Really you don’t need to read more than one chart:

If you vote for anyone other than Harris, you’re voting for Trump:

  • Billiam
    link
    56 days ago

    No most of them started out as monarchies so they cant have parliaments. That would be a change in how the government functions, and that’s impossible

    Well that’s not true at all. Parliamentary monarchies are absolutely a thing, the UK being one.

    • @blazera
      link
      English
      -16 days ago

      Awesome, that means how our government functions can be changed to accommodate several parties.

      • Billiam
        link
        2
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Nobody is saying the US system can’t be changed to accommodate third-parties.

        What they are saying is that third-parties aren’t viable the way things are now.

        You can’t elect third parties to change the system; the system has to be changed to elect third parties. Until then, voting for a third party is wasting a vote and advocating for others to do so is telling them to vote against the major party that is both more likely to win and also the one that more closely represents their values.

        The exception, of course, is if one of the major parties suffers an implosion like the Whigs did in the mid-1800s. But the Dems are more unified than ever and the Republicans are brainwashed by right-wing media, so I don’t see that happening any time soon.

        • @blazera
          link
          English
          16 days ago

          You’re saying the only way to get rid of the two party system is to continue to exclusively support the two parties

          • Billiam
            link
            16 days ago

            And the sooner you swallow that pill, the sooner you’ll realize that politics is not about emotions, it about strategy, and voting for third-parties isn’t a winning one.

            • @blazera
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              You say emotions, I say evidence based. With over a century of results of voting exclusively for one of two parties. The result being we’re more deeply ingrained in two parties than ever before.

              Lets say we vote for democrats again, what are you willing to claim will be different next election with regards to moving past the two party system?

              • Billiam
                link
                15 days ago

                evidence-based

                And all the evidence shows that, as the US is currently, voting for third-parties hurts you far more by allowing the major party that least represents you to win. You can’t claim to adhere to “evidence” if you don’t acknowledge that fact.

                Also, I’m going to let you in on a little secret: I don’t want any of the current third parties to win. None of them are serious beyond being spoilers for the major parties- they don’t host voter drives, they don’t campaign for local and state elections, they don’t do anything for four years then show up and expect to have the same shot as the major parties.

                I’m perfectly happy voting for a party to win who agrees with 60% of what I want than getting 0% of what I want, because it’s the rational choice to make.

                • @blazera
                  link
                  English
                  15 days ago

                  as the US is currently

                  This is where we’re losing eachother. I dont think youre understanding that I am advocating for changes from how the US is currently.