issue at one point. Her office's commentary on the case reinforcing the standpoint.

But you are right it wasnt actually directly in SESTA that I can find, that said i havent had time to go through it all.

@rchusid

@pieist @QOTO

Our system admins and developers discuss their progress in the QOTO chat, thats your best bet to keep up with the progress. We fixed a few of them last night, a few are still outstanding, the fixes havent been pushed to the site yet.

Follow along here: https://matrix.to/#/#QOTO:qoto.org

@ABScientist

well to be fair i never said he would pull out military aide completly. So under him the palestinians arent out of the woods. They just have a bit more of a fighting chance if he follows his pattern from last time.

@stux @lowqualityfacts

I doubt the accounts would delete themselves though, that would be too easy to identify them.

Keep in mind on both those platforms that is a natural pattern. When i get a lot of followers in one day it always rebounds shortly after.

Just a reminder, under Trump spending on the genocide against the Palestinian people went from 4.7 b at the end of Obama/begining of Trump's time in office, down to 4.3b byt he end (just military support for israel not humanitarian aide).

Under Biden Harris it went the opposite direction, from a spending of 4.3b at the start to a whopping 12.5b in support of the genocide in 2024.

I cant say I'm happy with Trump winning, but at least I can say the palestinians might be better off. All I know is this is why Harris, more than anything else, was never going to see my vote.

#USPol #Palestine

@cobratbq

I've seen the video before. It, and ones like it, are what i mean when I say even the theory effectively admits that it is only an illusion anyway and doesnt represent a true 2-party system (that the support will flip in large movements rather than small).

@cobratbq

> I think it is a bit of a sinkhole that if you get stuck with two major parties it's hard to get away from that.

If that is true then why dont any other elections get "stuck" like we did? Also why is it the states that moved to RCV, which should have eliminated the 2 party system, yet they still vote according to the 2-party myth, showing it is simply the gullibility in believing in the 2-party system, nothing physical making it real.

The truth is really much simpler than that, everyone likes to think so highly of the people because it sounds inspirising, and everyone wants to blame the system and the leaders and some corruption and while all those are issues they arent really our problems they are our symptoms. Really america has one problem.. the people, they are vile, and they are gullible and **very** easily manipulated. One of those manipulations is to convince them that the 2-party system is real. We will always have a 2-party system because it isnt real, its in their head, but their dumb enough that once they beleive something it never changes because all the evidence in the world never changes an american mind. I mean already the evidence is overwhelming that that 2-party system is purely a myth that exists only because it is believed, and yet, look how hard everyone believes it, all because they refuse to accept americans are just broken people who do stupid things.

@cobratbq

Its a myth because it is only the beleif in it that creates the effect at all. If no one thought there was a two party system there wouldnt be one.

Few points of evidence:

* Before people in the USA thought there was a two party system, there wasnt. Despite the voting system not having significiantly changed prior to the last 100 years the primary parties changed all the time. Throughout US history the 2 dominate parties have been replaced 8 times

* Other countries with a first-past-the-post voting system do not show a tendency to a 2-party system. There are countless elections around the world using this approach that dont consistently have the same 2 parties win

* Even if you model out the debunked theory claiming FPTP results in 2 party it doesnt make sense. Under that model it would only produce an illusion of a two party system (where the real support concentrates in the top 2 in votes). Nothing about the model would keep the same 2 parties in power, it would just cause the switching between parties to be abrupt (third parties with little votes in previous years suddenly jumping to 51% support over a single election). So even in pure theory if we accept the myth in that context it is still not real in any meaningful way.

@sufferforme I am impressed by your commitment to your faith.

As expected I'm both proud of america for seeing Harris for who she is and not voting for her but likewise disapointed to see Trump get support. Still gullible buying the two party myth.

Well 4 years of trump,back to riots I guess.

@sergeant

All of our stuff has matrix rooms, including QOTO and our open source suite. You can join the QOTO lobby here if you want to interact with the employees who maintain QOTO and the servers/services:

https://matrix.to/#/#QOTO:qoto.org

@aosinski I think it depends on the type of betting. If its like horse betting where the spread is defined by the number of bets to ensure the house wins no matter what, then yes. But when the odds are calculated by the housae and fixed I'd argue it is more reliable since the house stands to loose a lot of money, so they are compelled to make accurate predictions or else loose tons of money.