McConaughey (lemmy.zip)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/comicstrips@lemmy.world
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 17 points 1 week ago* (67 children)

Which of the two major parties stands against capitalism again?

  • source
  • hideshow 67 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    Neither, unfortunately, but we have a two-party system, and one side is openly fascist, so I would advise that anyone who doesn't like fascism vote for the other non-fascist (arguably less-fascist) party.

    I don't like voting for the "lesser evil" and wish things were better, but voting for unviable candidates out of a sense of blind idealism is worse, because it empowers the most regressive movements to succeed.

    We don't currently live in a real democracy, but we have a chance to turn things around. If you decide to give up and let the fascists win, you're one of the bad guys.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    We need Ranked Choice Voting and Mixed Member Proportional districting to reduce the need for strategic voting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Your outcomes are between the candidate who will hurt you and yours less vs the candidate who will hurt you and yours most.

    If you're lucky, choosing to not vote will still lead to the candidate that will hurt you and yours less.

    Be as pedantic as you want: this is the reality of it.

    Do whatever outside of the election season to change that but once the final polls happen, those are the only choices you have.

    It's like when you get beat up and you're on the ground. You try to protect your vitals and hope you'll survive to fight another day.

    Not voting is idiotic and lazy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago

    The reality is choosing between the two major parties is choosing hurting now or hurting later.

    False.

    • They'll both hurt now but one will clearly hurt less.
    • One will also do more good than the other.
    • 3rd party during the final election won't get anything accomplished, because that third party literally has no representation in lower positions of government.
  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (8 children)

    Which anti-capitalist third-party has even a 0.000001% chance of winning enough seats to be an impediment to Trump?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Why do you believe Trump losing the presidency will change anything?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    winning enough seats to be an impediment to Trump

    Trump was already voted out once; and in the intervening four years the Democrats proved themselves to be incapable of impeding Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    How many boats of civilians did Binlden order to be sunk? How many heads of state did he kidnap or assassinate in wars of choice? How many American cities did he occupy with military units? How many of his political opponents did he have the justice department charge with baseless crimes? How many Nazis did he dine with?

    The Dems piss me off, but saying the only reasons to say they're no different than the Republicans are:

    1. Being a fucking idiot ;or

    2. Atremptingto prop up the GOP by convincing leftists not to vote against them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    If the goal is to change the system then voting for either one will never get you to your goal.

    I want the current 2 party system to die. And that can only happen if a third party wins. That's in my opinion the highest priority item.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    The last time a President wasn't a Democrat or a Republican was elected was 1848. But neither the Democratic or Republican parties resemble at all what they were in 1852.

    You don't change the 2-party system, you change the parties themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    Which third party is against capitalism? Legit curious.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago (31 children)

    Which third party has a chance to actually win or do something and isn't just throwing your vote out?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    I'm not sure I fully understood that . But the first step in any change is ranked choice voting. If we had that then we could do three parties or more.

    As it stands, we've devolved into a two-party system and neither party will give up control.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    All of them, complain about non-voters not voters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago

    Okay let's see. We have a large part of the population who just won't vote. Voter apathy is real.

    Of the Democrats and Republicans, you have about 2/3 of each party that are voting like it's a sports team. They'll never change and they'll never think.

    The thinking people who vote for each party understand that the third party has no chance and they're trying to sway things generally in their direction.

    So the third party victory plan, if I have it correct, is to overcome voter apathy, and also to sway some people who are voting like a sports team from both parties.

    If that's your plan for victory, then you don't have a plan for victory. And you're just wasting your vote.

    Call me cynical, but I think third parties are funded by people outside the country to sway the election. Just like they only thaw out Jill Stein every 4 years to steal votes from the Democrats, and then they park her in a Russian freezer somewhere for the rest of the time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Part of building a viable alternative is getting enough votes for consistant ballot access and other resources that are afforded by default to the two primary parties. Winning comes in degrees.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago* (2 children)

    Yet Jill Stein vanishes for four years between Presidential elections and does absolutely nothing to support a third party coalition at the state and local level.

    And she somehow deserves your vote for simply not being a D or R? Yeah nah.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    If that was really the strategy they would start with local elections.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (20 children)

    "They won't actually fix anything but they might win" is an unbelievably terrible argument

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (19 children)

    No. It's "which of these two horrible choices might we influence to make some progress"

    You don't get a third choice for the big things. It's mathematically and literally impossible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    The ONLY chance the US had for a third party was back when Teddy Roosevelt ran in the Bull Moose party. He was already a president with a major party and wanted another run but the party didn't like his socialist agenda. (I'm simplifying)

    If he would have won, we probably would still have a 2 party system. 1 of the parties would have adapted to the Bull Moose party.

    We need to elect people that will support the change to RCV. Dems seem more favorable to this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    Dems seem more favorable to this.

    The problem is that you're relying on "vote blue and hope they give us electoral reform out of the kindness of their hearts." It's not a real strategy. Dems have a clear incentive to not enact voting reform, because they survive off of being the lesser evil and effectively coercing people into voting for them. And if you say that we should vote for Dems conditionally to them (genuinely) supporting RCV, that's one thing, but if you're just supporting them regardless then any ideas you have about RCV are meaningless because in practice those ideas aren't affecting your actions in any way.

    It's like seeing that your car won't to start and thinking the solution is to drive it to the mechanic. The whole problem is that you can't drive it anywhere. In the same way, the whole reason we need electoral reform is the same thing that prevents it from happening, that we don't have any mechanism for advancing policy goals in the current system. You can't rely on a broken system to fix itself.

    What we need is to realize that the current system is FUBAR and organize non-electoral strategies (for example, strikes and demonstrations) to advance policy positions, and we need a dedicated party that's focused on that strategy and able to lay out a clear platform to that end.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    What's your source for your claim that it is literally impossible for a third party to ever be viable again?

    My source is the history of the US.

    Vote for who you want and I'll vote the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    The history of the US that has included third parties?

    Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and not believe your claims. You seem totally unable to defend them.

    At any rate I'm glad we're both voting. It's the bare minimum we need to do.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    Yeah, but hope is not a strategy. What's the path to making that happen?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    Vote 3rd party, argue with dumbshits that refuse to vote third party because of their self defeating "they can't win" Ouroboros and try and get them to see that the only reason they "can't" win is because of that very attitude, but if they did get the votes they could, in fact, win. Y'know stuff like that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (5 children)

    Yes yes, go team! Everything is hopeless just keep the status quo and pray like a good boy, I know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (4 children)

    Hope doesn't win. Strategy wins. Get me a strategy that is reasonable and I'll back you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (3 children)

    All you win is the status quo, and maybe at that, it can always get worse. Without taking a chance on "not what we've done for decades," "what we've done for decades" will continue regardless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

    What is winning to you? To me, it's getting abortion back and reducing ICE enforcement. And those are achievable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Yeah that's true. Biden did nothing.

    Oh wait, what's this...

    Landmark Legislative Acts

    β€’ Inflation Reduction Act of 2022: The largest federal investment in clean energy and climate change mitigation in U.S. history, alongside provisions allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices, capping insulin at $35 a month for seniors, and capping out-of-pocket prescription drug costs at $2,000 per year. β€’ American Rescue Plan Act of 2021: A $1.9 trillion economic stimulus package that expanded the Child Tax Credit (temporarily cutting child poverty), provided direct economic impact payments, funded vaccine distribution, and expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies. β€’ Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Bipartisan Infrastructure Law) of 2021: A major public works investment focusing on roads, bridges, public transit, clean water (replacing lead pipes), and high-speed broadband expansion. β€’ CHIPS and Science Act of 2022: Substantial funding to boost domestic semiconductor manufacturing, research, and high-tech supply chains. β€’ Respect for Marriage Act of 2022: Repealed the Defense of Marriage Act and codified federal protections for same-sex and interracial marriages. β€’ Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022: The first major federal gun safety legislation in decades, enhancing background checks for buyers under 21 and funding red flag laws and mental health services. β€’ Honoring our PACT Act of 2022: Significantly expanded healthcare and disability benefits for military veterans exposed to toxic burn pits. β€’ Stop Campus Hazing Act & Stop Institutional Child Abuse Act (2024): Laws enacted in late 2024 to increase transparency around campus hazing and monitor the care of minors in residential treatment facilities.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Oh is it time for "Both Sides" already? Forgot to mark my calendar

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    If you have a path to change the system of governance, that could be worth pursuing. But voting isn’t a path to that - just a form of harm reduction within the system.

    You still buy groceries - even though you may hate the process of handing over your net worth for something that helps sustain your life and want to change that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment