• Socialist Mormon SatanistOP
      link
      -342 days ago

      Well, if you believe plenty of people don’t disagree with you, then neither you nor the Democrats should have anything to worry about or be upset about when it comes to third parties. Thanks, friend! :)

      • @just_another_person
        link
        172 days ago

        Everyone in the entire country has something to worry about BECAUSE there are only two parties. Did you have your pills this morning?

      • @orclev
        link
        16
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        That would be fine if it weren’t for the fact that the races are so tight that every vote matters. If Harris had a healthy lead on Trump to the point where a couple hundred votes here and there could be thrown away and she’d still win nobody would worry, we’d say “sure, throw away your vote, or you know, just stay home, you do you”, but unfortunately that’s not the case. So yes, the vast overwhelming majority of people disagree with you, but unfortunately even being wrong your vote is still important.

        On the topic of whether there are more than two parties, first past the post means no, there aren’t, there can’t be more than two parties. Fix first past the post if you want an actual democracy. Until that happens, voting 3rd party is functionally the same as not voting, in either case your vote isn’t being counted to determine the winner.

        • geekwithsoul
          link
          fedilink
          English
          112 days ago

          Monk would evidently much rather vote for Pro-Israel candidate Rachele Fruit. Quoted earlier this year:

          And anyone who is interested in reading and learning about the history of Hamas will be convinced that it’s not about liberation. It’s about genocide against the Jews.

        • @anticolonialist
          link
          -22 days ago

          If she didn’t swing hard right maybe polling wouldn’t be so tight.

          • @orclev
            link
            32 days ago

            That can be true and she can still be the best candidate. There’s a very long list of people I would rather see elected president but unfortunately the reality is that only one of two people are going to win. It’s either Harris or Trump, and while I don’t like Harris for many many reasons, she’s not an existential threat to democracy like Trump is so she gets the votes. The only way to fix this is to get some kind of proportional voting implemented at the federal level. Personally I like STAR voting, but even the worse choice of ranked choice is still better than first past the post.

        • Socialist Mormon SatanistOP
          link
          -212 days ago

          Voting for who you want to, isn’t throwing away your vote. It’s exercising your rights. Thank you! :)

          • @just_another_person
            link
            142 days ago

            No, it’s throwing a vote away when it has no chance of affecting the election. It literally means your vote does nothing.