• @Rnet1234
    link
    English
    116 months ago

    Yeah this isn’t even like a complicated idea; I don’t get why people have trouble with it.

    As a practical real world example: in the 2000 election, Bush won Florida by 537 votes. (the exact number is questionable because of the recount and the bullshit that was Bush v. Gore. Which we can and should be very angry about but also doesn’t change the conclusion here).

    97,488 Floridians voted for Ralph Nader.

    Now, I’m gonna assume that people who voted green care about like. The environment. And I’m quite sure that Nader was more progressive on environmental issues than Gore was – Gore would probably have been a boring and relatively centrist democrat. But by voting for Nader over Gore we didn’t get Nader, we got Bush.

    If even 1% of the green voters in Florida had held their noses and voted for the candidate who they maybe didn’t align quite as well with but had an actual shot at winning, we could have had a president who actually recognized climate change as a threat almost a fucking decade before we did,instead of a climate change denier. Would it have fixed everything? No! But we’d be a hell of a lot better off than we are now.