Agreed. But seriously, the Democratic Party is not open to having other parties on the ballot.
I wouldn’t have voted for Cornel West anyway, but there’s an entire group within the Democratic Party whose main job is to keep third parties off the ballot.
Having said that, if a third party hasn’t followed the rules to be on the ballot, then I am fine with them being dropped from it.
The Democratic Party is not responsibile for helping other parties get elected.
Quite the opposite. The other parties are opponents, and Democrats are partly responsible for making sure their opponents obey all applicable election rules.
I am being respectful, and this is the internet. If you can’t take a random stranger calling your opinion shitty then you should grow some thicker skin and maybe not have such a shitty opinion.
I was referring to the civility rule of this sub. Rule number 3. (Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!)
Plenty of comments like yours get removed, because the awesome mods here want this place to remain civil and grown up in discussions.
Also, you don’t have to insult someone to argue your opinion. I promise.
Yet I haven’t insulted you, and it does seem more about how it’s making you feel since we are already a few comments in this thread, and you’re still crying about your shitty opinion.
I’m not disagreeing with you, but instead of worrying about “spoiler” votes, they could focus on having strong enough candidates that don’t need to fear third-party competition.
Maybe the margins wouldn’t be so thin if they had strong enough candidates though. Many people, myself included, vote based on who best matches our values.
And for me, and many others, that’s a third party.
You’re assuming that only one side knows how to find strong candidates.
If both sides have strong candidates, then you would expect thin margins. And “strong” doesn’t mean “maximally appeals to you”. It means “appeals, at least a little, to the maximum number of voters”.
You can of course vote for whoever you want. But 30+ years ago third party candidates could get 5% or even 15% of the vote. Since 2000, a third party candidate has only gotten over 2% once (2016). That suggests major party candidates have gotten stronger over the years.
You are still free to vote for him, or anyone else. That’s democracy.
But there are over 300 million Americans. They can’t all be on the ballot.
Agreed. But seriously, the Democratic Party is not open to having other parties on the ballot.
I wouldn’t have voted for Cornel West anyway, but there’s an entire group within the Democratic Party whose main job is to keep third parties off the ballot.
Having said that, if a third party hasn’t followed the rules to be on the ballot, then I am fine with them being dropped from it.
The Democratic Party is not responsibile for helping other parties get elected.
Quite the opposite. The other parties are opponents, and Democrats are partly responsible for making sure their opponents obey all applicable election rules.
Election rules written by the duopoly giving them the advantage
Of course not. But they sure do seem to work extra hard to keep other parties off of the ballot.
You just entirely disregarded what the commentor said only for you to double down on your shitty opinion.
I didn’t disregard anything they said. And indeed, I agreed to part of it. Are you are sure you are reading the right thread?
Also, please stay civil. Just because you don’t agree with me, doesn’t mean my opinion is “shitty.”
How about we not get so personal in our discussions?
I respect and support your right to your opinion. Please offer me the same courtesy. Thank you!
I am being respectful, and this is the internet. If you can’t take a random stranger calling your opinion shitty then you should grow some thicker skin and maybe not have such a shitty opinion.
Thank you!
Um, it’s not about my hurt feelings, friend.
I was referring to the civility rule of this sub. Rule number 3. (Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!)
Plenty of comments like yours get removed, because the awesome mods here want this place to remain civil and grown up in discussions.
Also, you don’t have to insult someone to argue your opinion. I promise.
Yet I haven’t insulted you, and it does seem more about how it’s making you feel since we are already a few comments in this thread, and you’re still crying about your shitty opinion.
Yes, just like lawyers work extra hard to get their opponent’s case dismissed.
It’s an adversarial system. It depends on each side being hypervigilant about what their opponents are doing.
I’m not disagreeing with you, but instead of worrying about “spoiler” votes, they could focus on having strong enough candidates that don’t need to fear third-party competition.
They can focus on both at the same time.
In an election, every little advantage counts for the same reason that every vote counts.
Maybe the margins wouldn’t be so thin if they had strong enough candidates though. Many people, myself included, vote based on who best matches our values.
And for me, and many others, that’s a third party.
You’re assuming that only one side knows how to find strong candidates.
If both sides have strong candidates, then you would expect thin margins. And “strong” doesn’t mean “maximally appeals to you”. It means “appeals, at least a little, to the maximum number of voters”.
You can of course vote for whoever you want. But 30+ years ago third party candidates could get 5% or even 15% of the vote. Since 2000, a third party candidate has only gotten over 2% once (2016). That suggests major party candidates have gotten stronger over the years.
No, it’s not just one side. The Republicans also work to keep third parties off the ballot.
Very true.
I post stories about all third parties, and I get hate DM’s from both parties daily. lmao