It has been said a gazillion times over the last few months, but is it getting through to those who need to hear it?

  • RunningInRVA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    So if a 3rd party candidate was somehow elected then we would be forever freed from the two party system? I doubt it.

    I think if a 3rd party is ever going to become something viable in a national election then it will have to start small at the state level and work its way up from there. And it’ll take a bunch of states doing that to create any kind of momentum needed to create anything viable at the national level.

    I still think voting 3rd party in the presidential election is a monumentally poor choice. It’s a worthless protest vote at this point.

    • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Who said that a single win for a third party candidate would be the death knell of the two party system?

      My personal goal is to vote for the candidate who best reflects my values. Always. In every election. At every level. If everyone did this tomorrow we’d be in a much better situation. Obviously that is unrealistic. But so is asking those who vote their heart to compromise their values by voting for a different candidate just because they have a chance of winning. The goal here IS slow generation change. By all means given to us.

      • RunningInRVA@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Maybe I misunderstood your comment, and I apologize if so. You said we would be voting in a two party system for another generation if we didn’t vote third party. I assumed that meant a 3rd party would have to win to break out of what we have today.

        • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Well, don’t get me wrong, a WIN for a 3rd party IS the ultimate goal. But change happens slowly in politics and in life. Slow and steady support for a three party system will eventually result in that end. Continued support for a two party system, by contrast, never will. I, myself, will continue to place votes for the better of those two eventualities.

          • RunningInRVA@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I think we agree. I’m supportive of a viable third party if it creates more choice, but it’s not going to start with a presidential election. There are billions being spent keeping it the way it is. I’m sorry about it, but it’s the truth. I would encourage you to push for a 3rd party at the local level rather than to simply put up a protest vote at the national level. An example would be what’s happening in Nebraska where a 2 term Republican incumbent is at risk of losing to an Independent who successfully negotiated for striking cereal workers.

            • voiceofchris @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Well, i would agree that “it’s not going to start with a presidential election” so long as you define “start” as “the first election win for a third party candidate.” You shouldn’t vote 3rd party in only national elections and expect to be reeping the benefits of a viable third party presidential candidate any time soon.

              But there are other ways to define “start”. There are goals for voting third party other than to see your candidate win. And there are argumeunts to be made that we are way past the starting phase and are now in strong need of drastic course correction, such as cannot be offered by either party.

              For one example, third party candidates move policy. If 5% of the electorate are in favor of something that currently only a 3rd party candidate represents you better believe one or the other of the two parties will attempt to incorporate that thing into into their platform to grab those voters. This may not be a “start” toward a viable third party, but it can be a “start” toward better policy, and that’s a win.

              At the end of the day though i think there is a strong misconception amongst main party voters that says that 3rd party voters are just offering up limp protest and would be better served by voting against the candidate they hate more. But the truth is different. Neither party serves them better. A 3rd party voter most likely despises both of the two parties and sees the differences between the two as just window dressings on what are two parties both bent on statist, war mongering, imperialistic oppression. Both parties are so very far from what we believe to be possible and right that a distinction between the two parties becomes laughable in comparison to a distinction from the two parties. I am not voting against Trump or Harris when i cast a 3rd party vote. Am voting against BOTH. They are both truly awful and yet i will have to endure one or the other. But at least i did my small part (in elections both big and small) to move things closer to what i belive to be a better situation for future generations.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        If everyone did this tomorrow we would have project 2025 and get a fascist dystopia, dumbass. The left would splinter and Trump would easily win.