938
USA presidential candidates (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
127 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 73 points 2 years ago (4 children)

It amazes me that one of the largest countries in the world, with the most diverse demographics, can only chose between two candidates. This is not democracy. It's a shit show that has been going on for far too long.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    Just mention an alternative and you'll will quickly understand why.

    The parties have done the most amazing job in pretending the world will end at every election if they are not chosen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It is kind of amazing how even those disenfranchised voters will rally to support the hegemony of the “two party” corporatist rule. I suggested recently we could consider rallying behind a single issue 3rd party candidate who would end the legalized bribes and replace FPTP with a more democratic alternative, and was immediately downvoted and told it’s not possible due to FPTP.

    facepalm

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    It is theoreticaly possible, but praticaly speaking it would be near impossible.

    To acomplish this, you need to get 51% of the population (who actually vote) to all vote for one person. However, with FPTP, you get one choice on the ballot. Is the average voter going to risk their vote on a 3rd party, or vote for who they belive to be the "lesser evil" of the two that have a shot at winning?

    Even if you do manage to get 51%, there's the electoral collage. Never forget, our democracy has built in the ability to overwrite the presidential vote.

    Your first hurdle is getting any one to name an independent candidate.

    Edit: adjusted some wording to be better.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I agree with this. But also, this time is the closest to "end of the world" stakes we've had in recent memory. We have a literal criminal, rapist, and fraudster who already tried to overthrow the government once leading the polls.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Is that a 3rd option in a first past the post system?

    Hmmmm… what could be the issue there I wonder.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The people are the issue not the system

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    There is absolutely an issue with first past the post voting systems. And frankly I think you know what the problems are.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    That people are so desperate to keep it in place.

    FTFP is never going go away if you keep voting for it lol.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    How surprising. A comment meant to discourage voting.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Vote for something different than the ftfp parties.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    That's not how it works. As long as FPTP exists, it will lock us into two parties. We have had multiple party systems that all demonstrated this principle. Some places are experimenting with alternatives on the state and local level, but it will take time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    You’ve already got one response to this which is correct. I want to add to it to help explain how FPTP voting systems result in a 2 party system and simply voting for another party does not solve the issue.

    But first you’re either aware of the problem and want to encourage people to vote third party while pretending not to know how the system works or you’re actually just ignorant to the issue.

    I don’t normally like video links in discussions like this but this one is especially good and is only 6.5 mins.

    https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Your video does not explain how voting Democrat is going to fix the FTFP system.

    People that don't understand politics have a better understanding than people that have been frog-boiled into voting for a Genocidal Geriatric.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The presidential vote isn’t where we fix the voting system. We have to work in the system we have. It’s just reality.

    My assessment of you hasn’t changed - you’re either completely ignorant or want Biden voters to change to third party to help Trump.

    Every interaction with you has a similar quality. I’m never sure if you’re just this stupid or if you know exactly what you’re doing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    The presidential vote is where it's fixed. Republicans have already moved to ban other voting types calling them 'too complicated'. Democrats will join them the second their duopoly is endangered.

    Just like how they crack down on student protests and block ballot access for third parties, Democrats have no standards either.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The system exists as it is…. I don’t know any other way to say this. FPTP has a spoiler problem that you can’t wish away.

    I’m not going to vote for a candidate that’s going to get maybe 2-5% of the vote.

    I would like to bet you $1000 that either the Dem or Rep candidate will win. If anyone BUT those two win, I would pay you.

    If you ACTUALLY believed anyone else will win, you’d take me up on it. What do you say?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Strange you're including Republican in there. You believe Biden is winning right? So your money should be on Biden and any other winner would make you lose.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I’m sitting here trying to convince you that FPTP results in a two party system. I’m betting on the two parties.

    YOU are the one imagining that can change by simply voting 3rd party.

    So, you down for a bet or what?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If Biden isn't winning what's the point of voting for him?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    He is one of two possibilities.

    And you’re not going to bet because you know it too.

    And now we know you’re not ignorant to this fact. You’re encouraging 3rs party votes knowing very well they will not win.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    No Biden is zero of one possibility.

    There's no way he's going to beat Trump.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I’m glad we finally got to you admitting 3rd parties won’t win.

    Thanks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Tradition and inertia.

    The USA is proud to have the oldest and longest-standing written constitution. The fact it hasn't been rewriteen in a long time help explain why there's still an electoral college, slavery for prisoners (13th amendements), and weak regulation of campaign finance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Oldest active constitution is San Marino.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Presumably what the other commenter was referring to is the US having the oldest codified constitution

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Which is honestly meaningless but very convenient for US narrations. There were also older de facto constitutions, which are usually forgotten like the Henrician Articles of P-L Commonwealth. US constitution is famous because it was the one which was loudly proclaimed and imitated later.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    didn't you vote in the primary? why not?

    Americans got to choose between many candidates, and out of those, it's down to 6, and of those 6, it's only really likely 2, that's true.

    But it isn't quite like you imply.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I didn't vote in the primary, because I'm not American.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    yes, obviously. but the point stands: there wasn't just two candidates, and you don't know what you're talking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I understand what you are trying to say. Ultimately, there are only two to vote for. Ideally, there should be more than two parties, and more than two candidates. That's how democracies work. What you have is a dysfunctional system that divides people in two groups, and there are no incentives to cooperate between parties. Proper voting is also suffering due to the two-party system.

    https://youtu.be/yhO6jfHPFQU

    In my country, the parties with the majority of votes and the ability to cooperate gets to form a government. We also try to make it easy to get people to vote, insted of your system of gerrymandering.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    there are 6 parties, but only two of the six are large ones at the moment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes I know, but the voting system favours the two largest. Thats why they are large. Small parties have 0% chance og getting representatives into the houses, so they are basically irrelevant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago*

    The RNC never intended to run a candidate other than Trump because he controls MAGA, which is what remains of their energized base. The primaries they held were “just in case” Merrick Garland actually did something useful and successfully prosecuted Trump for insurrection, which never came to pass.

    The DNC did everything they could to prevent primary elections from occurring in various states, and bullied anyone who was floating a run into submission. This included the state dept making calls to state DNC committees to cancel primaries, or remove certain candidates from their ballots. According to them, it was an insult to Biden admin and their legacy to even suggest another candidate should run. And now look where that’s gotten us.

    So no, we didn’t actually vote in primaries this year because the establishment refuses to relinquish the status quo.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent