this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
930 points (78.8% liked)

Political Memes

5341 readers
3788 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world -2 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Which is why the correct way to bring it up is to mention the spoiler effect.

The problem is when you talk to some republicans they want a 1 party system. They want to ban democrats. If you talk to some democrats they believe we should ban third parties. These are both antidemocracy views that normalize each other.

So what you're arguing for here (to be very clear) is that it is better to embrace a softer form of anti-democracy messaging than to explain that we should avoid voting third party when spoiler effects are a concern.

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 6 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I'm saying that if you're in favor of strengthening third parties in America a lot of work needs to be done and just shouting vote third party every 4 years is none of that work.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

And I'm saying damage control for third parties a lot more work needs to be done than simply saying "3rd party bad, 2 parties good." because idk if you've been watching but we're perilously close to having a 1 party system.

This a prime opportunity to educate voters on their own voting system and people are squandering that to oversimplify their messaging to the degree they sound like republicans.

Edit: To clarify if you wanted to eliminate the republican party, a 3rd party needs to replace it in a 2 party system creating a "catch 22" situation where fptp props up a fascist minority party because 3rd parties can't compete

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

Any third-party candidate trying to run for the president is either stupid or acting in bad faith. That's what the meme was pointing out. That's the reality of the situation in America until the work is done to fix the spoiler problem. If someone is competent and actually is acting in good faith, they don't run as a third party in US presidential elections. If their belief is we need stronger third parties, they do that by trying to change the electoral system at a more local level.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

because idk if you’ve been watching but we’re perilously close to having a 1 party system.

THAT IS WHY WE'RE SAYING 3RD PARTY BAD

This is NOT the time. Just shut up about 3rd parties. The debates and discussions are still perfectly valid in 3 months, let's talk about it then.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

"Now" is the only time to educate people about how the voting system needs to change and the "Less parties more good" mantra is the stupidest shit I've ever seen. The problem has a name and its called the "spoiler effect".

People talk about these issues during political season or they don't talk about them. Quit trying to solve a long term problem with a short term problem.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

People talk about these issues during political season or they don’t talk about them

...and that's the problem. 3rd party people need to be having this conversation more than once every 4 years.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

So you think that's good? wtf

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

If you talk to some democrats they believe we should ban third parties.

I have never seen this argument from any democrat before.

Questioned their legitimacy in participating as a candidate in a presidential election? Yes.

But banning third parties? Absolute hogwash, I've never once seen that.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Sure you conveniently haven't, but I've seen it floated on these boards and the post in the chain above us we're replying to is aligned with antidemocratic messaging - it by no means rejects anyone who wants to ban 3rd parties.

But lets make an even easier comparison making it hard for 3rd parties to exist is not wholly different than banning them. This is in fact how republicans approached abortion before the supreme court's catholic wing decided to allow bans.

Its all working to the same goal. Anti 3rd party messaging without context and rational thought is just anti-democracy messaging which only helps republicans. Every legal tool democrats are using to beat down 3rd parties will eventually be used by republicans to prevent democrats from being elected.

The only way to fix it is to change the way we vote so that 3rd parties don't produce spoiler effects.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

OK, so claims of randos on the internet.

NOT any single elected democrat.

Got it.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Ah so what matters is words not actions? Taking steps to remove 3rd parties from ballots is fine as long as you don't say it?

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

What matter is context. Intentionally leaving it out is garbage.

As is not saying which ballots you're referring to. In this case, I assume its the presidential election where they are playing the role of spoiler?

Yes, it absolutely makes sense to legally challenge those.

But "some democrats" is just as garbage and useless a comment as "people are saying".

Edited to add: This is also definitively and explicitly not the same thing as saying ban all third parties.

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.