There’s literally only two options until we change the voting system. Something that is unlikely to happen under Democrats in the near future but guaranteed to never happen if we continue giving MAGA power.
The UK also has a FPTF voting system, yet the Lib Dems won enough votes in the past to form a coalition, and currently the 5th biggest party in parliament (Reform) is leading the polls, and the 8th biggest (Greens) is often-times polling in 2nd place. Even if you might not win the next election, you can help build something that gets the “only-ever-vote-for-1-of-the-2-leading-horses” people to also vote for it after that.
Some people will never vote for parties that cross ethical lines like genocide, omnicidal climate change, capitalism, oligarchy… For these people the lesser-evil is still way too evil.
“It is infinitely better to vote for freedom and fail than to vote for slavery and succeed.” - Eugene V. Debs, Appeal to Reason, 1900-10-13.
“Wage-labor is but a name; wage-slavery is the fact.” - Eugene V. Debs, The Socialist Party and the Working Class 1904-09-01
And when the LibDems last had a coalition, with The Conservatives, they were complicit in a very British genocide, that resulted in the culling over 130,000 disabled poor, in very cruel ways, amidst media jeering it on with lies.
Contrast that to the kinds of power sharing that happens in the devolved parliaments…
Mathematical game theory might be too abstract for some. You’re correct but I’m worried the message may be seen as arguing for entrenching the status quo, it’s a packaging problem for a bitter pill.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t end FPTP but this has become a thought ending cliche.
England is mostly FPTP they have ditched both Labour and the Conservatives in the last few years according to the polls. Canada has FPTP and they have 3 viable parties.
The math is not preventing a third party. This mindset is.
Was it around the time when they passed their nationalized healthcare service? The healthcare service that wouldn’t be a thing without the NDP. The kind of healthcare we still don’t have here in the US. The kind of healthcare that polls at like 70% in the US.
I’m not arguing that the NDP didn’t do anything for Canada I’m a staunch supporter of them, but Canada has been barreling closer and closer to a two-party system and to cover your eyes and say it doesn’t exist because it’s inconvenient is insincere at best
Things can go either way. Canada can be moving away from the NDP; England is moving away from their 2 entrenched party. To cover your eyes and say FPTP makes things we literally have historical examples of impossible because it’s inconvenient is simply ignoring reality.
Yes FPTP does make it harder and we should end FPTP, but it is possible. Especially when both of the 2 major parties are refusing to address massively consequential issues such as healthcare and the military industrial complex.
Agreed, it’s intensely frustrating that we’ve found ourselves caught in a very American “lesser of two evils” system where the major parties don’t give a fuck about the average person. We have a lot of positive change happening at the provincial level. However, a handful of exceptions in the face of an avalanche of examples to the contrary. That said I don’t want to bully someone for hoping, if you think it doesn’t matter, go for it.
Its not correct. That’s not how statistics work. Its very much possible for a non-democrat or non-republican to win. Predicting likely outcomes doesn’t mean those things will happen. Y’all sound like MBA bros.
I’d argue that Donald trump was third party at the start
Donald Trump has always been their boy, even through his trust buying phase.
In 2004, a friend who had worked with Trump, came back to our home town for new years, in our fave pub, and told us what a joke of a played narcissist he was, being primed by his psychopathic handlers for a puppet presidency. It stopped seeming like an absurd plausibility about a decade later.
He’s their boy.
Bernie, alas, also, not the token virtue paragon we’ve had presented to us to placate us with as much as we’d like him to be. Solution space may be elsewhere yet.
No, I really don’t, did you see 2016 and 2024. They voted in utter incompetence rather than consider it. I agree with you that it’s incredibly frustrating but in order for a third party to be viable ranked choice would need to be introduced. It’s a bitter pill.
Theres more than two options. Its an absurd premise to begin with.
There’s literally only two options until we change the voting system. Something that is unlikely to happen under Democrats in the near future but guaranteed to never happen if we continue giving MAGA power.
The UK also has a FPTF voting system, yet the Lib Dems won enough votes in the past to form a coalition, and currently the 5th biggest party in parliament (Reform) is leading the polls, and the 8th biggest (Greens) is often-times polling in 2nd place. Even if you might not win the next election, you can help build something that gets the “only-ever-vote-for-1-of-the-2-leading-horses” people to also vote for it after that.
Some people will never vote for parties that cross ethical lines like genocide, omnicidal climate change, capitalism, oligarchy… For these people the lesser-evil is still way too evil.
“It is infinitely better to vote for freedom and fail than to vote for slavery and succeed.” - Eugene V. Debs, Appeal to Reason, 1900-10-13.
“Wage-labor is but a name; wage-slavery is the fact.” - Eugene V. Debs, The Socialist Party and the Working Class 1904-09-01
And when the LibDems last had a coalition, with The Conservatives, they were complicit in a very British genocide, that resulted in the culling over 130,000 disabled poor, in very cruel ways, amidst media jeering it on with lies.
Contrast that to the kinds of power sharing that happens in the devolved parliaments…
These are not the same.
Mathematical game theory might be too abstract for some. You’re correct but I’m worried the message may be seen as arguing for entrenching the status quo, it’s a packaging problem for a bitter pill.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t end FPTP but this has become a thought ending cliche.
England is mostly FPTP they have ditched both Labour and the Conservatives in the last few years according to the polls. Canada has FPTP and they have 3 viable parties.
The math is not preventing a third party. This mindset is.
Yep. The self fulfilling defeatism prophecy. And *poof!*, the truth of it vanishes once it stops getting uttered and believed.
The best comparison is probably the “Biden is the most electable candidate” narrative from the 2020 primary.
Can you tell me the last time NDP won a federal election in Canada?
Was it around the time when they passed their nationalized healthcare service? The healthcare service that wouldn’t be a thing without the NDP. The kind of healthcare we still don’t have here in the US. The kind of healthcare that polls at like 70% in the US.
Reminds of the Princeton study…
I’m not arguing that the NDP didn’t do anything for Canada I’m a staunch supporter of them, but Canada has been barreling closer and closer to a two-party system and to cover your eyes and say it doesn’t exist because it’s inconvenient is insincere at best
Things can go either way. Canada can be moving away from the NDP; England is moving away from their 2 entrenched party. To cover your eyes and say FPTP makes things we literally have historical examples of impossible because it’s inconvenient is simply ignoring reality.
Yes FPTP does make it harder and we should end FPTP, but it is possible. Especially when both of the 2 major parties are refusing to address massively consequential issues such as healthcare and the military industrial complex.
Agreed, it’s intensely frustrating that we’ve found ourselves caught in a very American “lesser of two evils” system where the major parties don’t give a fuck about the average person. We have a lot of positive change happening at the provincial level. However, a handful of exceptions in the face of an avalanche of examples to the contrary. That said I don’t want to bully someone for hoping, if you think it doesn’t matter, go for it.
Sure but it makes a hell of a lot more sense than telling everyone not to vote.
Its not correct. That’s not how statistics work. Its very much possible for a non-democrat or non-republican to win. Predicting likely outcomes doesn’t mean those things will happen. Y’all sound like MBA bros.
Not under FPTP unfortunately.
You dont think that both parties could offend the majority of americans and cause a third party to win?
I’d argue that Donald trump was third party at the start, and that republicans and democrats offending most Americans is how we ended up with him.
If Bernie or someone like him were to win the presidency, would they be considered a democrat or an independent?
Donald Trump has always been their boy, even through his trust buying phase.
In 2004, a friend who had worked with Trump, came back to our home town for new years, in our fave pub, and told us what a joke of a played narcissist he was, being primed by his psychopathic handlers for a puppet presidency. It stopped seeming like an absurd plausibility about a decade later.
He’s their boy.
Bernie, alas, also, not the token virtue paragon we’ve had presented to us to placate us with as much as we’d like him to be. Solution space may be elsewhere yet.
Every time I mention this “elsewhere” though I get called an idiot who doesn’t understand that there’s only two choices.
When confronted with that, the socratic method may help.
No, I really don’t, did you see 2016 and 2024. They voted in utter incompetence rather than consider it. I agree with you that it’s incredibly frustrating but in order for a third party to be viable ranked choice would need to be introduced. It’s a bitter pill.