• @thedeadwalking4242
    link
    93 hours ago

    Well election is over, the time to start building up a third party is NOW

  • Bobby Turkalino
    link
    fedilink
    43 hours ago

    Is this why coffee is often served as molten lava? Because all yall blow on your coffee before every sip? I despise all of you. I just want to drink coffee like any other drink

    • anon6789
      link
      32 hours ago

      This is one of my favorite things about using an Aeropress. I use half the water to brew the concentrate, which will be just off boil, but then the water I use to dilute to final strength can be any temp I want, so it is immediately drinkable. There are many other advantages, especially if you like to experiment, but this one to me is huge.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    265 hours ago

    3rd party voters didn’t swing a single swing state. That is a demonstrable fact. It’s time to stop punching down.

    • @TheFeatureCreature
      link
      English
      24
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      People will, in a single breath, tell people to exercise their right to vote in democracy and also that voting for the person/party that best represents them is wrong if it’s not a Big Party.

      • @kernelle
        link
        243 minutes ago

        Usually in a democracy the people are represented by parties which they align most with. In my country I can vote for one of seven, which get proportionally represented by a number of seats in parliament. The winning party rarely has more than 50% of the vote, if they do, all the losing parties will become the opposition, and if they don’t they have to combine with another party to have at least 50% of the votes. This assures that the winning party or coalition still has to negotiate their position and decisions every single day. If one party would want the power the current administration in the US has they would probably need 80 or 90% of the votes.

        Is it complicated? Yes. Does it make sure the people are represented? Also yes.

        In the US if a state votes 51% one way, 100% of the electoral votes go to that party, causing a reality where a party could get less than a majority vote and still win. This alone is proof that the people are not fairly represented and isn’t a fair democracy. In local elections you’ll have a much more nuanced choice but at a federal level it’s antiquated to say the least.

        I will say that in a fair democracy, you should vote for your representative, in the US you have no such choice. Be it by living in one state counts as more than another, or the fact that a third party has little to no representation post election.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        33 hours ago

        The issue in the US is that it IS against your political interests to vote for anyone but the least bad option.

        The first past the post system simply doesn’t allow for a diverse political landscape.

    • @Wrench
      link
      -114 hours ago

      Rofl, victim complex much? “Punching down” like you’re some repressed minority for having shitty prioritization skills. Jfc

      • @Plastic_Ramses
        link
        2
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Dont you know?

        The people who say they dont want to support genocide but actively choose the worst of the genocide-related options are the real victims here.

  • @TropicalDingdong
    link
    225 hours ago

    Its so hilarious how this ridiculously toxic culture around blaming third party was developed, worked on for months, and then when it came time, the impact of third parties was so utterly irrelevant as to be laughable.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -6
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      The real beef was with stay home single EDIT issue folks who would otherwise be Dem voters.

      3rd party “voices” were annoying because they only punched at Dems, never at republicans. Interestingly, a few of them migrated to libertarian and conservative instances now

      • @TropicalDingdong
        link
        54 hours ago

        This is all just the same toxic projection that I’ve been pointing out in this thread.

        You want to blame third parties but there is basically 0, practically negative evidence for it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          No, I haven’t discussed 3rd parties at all in my comment. I said 3rd party “voices”, reading comprehension meaning “commenters/online personalities” because I noted their movement to new instances.

          Edit also note I had a typo in my above “single party” to 'single issue"

              • @TropicalDingdong
                link
                -34 hours ago

                What do you expect when you just keep putting the same performative toxicity on display?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  24 hours ago

                  So much assuming.

                  My “toxicity” are legitimate concerns to not get trump, who will ramp everything up. Well look who’s here now.

                  As I said, single issue stay homes, and “alternative” voices that actually only served to strike at Dems are issues I believe shifted the narrative and may have influenced the election.

                  I made a thread to discuss other influences beyond just punching down at 3rd party platforms.

      • @TropicalDingdong
        link
        125 hours ago

        No, it was just part of a broader culture of infantalism demonstrated by Democratic apologists. There was no there there. Just people desperate for something to blame for their incompetence.

        • lime!
          link
          fedilink
          English
          05 hours ago

          but like… if everyone is saying “don’t vote third party”, and the amount of third party votes significantly drops as a result, isn’t this what the result would look like?

          • @TropicalDingdong
            link
            9
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            There is a term for the act of only looking for evidence that confirms your bias. If the “strategy” worked, then why isn’t Kamala Harris president?

            And if that wasn’t the goal of the strategy, what point is it that you think was being made in the first place?

            • lime!
              link
              fedilink
              English
              14 hours ago

              i have no idea what the strategy of the us democratic party was, I’m just reflecting on what i’ve on social media over the past month or so (a constant barrage of “don’t vote third party”) and comparing it to the results (very few people voting third party). of course there’s no way to know how much of that was due to said barrage, but we can for sure say that the people telling people to vote third party failed.

    • OpenStars
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Supposedly if every single liberal-leaning person were to vote Democrat, they (edit: some of them) would have become swing states.

      But I think it’s more that people just want an easy target to punch, which makes people feel more in control. Like, it’s not our glorious leader™’s fault, it’s “those” people, over there. And the number of Internet searches for what happened to Joe Biden on the very morning of the election should legit be worrisome to us all imho…

      Ngl, I was kinda impressed by storing told about Kamala’s campaigning and dedication. (Or was that simply part of the spin machine?) Maybe she could - no, surely she could have done better? But she also gave it as much as “the establishment” would allow, and came up short.

      So now we can either roll up our sleeves and try to fix things… oh who is anyone kidding we’ll just take whatever handouts we are given, as always.