• Bremmy
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    This gives big “RFK Jr. will steal votes from Kamala”

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    Note: Jill is literally paid to run as a spoiler, and if you look at her actual policies, lot of transphobia, ablism, and support for pseudoscience

    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      This shouldn’t surprise anyone considering her source.

  • hearmeroar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 hours ago

    hate to “BURST” your bubble, but Trump is destroying america and destroying the Republican do nothing party! and Democrats are winning hands down!

  • geneva_convenience
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Kamala Harris can win over all of those Jill Stein voters with a single sentence.

    Stupid Jill Stein’s entire campaign is based on the premise that Democrats would keep a genocide going for an entire year into election season.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Let’s completely forget everything but the election for this hypothetical. Do you think Harris coming out and saying “I will immediately stop supporting Israel” she will automatically win? Or do you think it’s more likely the Jewish community would condemn her words and move over to the rubber stamp in chief who would give Israel even more support with fewer conditions? (Ignoring the personal favors he asks for of course.)

      Yall act like this is a simple black and white issue, when it’s obviously not. Even when you boil it down to “just” the election.

      • geneva_convenience
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Yes an arms embargo net her an easy win.

        The Jewish community does not care about sending infinite weapons to Netanyahu.

          • geneva_convenience
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Genocide is not a core tenant in the Jewish faith. To say all Jews are Zionists is incredibly antisemitic or you.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Ah yes, in a world where simply protesting the murder of tens of thousands of Palestinians is branded “antisemitism,” directly preventing military aid to Israel will somehow be perfectly fine.

          Please, tell me more about this magical fairytale land you live in, it certainly seems a hell of a lot more likable than reality.

          • MisterScruffy
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            14 hours ago

            Netanyahu is campaigning for Trump. Coming out against a foreign pm because that pm is helping your election competitor shouldn’t be that difficult to pull off.

      • BMTea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Oooh, so Kamala is playing 5D chess and will do an about-face on Biden’s genocide policy when she enters office? Because her past record is so stellar on this issue? Like that time she had wine from an illegal settlement served at the White House? She and her boss wipe their ass with the rule of all and all pretensions of even basic human morality on an international level, but she’s not Trump!

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          Strawman much? Or are you arguing with voices I can’t hear?

          Edit: Y’know what? I’m curious. How do you envision her coming out against Israel going? Let’s hear your version of how things would go, because I can’t hear these arguments as anything other than “I support Trump.”

          So please, enlighten me as to how this would go down without Trump being elected and making the situation worse.

  • Talisker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Preemptively rolling out that “Democrats losing is the fault of everyone except the Democrats” narrative, again.

    Must have seen the MN polling numbers…

  • acargitz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I don’t understand why it is taken for granted that if Stein wasn’t a candidate the people who vote for her would be voting for the Democrats instead. Just as likely they would not vote at all or vote for some other protest candidate.

    • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      I saw some stats on this in another thread, most third party voters wouldn’t be voting if their candidate wasn’t on the ballot, and most third party voters benefit Democrats down ballot. The spoiler candidate logic has always been sketchy.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        The spoiler candidate logic has always been sketchy.

        it depends on how popular third party is. If they’re getting 20-30% of the vote but no more it’s extremely common for them to drop out to support the primary instead.

        Anything lower than 10% and it probably doesn’t matter much. RFK jr is a decent exmaple of this, although he was more “bipartisan” in terms of support, apparently.

        • turmacar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          The last US Presidential election decided with more than a 10% margin was Regan. The only vote with above a 5% margin this millennium was Obama’s first term.

          “Anything lower than 10% and it probably doesn’t matter much” is a weird take.

          • Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 day ago

            As in that’s such a small group they are probably more dedicated to their candidate and won’t vote for anyone else.

            Again. You can’t expect to remove candidates from a ballot and their support will all just vote Democrat. It’s a false logic to assume they belong to anywhere else other than their vote block.
            When you have a large base that small percentage that’s willing to vote off base ends up being a larger percentage of the vote overall as well.

            Currently you would have to get every single last green party voter to give up and vote Blue which is an impossible ask. So even at 5% of the vote I’m not sure they could swing an election with enough if their candidate asked nicely.
            They went high with their estimate though.

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              23 hours ago

              yeah, my 10% figure was probably generous, but i think i would probably stand by it in most cases, as unless you’re polling 20% at bare minimum you’re probably dropping out of primaries anyway out of fears of “siphoning” votes. Realistically the outcome between the two alternatives here is probably marginal, if at all.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            23 hours ago

            this is assuming that the voter split isn’t roughly at random. Jill stein is running on either extremely far left anti war sentiment, which we see among the right as well, along with cozying up to russia apparently, which only tankies and farther right people want.

            That alone is pretty mixed.

            Generally unless the candidate is going to pull a large enough share of the votes to the point where it enact a significant draw from the candidate hence my 20-30% figure, it really won’t do anything to the voter turnout. Like i said, as we saw with RFK, it was roughly split down the middle.

            Jill stein might pull more far lefties, but that’s only because they refuse to vote in their best interest lmao. They wouldn’t vote anyway.

            • WamGams@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              19 hours ago

              Conservative voters are not anti-war, they are anti-Russian war, and the Republican ticket already addresses that. These people don’t historically vote for left wing parties, nor are they in this case.

              The green party’s base is pot smokers and college students who haven’t gotten wise to the green grift yet.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                17 hours ago

                Conservative voters are not anti-war, they are anti-Russian war, and the Republican ticket already addresses that. These people don’t historically vote for left wing parties, nor are they in this case.

                it depends. Some of them are anti-war because they’re isolationist, and they don’t want to be a part of the ongoing global politics thingy. Some of them as you said, are anti russian war, which is absolutely true. A lot of these same republicans also support israel, although that might be construed differently since they are technically an ally of the US. But that is pretty the case there.

                The green party’s base is pot smokers and college students who haven’t gotten wise to the green grift yet.

                it’s either stupid people who don’t know anything about politics, or people who think the green party is a real political party lol.

    • celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      Because a vote abstention is a vote for the person in the lead. If Harris is in the lead, then every single American who abstains from voting is essentially helping her win, but the same is true if Trump is in the lead. Convincing Green voters that it makes more sense in a FPTP system to vote Democrat as its the closest party to their preferred ideology is a statistically productive activity.

      • basmati@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Voting for genocide will never be something you can convince humans is in their best interest as close to their preferred ideology.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    jesus christ this thread is a fucking nightmare bro

    i feel like i’ve done three pounds of ketamine just scrolling through these comments.

  • bloodfart
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    18 hours ago

    If you want to vote third party but don’t like the greens, the party for socialism and liberation is running de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian statehood!

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    131
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    2 days ago

    !rcv@ponder.cat

    Any third party that’s telling you to vote for them under FPTP, but isn’t heavily promoting RCV to fix the system, isn’t trying to win. They’re trying to spoil the FPTP election.

    RCV is already law in a surprisingly large number of places. It may change the majority in the house in this upcoming election, because the difference in vote-counting within the two states that use it for US congressional elections might be enough to change the razor-thin outcome.

    RCV is on the ballot, in one form or another, in 7 states and DC this year. Go vote. You might be able to fix the system, and move toward the future that all the people in this thread who are being vocal about Jill Stein say that they want. Remember back when marijuana was illegal? That changed. This can change too, and it would be glorious, for a lot of important goals that a lot of people claiming to support Jill Stein claim they’re supportive of. It would be practical and realistic. It would work.

    Anyone in this thread who is saying Jill Stein is extremely important, but haven’t been saying anything about ranked choice voting or changing the voting system to make third parties realistic: Why? What’s your goal, why did you make that decision about your priorities?

    The answer is obvious, of course. But it’s fun to ask.

    @anticolonialist@lemmy.world, why?

    I’ll add more @s as more people pipe up. They always do.

    Register and vote, for RCV as well as for Harris. We have 25 more days.

    https://www.vote.org/

      • rsuri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        This video was clearly created by leopard supporters who just wanna be mad at tiger for leopard’s failure to beat gorilla. Leopards are basically just light gorillas. Vote tiger.

    • flames5123@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      RCV is just slightly better than FTP. Let’s go with the bests and support STAR now. If we do all RCV now, we can rage the system in the next 40 years due to people saying “but we just changed it!”

      • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        RCV in single member electorates is pretty meh, and yeah RCV in general has its issues. But saying it’s “slightly better” than FPTP is a MASSIVE understatement.

        Change begets change, don’t be against changing to something much better, just because it isn’t perfect.

      • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Star is flawed too, it incentivises people who are voting for the underdog to not rank any other candidate or your own ballot could spoil your preferred candidate. If all thrid party voters voted to mathmatically optimize their candidates chance, Star voting wouldn’t change anything for them. RCV is better if you’re trying to actually engage thrid parties.

        Star doesn’t fix the ‘spoiler effect’ unless you decide not to give your preferred candidate the largest mathematical advantage your ballot can provide, and if you do want to ballot optimize, you should only rank one person, and then were right back to where we started.

      • JaymesRS@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        Paraphrase from Historian Kevin Kruse:

        “No, l’m not voting [for the better one of the two major parties in a first past the post system] this election. But rest assured that when the Trump administration starts arresting my nonwhite neighbors and forcing them onto the trains, I’m going to have a pretty big frown on my face. That way, everyone will know it’s not my fault.”

        • TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Boy if you hate non-white people getting arrested you’re gonna have a bad time finding the person who wrote the crime bill that most often leads to that.

          The point of 3rd party is that they cannot support a DNC that is just fucking cool with simply being slightly less bad than hitler as long as the other guy is literally hitler. Because since 2012 they’ve refused to adopt anything progressive. Because they’ve continually sued to stop progressives. Because they’ve used their own money against progressive democratic candidates in primaries to stop them from getting in, instead of using that money to promote the DNC. They are actively against progressives, so I don’t see the point in blaming the 0.31% of the vote for something the DNC is actively working against. We’ve gone from “we need change” in the DNC to “nothing will fundamentally change”. So I mean… yeah… what do you expect from progressives when neither of the two parties represents them.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        I didn’t ask whether David Doonan had published a press release on a janky web site which was mostly complaining about Democrats trying to remove Green Party members from the ballot, in this FPTP election. This also somehow finds a way to blame the lack of RCV on the Democrats, when a lot of them support it. Here’s a list:

        https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting/endorsers/

        I don’t see any Green Party people there. I have never heard Jill Stein talk about it, and I’ve heard her say a bunch of things. That’s strange to me. But regardless of that, that’s not what I asked. I also didn’t ask whether you plan to vote for Kamala Harris. My question was:

        Anyone in this thread who is saying Jill Stein is extremely important, but haven’t been saying anything about ranked choice voting or changing the voting system to make third parties realistic: Why? What’s your goal, why did you make that decision about your priorities?

        Do you want to answer that question? You don’t have to. You can change the subject again, if you’d like to.

        • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          2 days ago

          Green Party and Jill Stein has been talking about RCV way before for Democrats ever started talking about it. And I’m kind of doubting that you listen to anything that anybody, says except for the dnc

          • BrokenGlepnir@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            And yet they aren’t running anyone in Alaska, a state that implemented it this election. Are they campaigning against the ballot initiative to remove it at least?

            Edit: and yet no one has ever replied to me on this. Can they seriously not find a candidate for a party seen as the most environmentalists party in a state filled with conservationists, that the democrats only take some elections in because of their SLIGHTLY better environmental policies?

      • nexguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Your comment is fascist and while I was reading it my fascist shoes became untied. I would tie them but the strings are fascist. I apologize for using so many fascist letters in my words. At least periods aren’t fascist… yet.

      • Pfeffy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        The green party likes it for presidential elections where RCV doesn’t really come into play at all because there aren’t three viable parties. They are just making up grievance politics because rcv would never affect them since they never run for anything but president. Democrats are educated enough to know the green party is a scam and Republicans are too ignorant to vote for anything named green.

      • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        37
        ·
        2 days ago

        Certainly not like the DNC which sued to keep RCV off the DC ballot, or Alexandria county VA which opted not to implement it in 2024 because it might confuse the black community?

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          There are a lot of people in politics who are opposing RCV, because it erodes their power. Some of them are Democrats. Sure. That wasn’t my question. My question was, why is the Green Party spending so much energy pursuing a doomed effort which can only elect Donald Trump, and such an infinitesimal amount of energy on advocating for fixing the system in a way that would let them actually get elected in the future?

          It’s a strange allocation of priorities.

          I did look around for things the Green Party has done to support Ranked Choice Voting. You’ve sent me the RV tag search, which has a press release from January 2024 and the one before that, from February 2023, dealing with RCV. Hooray.

          I did find a substantive thing that Jill Stein herself did to support it in 2017, which actually had something to do with Maine putting it into action: https://mainegreens.org/news/in-the-news/107-jill-stein-joins-push-to-save-ranked-choice-voting-in-maine

          That’s good. Why hasn’t she done anything since then? Why is always the focus on attacking the Democrats, and the focus if at all beyond that is a tepid hand-wave in the direction of RCV, when that is the solution that would lead to them being able to get elected? I didn’t look very hard, but I did look, and this was the most recent thing I was able to find since January:

          https://mainemorningstar.com/2024/10/07/green-party-candidate-jill-stein-praises-maine-voting-system-as-means-to-oppose-genocide/

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    2 days ago

    It was nice to see the World News community finally realize that the DNC has been doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot for a year.

    Maybe this community will finally catch on and connect the dots between a random ass 3rd party getting blamed for stealing votes away from the Democrats, and Democrats not actually meeting the core demands of their constituency.

    Or maybe not…

    • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      Maybe someday we’ll have people blame the DNC for choosing to back unpopular opinions/policies losing the popularity contest against “Literal Evil Fascist with the Playbook of How To Do Evil 101, but Fox News said it’s cool”.

      But instead we need a new scapegoat for when Greens come in 4th place to the Libertarian’s “I just wanna date this 14 year old with my rifle and say the N-word out loud without backlash.”

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe someday we’ll have people blame the DNC for choosing to back unpopular opinions/policies losing the popularity contest against

        the DNC is choosing unpopular policy? Brother this is a representative democracy. If harris wins, it’s because it was the popular policy/stances. There is literally no alternative here unless you thing there is a deep state rigging the elections or that the majority of the american populous isn’t real or something lmao.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 day ago

          the DNC is choosing unpopular policy? Brother this is a representative democracy. If harris wins, it’s because it was the popular policy/stances.

          Uhh… No. Fracking isn’t even popular as a majority position in PA where she’s pushing it. But she’s gonna anyways cause for some reason the minority is the “better” place to scrape votes from?

          And in a 2 party system if one side is “literally evil” the other basically knows they have a blank check to run on as long as it’s not the same policy as the evil side or else why would voters swap sides when evil wasn’t a disqualifier?

          We have polls that literally tell us what the popular positions are. Harris is not listening to those so whatever the reason is its not popularity.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Uhh… No. Fracking isn’t even popular as a majority position in PA where she’s pushing it. But she’s gonna anyways cause for some reason the minority is the “better” place to scrape votes from?

            oh im sorry i didn’t realize kamala was running for the federal presidential role of PA specifically.

            And in a 2 party system if one side is “literally evil” the other basically knows they have a blank check to run on as long as it’s not the same policy as the evil side or else why would voters swap sides when evil wasn’t a disqualifier?

            this is sort of true, but a substantial chunk of US voters believe that kamala harris is the “evil” not donald trump. so this isn’t exactly a bull in a china shop situation here. This is more like a bull vaguely around a china shop.

            We have polls that literally tell us what the popular positions are. Harris is not listening to those so whatever the reason is its not popularity.

            i mean that’s a fair statement, but she wouldn’t be running on fracking if she thought it was detrimental, so it’s either not a huge concern for most voters, or there is something more than being let on in the rhetoric here.

            At the very least we know kamala will more than likely support a real EPA, so maybe the idea is to push environmental concerns from fracking into the territory of the EPA and local areas, rather than doing a federal ban on fracking. Which i would be fully in support of. The EPA should absolutely have more power.

            • Dragonstaff@leminal.space
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              22 hours ago

              i mean that’s a fair statement, but she wouldn’t be running on fracking if she thought it was detrimental, so it’s either not a huge concern for most voters, or there is something more than being let on in the rhetoric here.

              You’re begging the question here. If Democrats paid attention to their voters we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Generally, critics of Dem strategy believe that they are too beholden to wealthy donors.

              Democrats blame Jill Stein for Clinton’s loss. But Dems can’t force her not to run again, or people not to vote for her. If Kamala doesn’t win, it will be because she didn’t convince enough people to vote for her, not because Jill Stein is running.

              • farngis_mcgiles@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                16 hours ago

                If Kamala doesn’t win, it will be because she didn’t convince enough people to vote for her, not because Jill Stein is running.

                dems absolutely can’t handle this

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                22 hours ago

                You’re begging the question here. If Democrats paid attention to their voters we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Generally, critics of Dem strategy believe that they are too beholden to wealthy donors.

                are you proposing that a candidate should work to appeal to 100% of their voter base, rather than the most broad constituent beliefs of it? The wealthy donor thing is a problem, over party lines, that’s an interesting one to solve so i’m not really surprised there.

                But to be fair, if we did stop fracking, it might be detrimental to the oil market right now, considering the position that the global oil industry is in, is, less than ideal. So there is also a reason to push for fracking given the current global market at the moment.

                Democrats blame Jill Stein for Clinton’s loss. But Dems can’t force her not to run again, or people not to vote for her. If Kamala doesn’t win, it will be because she didn’t convince enough people to vote for her, not because Jill Stein is running.

                i consider this a voter skill issue, rather than a candidate issue, just vote for the better person lmao. Voting for stein is like voting for a brick wall, except one that wastes money.

                • Dragonstaff@leminal.space
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  21 hours ago

                  a candidate should work to appeal to 100% of their voter base

                  Less a proposal and more of a fact: People won’t vote for a candidate who does not support the issues that they support. You can’t expect a voter who is against fracking to vote for a candidate who supports fracking.

                  If Kamala supports fracking and the majority of voters do not, it is up to her to change, not the voters.

                  i consider this a voter skill issue

                  Yeah… Democrats want to blame the voters so they can continue to court wealthy donors. If everyone in Michigan promises to “Vote Blue No Matter Who” then they can continue arming Israel without losing any Muslim votes. Unfortunately that’s not how things work.

    • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      51 minutes ago

      What kills me about this is if the neolib dems had taken just a moment at the primary to cast their vote for undecided to show the Dem leadership that genocide was a non negotiable issue they should do the right thing on, it might have worked.
      It would have cost absolutely nothing, and we might be coasting to an easy victory right now. Instead we’re here.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        What kills me about this is if the neolib dems had taken just a moment at the primary to cast their vote for undecided to show the Dem leadership that genocide was a non negotiable issue they should do the right thing on, it might have worked.

        wait, what’s stopping them? Not voting because it’s not important to them? Sounds like democracy working as intended to me.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        2 days ago

        100%

        But look around this place. Its still the same Blue MAGA here trying to bash peoples head in (now for Harris, then for Biden) as before.

        The same people that would demand we drive off a cliff with Biden at the wheel are the ones insisting that we need to support Harris in-spite of her genocide policy, instead of trying to move her on the issue. Like we literally need her to fix her policy or she literally can’t get elected. And its self-evident in the data we have. She’s now losing, not even accounting for the structural biases we should very much expect from RW fuckery and the EC.

        Like just come out against genocide. Its fucking easy. It can be a fucking lie. Just fucking lie to us so we can convince enough people to get you elected Harris.

        • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Man. I wonder if we are going to lose. Its definitely possible at this point, but hard to imagine. How awful are our dem candidates to lose to an insane peice of human trash like Trump

          • Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Pro fracking. Anti gun control. Pro Electoral College. Pro “entrepreneur” economics. Can sip a beer and barely look disgusted. Pro war. Pro taxation and tariffs. Anti environmental protections for big businesses. And pro death penalty.

            I mean we already had early 2000 Republican presidents and the Republicans want someone worse and the Democrats that want change don’t want it either.

            So pretty bad.

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 day ago

          TBF, Blue MAGA on lemmy didn’t really come out of the wood work in full force until Biden stepped down.

          Now they’re blame shifting before Harris has even lost.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            Oh no they were definable here before. I’ve got the receipts, the saved threads , etc. I mean hell some are mods. But you know what happened? They dumped those accounts, if they weren’t super well known. if you want names I’ve got names.

            • treefrog@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              They were here before.

              But once Biden dropped the down votes for criticism of the Democrats got fierce.

              That’s all I’m saying.

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                And you are 💯 correct. I’ve done my best to document it, because to me, its an incredibly important and interesting phenomena. It’s almost exactly what happens to MAGA in their toxic dismissal of a shared reality. I’m going to save this and when I’m a bit more ready with something, I may reach out.

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 day ago

              Hahaha yeah man people forget how vitriolic and cruel the Blues were when told their candidate might lose.

              Refuse to be told they might need to change tactics and double down on slamming face first into a brick wall for the sake of not having to question their beliefs and having someone else to blame.

              But they are coming back now again that the “hope” has worn off and nothing feels different. Got to punch down to keep their self cope up.

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 day ago

                Punch down to keep the cope up.

                That is a great way to out it. They wouldn’t be as emboldened if not for the also toxic moderation in this place .

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      2 days ago

      People just want someone to be mad at in case Harris loses

      Because Harris losing simply could not be her own fault, if it happened

      • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Look at the response Chappell Roan got. Even though she said she was gonna vote for Kamala, the fact that she had criticism got her fukken canceled by the blue maga crowd.

        • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Which is wild because most people, especially people her age, have a very similar non-partisan opinion which imo should be encouraged as a sign of critical and independent thought.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          in defense of not her, she did make a pretty fucking stupid statement. It was worded like ass and not very clear on the message. Idk why she was surprised by the response she garnered.

          You can’t just show up on the internet, make a vague political statement to hundreds of thousands of people, and then expect every single one of them to understand it lmao.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        There is a world in which it’s not her fault or anyone else’s fault. You can run a flawless campaign and lose for reasons beyond your control, or any other single stakeholder’s control.

        • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah, Picard Principle at play here. You can commit no mistakes and still lose. I can argue that there are a few things that Harris could do better. Americans are stupid and cruel as a whole…you tact too hard to the Left, you piss off the moderate voters and they stay home, vote Third Party, or worse, vote Trump, and if you tact too hard to the Right, you piss off liberal voters, and while they are less likely to vote Trump, you still lose their votes.

          Man, we shouldn’t even be having this conversation at all. Trump is a convicted felon. He should be in jail right now, getting ready for the next trials.

          • Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I’m amazed that anyone is still buying the “moderate voters” bullshit. Just try to picture an actual human being who’s politics have left them scratching their heads between Harris and Trump. “If only Harris would do a little more for corporations. Oh well, I guess I’ll stick with the racist orange insurrectionist.”

            It’s not about moderate voters. If anything it’s about the median voter, but that’s a very different animal. The median voter in this country is wacky as fuck with political opinions that are all over the place. The one thing they almost all have in common is that they hate establishment politicians from both parties. Harris is trying to get their votes by being even more establishment, and it’s going to be a disaster.

            The one hope we have is the end of RvW. If that’s woken up enough women voters, then we still can win. Republicans may have screwed themselves so badly that even establishment Democrats can beat them. Let’s hope.

            • treefrog@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              It’s not voters she’s courting with her center right politics.

              It’s corporate campaign donors who are afraid of Trump’s instability.

              • Krauerking@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                Oh for sure. The people most concerned with Trumps policies are the wealthy who think it might hurt their business.

                Porn, import, healthcare industries. Lots of rich people who see they won’t get fair treatment either for their wealth alone like they expect from the duopoly they have been benefitting from for decades.

                Its why MAGA think its somehow great cause everyone will burn but somehow they will escape the fire because… God?

                Its corruption and insanity everywhere you look.

            • aesthelete@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 day ago

              Just try to picture an actual human being who’s politics have left them scratching their heads between Harris and Trump. “If only Harris would do a little more for corporations. Oh well, I guess I’ll stick with the racist orange insurrectionist.”

              The more I think about it, the more I realize that economics is a pseudoscience specifically designed to couch terrible actions of governments and corporations behind inevitability arguments.

              After all, we cannot have prices rise.

              So, we must continue with the sweatshops. We must continue with the factory farms. We must continue to drill baby drill. We must continue to build shoddy houses on flood plains…and on and on and on.

              When people say they trust Trump more “with the economy”, it’s perhaps because they know he’ll continue all of the above with a sloppy, sweaty grin and a shitty, little dance.

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              I’m amazed that anyone is still buying the “moderate voters” bullshit. Just try to picture an actual human being who’s politics have left them scratching their heads between Harris and Trump. “If only Harris would do a little more for corporations. Oh well, I guess I’ll stick with the racist orange insurrectionist.”

              that’s not how moderate voters work, you’re ascribing 100s of years of politics onto the one weird 8 year period, the only moderate voting for trump is a republican. And that’s only because they’re stupid and don’t do research.

              Like to be clear, moderates are not swing voters, and swing voters are not moderates, there is no “scratching your head” here. This isn’t a real scenario.

              Just to expand upon this a bit, moderate dem voters are voting for kamala, moderate republicans could probably go either way, depends on how much they care about the parties or how much research they’ve done.

              Independents will do as they have always done, voting weirdly for no particular reason.

              Republicans may have screwed themselves so badly that even establishment Democrats can beat them. Let’s hope.

              this is completely true, republicans have basically fractured themselves in half, if not thirds, if trump gets out of the running, the party collapses, simple as that. Dems are in a massive position right now since the harris campaign is pushing for more moderate voters (the majority of the party, and independents as well as straggler moderates on the other side) and in some significant capacity, farther lefties who would literally rather vote for anyone other than trump.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          How are we defining ‘flawless’, exactly?

          All else aside - yea, I actually kinda agree with this, though I get the distinct impression not in the way you mean it.

          edit - what happens if it’s the undecided vote that causes harris to lose, not Stein?

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            Then she should have messaged better on Israel. On that particular item I also feel like Netanyahu is on a timeline. I’m not sure he cares about the election though. More like he’s trying to get us pulled into a conflict with Iran before January because Biden can’t stand up to him. If he thinks Biden is just locked by the election then he’ll try to do it this month. Harris’ messaging doesn’t really take that into account in my opinion.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Then she should have messaged better on Israel

              I’d much rather her do more than message better, but i’d take clear messaging over whatever the fuck we’ve been getting.

            • Tinidril@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              2 days ago

              There is no candidate who can win this race that won’t keep writing blank checks for Israel. If anything, Netanyahu wants Trump to win. He is enraged by even the minimal pushback he gets from the Biden administration.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                There’s a chance Harris is more like Obama and reigns in everything but iron dome reloads, while actually holding them responsible for settler violence. If your standard is completely disengage from Israel then yeah we aren’t there yet politically. Although shooting at the UN might just fucking do it.

      • Soup@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I’m going to blame [Undecided] if that happens, but we all know [Undecided] is going to become vapor just after the election and then reroll and alt character masquerading as a victim of their own ignorance come November…

        So yeah… we all know they won’t be around to take their bow and own it.

        • PolydoreSmith@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          This rhetoric is sure to convince all those Muslims in Michigan whose family members are being blown up by US bombs. Keep up the good work, neolib crusader!

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            listen bro, it’s the will of the voters, if they decide to do that, and they end up with trump being elected, that’s not my problem.

            Idk why the harris campaign has to specifically cater towards the muslim population of MI here, seems rather odd to me.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                23 hours ago

                yeah maybe. It might not do anything either.

                Could do anything, Michigan may not even matter at all. It’s probably more impactful to mobilize moderate voters nationally (there are more of them) than to mobilize a single subset of a Michigan voters.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          So yeah… we all know they won’t be around to take their bow and own it.

          I’ve noticed that it’s not only undecideds that disappear after the election. It’s also everyone that voted for the last Republican after the inevitable (because they’re terrible at governance) crisis occurs. I remember when George W. Bush’s presidency ended in complete disaster, and suddenly there was nobody that voted for GWB to be found.

          Ultimately, if Trump wins, there will be plenty of blame games afterwards, but, in my opinion, they won’t matter. That talk may occupy a lot of paper space in the quaint period between him winning the election and January 20th, 2025, but a second Trump presidency will be such an utter disaster that the talk of “how we got here” will be rendered irrelevant by the urgent need to survive the many self-created crises that it’ll cause.

          And I suspect that you’re right, it will suddenly be impossible afterwards to find people who were on the fence about supporting Harris.

          • orcrist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            If you’re going around asking people who they voted for, after any election, expect to be ignored by many.

            • aesthelete@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              It’s not that. They’re all active on online forums and in media and then suddenly none of them can be found.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah why don’t we all just send Harris a harshly worded letter while ignoring people who throw away their vote. Yep absolutely makes sense!

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          2 days ago

          Ignoring people instead of, what?.. Railing against voters who are rightfully upset at Harris’s ambivalence about Israel’s genocide?

          You think constantly yelling at undecided protestors and blaming them for “Jim Crow V2 - Electric Boogaloo” is going to change their mind?

          Get over yourself. The only good that comes from whining about third party candidates spoiling democratic victory is situating the blame if/when Harris loses. It does nothing to convince undecideds, and I’d argue it turns a lot of casual voters off from going to the booth at all.

          Might even be radicalizing progressives into tankies, wouldn’t that be exciting.

  • zephorah@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    2016 Michgan election results

    Michigan 2016

    I can’t post more than one image because Lemmy/Memmy makes the images fall apart into a 2 mile long scroll.

      • zephorah@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        Even without him, Stein had it handled by herself. Why do you think she’s back? Jr, who was funded by a Repub PAC, dropped out. Then Stein re-appeared.

        • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          How is Stein having 1.1% of votes worse than Johnson having 3.6%? Stein sucks, I’ll make it clear. But how is Stein’s votes being in last place helping Trump when Johnson won more votes than her?

          If every Johnson voter voted Democrat (Libertarians agree with a lot of Democratic opinions, they just don’t see it) then Clinton would have won.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          No.

          With what logic are you using that all those votes could just be added to Hillary? It’s not how that works. You can just say if it had been completely different it would have been completely different.

          It’s like reaching into a bag and pulling 5 limes and saying if only they had been oranges you could have made orange juice.

          She wants money, sure, and loves to grift off the people that think themselves superior but this is bad math and pure conspiracy at this point.

          Edit: No answer just downvotes cause there isn’t a logical answer just irrational dogpiling to find a scapegoat to appease some strong anxiety. Take a breath. Regroup. Don’t start throwing shit now.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            No answer just downvotes cause there isn’t a logical answer just irrational dogpiling

            It’s inconceivable that a voter wouldn’t support either major candidate. All green voters become Hilary voters because Democrats and Greens are next to each other on my Ideology For Eighth Graders rubric.

            All you have to do is arrest Jill Stein and put her in “friendly with Russia” jail, and Hilary wins in a 0.1% landslide

          • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Somehow Johnson winning more voters with more money than the Green is checks notes proof the Greens are unbashedly evil. Libertarians get more money, are on every state’s ballot, but somehow are never blamed for when Democrats run bad candidates who prop up fascists and ignore swing states.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Why do you think she’s back?

          Because she’s candidate who won the primary for her party. Same reason Trump is back for third time.

  • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Its the genocide thats the problem-- Steins numbres are small… And Jill Stein owes the dems nothing, she can run if she wants. Thats what democracy is about. So the new republic can suck it.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Everything you said is true. But it has nothing to do with the article. It’s about how her campaign seems to be more a grift than pushing green policies, and aimed at taking votes from Harris in swing states than actually trying to win any election.

      She can obviously do what she wants, but it doesn’t appear she is being genuine.

      • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Thats fine. Theres only 2% of the electorate who are jewish, and a good portion of that 2% also dont support the zionist faction. We give some of them and the youth voters a voice to fight on our behalf. We need to keep the youth vote on side or the party is long term doomed anyway. Any leader who says they are swayed by the voice of youth has a long career ahead of them.

        We also say that, “we arent steering the US away from support of Israel, we’re steering it away from the far right government sponsored violence of Netenyahu.” And we claim we’re happy to be friends again when moderates or lefties are in charge in Israel. The zionists cant pretend to have clean hands, and Netenyahu needs to go.

        • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Media coverage can make or break a campaign. They absolutely destroyed Jeremy Corbyn for being pro-Palestine.

          • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            We could declare we’re now neutral because we have to follow the Leahy laws. Pull our military back, no more UN coverage, no more weapons. The “war” will calm down real quick.