• Fleur_@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    ^ This person was the “good” timeline for America. Dw I’m sure voting blue will work out one day.

    • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      2 days ago

      No Bernie was the good timeline. This lady caused this awful mess we have now because she thought it was her turn.

      • girthero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Bernie would have wiped the floor with Trump in 2016. Bernie is immune to any rhetoric from the right thrown his way because his principals are clear and always abides by them.

    • MangioneDontMiss@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      first time ive ever said something like this, but really, if the dems give us another corporate shill candidate, voting for a 3rd party candidate that has no chance might not be the worst option. maybe the country really just needs to fully implode, maybe that will finally break it out of its complacent stupor. Though, I doubt it.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      Because voting red has worked well so far? I don’t get the logic. There aren’t any other options.

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        How about we all start voting third party until we can establish at least 3 major parties. 5 would probably be better. It would force them to work together to accomplish things.

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          You don’t get 3 or more major parties in a fptp system though. The system itself is only capable of supporting two parties at most.

          The voting system needs to first be changed on a state level in every state ideally, or at least most of them, so people need to start putting a lot more effort into state elections.

          • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            if the fptp voting system dictates that the two most similar parties should merge to fight the third least similar party. In that case we should start an actual leftist party so the two parties on the right can merge and absorb eachother.

            • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              It’s more that the actual leftist party will take votes away from the liberals, but not the full-on nazi party. Meaning that you’d end up with something like 15% new leftist party that nobody dares vote for because it’s new, 40% dems, 45% repugnants and now the 45% is enough for them to win, whereas previously maybe it would’ve been 55% dems.

              In fact, to win an election under that system, it would be beneficial to start an even more right-wing party, because that would take votes away from the GOP. But at the end of the day, it takes a couple of election cycles for 2 dominant parties to emerge and the most extremist ones are typically the ones to lose as people unite under the more centrist banners. That’s how you get republican and republican lite, where really a lot of people would prefer a socialist party and a lot of other people would prefer a national-socialistic workers party. They have to meet in the middle and get two parties that are somewhere between the two polar opposites.