The core issue is that you only have 2 real options in america, third parties may as well not exist. So, come election time, your harm reduction option is to vote for the least evil party.

But that's not the way to solve the issue, and neither is abstaining or voting third party, IMO. The way to solve the issue happens between votes. Picketing, protesting, demonstrating, taking action, making noise. You won't solve the broken 2 party system at election time. But you do have to actually get out and take action, not just say that you will and keep letting the overton window shift right.

(Take with a pinch of salt because I'm not american)

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 1 points 47 minutes ago

I mean, you're not the first one to say thing. People picket, people protest, people make noise. College students are arrested, protests either get Zero media attention (or worse, are regulated to an ineffective location because of regulations) or the protestors switch to disruptive tactics that actually get noticed and are demonized by everyone for it.

Like I keep hearing this "You have to go out and take action", EVERYONE IS! People are walking up and knocking on people's doors and getting punched in the face. People are outside houses getting cops called on them and arrested. Everyone is now more able to point out the bad actors and exactly how that's effecting the parties and policies.

You have Bernie Sanders and AOC out protesting and "making noise" in the spot light every damn day.

third party doesn't work
you can't solve the 2 party system
The way to solve the issue happens between votes

our election cycle is every 2 years or less depending on the occasion. IT IS ALWAYS ELECTION CYCLE IN AMERICAN POLITICS. They have to plan early and extensively to knock off any candidate they don't want (pulling national resources to squash anyone they view "outside" their establishment).

At this point the "make noise" comments need to reiterate what the end goal is for that make noise. You're setting people up to just be angry and upset and protest the inequality or inefficiencies of our system when that's exactly what the politicians want (it's a feature, not a bug). No amount of protesting, a litany of policies at that, will be effective when the complete political spectrum is against change. Take a look at the Civil Rights Era and the voting that was concluded, it looks completely unlike anything we have now.

The political parties have strengthened their stranglehold (I've argued in the past that they are "political parties" in name only, they are more incorporated or an oligarch representatives at this point and should be regulated as such). They listen to power only, the power was taken from the working and lower classes a long time ago. We get our shows we can put on, but it doesn't move the needle anymore. It used to at least force them to talk about moving the needle, even that's gone now.

[–] ReadMoreBooks@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The core issue is that you only have 2 real options in america, third parties may as well not exist.

There's false assumptions necessary to reach this conclusion. Typically the false assumption is that the role of a third party is to win. The root cause of making this assumption is often that the scope of evaluation has been limited to one term or cycle.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I'm not convinced that voting for a third party has any positive effect, in one election cycle or over longer time. But I'm open to hearing your perspective.

[–] ReadMoreBooks@lemmy.zip 1 points 48 minutes ago

The false assumption that most make is that one cycle doesn't effect the next.

However, if a third party garners just 5% of the general election vote for POTUS then their platform and higher quality candidate will be on every ballot in the next cycle.

If there's a third choice on every ballot then the the third party platform places tremendous and immediate pressure upon the platforms of the two major parties. The third party doesn't actually win unless the other refuse to compromise. Long term, the continued threat is of greater value than a subsequent victory.

But, the electoral scheme doesn't work unless leftists trust leftists to determine the collective risk of voting third party for the states they reside in. Even Jacobin failed to trust twice.

Things are pretty fucked. Electoral means are slow. I tend to advocate for boycott, strike, and riot (encompassing a wide scope of wisely breaking laws).

[–] UpperBroccoli@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

But that’s not the way to solve the issue

So...... revolution? It worked once before!

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 5 points 6 hours ago

I mean sure! Take the whole CEO situation and springboard off that, you find yourselves in circumstances similar to pre-revolution France so the conditions are right.

[–] doingthestuff@lemy.lol 5 points 9 hours ago

This. I'm in the US and was fully prepared to protest whether Harris or Trump won, I'm opposed to them both in different ways. Trump and team may get me off my ass very quickly though.