529
Jill Stein Is Killing the Green Party
(newrepublic.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
529 points (93.3% liked)
politics
19126 readers
2410 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
How does voting for the Democratic candidate helping Trump win? That makes no sense.
Because that's how election math works; a vote for Harris is taking a vote away from a third-party candidate and is giving it to Trump. So people who vote for Harris are really trying to help Trump win.
That's the Lemmy logic that gets thrown at me all day every day, so I'm a believer now. You did it Lemmy!
That math would only work if Harris was lower in the polls. If she had less of a chance to win.
She is tied for first place. So your math is backwards. A vote for a third party is taking votes from Harris.
I stand by what I said.
You are going for a degree in education, and you can’t understand how if Harris is higher in the polls, that a vote for somebody else is taking a vote away from her? You plan to teach individuals but can’t understand how if person is higher in the polls that if you vote for somebody who is lower in the polls, you’re taking votes from the person higher in the polls?
I mean technically a vote for anybody else is taking a vote away from somebody else, But I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of people would not see it your way.
You seem to be implying some light mockery of my degree, yet it seems you missed the nuance of my comment, which was actually turning the same logic people use against third-party voters back on them.
The point is to show how absurd it sounds when you reverse the argument. You say voting for anyone else is taking votes from Harris, but by that logic, wouldn’t voting for Harris be stealing votes from candidates who represent real change?
I understand how polls work, but I also understand that we’re allowed to vote based on who we actually believe in, not just who’s leading in the polls. It’s the classic "vote for the lesser of two evils" mentality, and I’m challenging that by showing how it leads to more of the same.
Better?
I ran an experiment: I only posted the facts without the reasoning. They're not stupid. They reasoned it out quickly. But, the conclusions disturbed their comfort. It's comfort they value most. Truth and justice be damned.
If you find one engaging IRL then investment there is a much, much better ROI for our future. All we can do here, in this format, is sow the seeds of doubt.
Oh, I thought you were debating in good faith. My bad.
Yeah, they've never done anything in good faith. They're allergic to it. Their main goal in life is to be an infuriating contrarian that everyone despises.
That does seem to be the case. Nobody can be that stupid. Just a troll doing troll stuff.
Yep. A shitbird through and through.
But I do believe that. And I am voting third party. So it is in good faith.