• Deceptichum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Well it’s simple, what are the Democrat voters going to do, vote 3rd party?

    They’re held hostage to the party, so the party has no need to reflect them, it just has to be less bad than the Republicans.

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      Of everyone who claims no third party could win would actually coalesce around and vote for a third party candidate, the third party would win. Their children apparently aren’t suffering and starving enough, yet.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        That’s not true for the president. They are not picked by popular vote but the electoral college, and it’s “first to get half the Electoral College votes”, not who ever gets the most. It takes a literal majority, otherwise Congress or some other suits just get to pick.

        The US is absolutely not a democracy when it comes to 2/3rds of its branches of government.

        • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Considering the Senate is just two assholes per state and the House would have over a 1,000 members if we had the same ratio as 1789 I’d expand that to all three branches.

          It’s not a legitimate government, but we all pretend it is. Especially the people with guns.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Well, a “legitimate” government just needs to retain control, and they definitely have control. Though yes, the US is definitely not a legitimate democracy.

        • Maeve@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Idk about that. Maybe, but if we keep doing the same thing expecting different results, we’re definitely not getting them.

          • Zorque@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            The problem is you’re only focusing on one branch.

            Congress has an amazing amount of power… the problem is a majority of them are really only concerned with their own piece of the United States of Pie. Their first, second, and only concern is being re-electable. Start focusing on electing more people who actually have the people’s (all the people, not just their specific constituents, mind) best interest at heart and you can have effective change.

            Constantly focusing on the Presidential election, and only the Presidential election and you lose out on most of the power in this country.

            • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              Start focusing on electing more people who actually have the people’s (all the people, not just their specific constituents, mind) best interest at heart and you can have effective change.

              The problem is that the person you want to elect will lose to someone who selfishly serves their constituents, because their constituents vote for them.

        • Maeve@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s true but many actual leftists will coalesce behind a better option.

      • Zorque@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        No they wouldn’t, it would, at most, be a deadlock between the three parties that the House would decide on. One would hope they would go with the one with the most votes, but in reality they can pick anyone. Including someone who wasn’t even one of the top three candidates.

        Not to mention all the people who want a “third party” aren’t necessarily going to vote for the same third party. They all want their own person. Most likely none of them would get anywhere near the majority popular vote, much less any electoral votes.

    • seathru@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      what are the Democrat voters going to do, vote 3rd party?

      Sit on their hands like they did in 2016.

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        You mean the election that had record voter turnout all over the country? Is that what sitting on your hands means?

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        Unless you’re in Nee Hampshire right?

        Or like we saw with Bernie, they’ll sabotage your campaign and rig the DNC.