654
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
654 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19097 readers
2794 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That's true. But...
We know there is an extensive campaign by the Russian government to divide the left and attempt to get Trump re-elected. And given the nature of our current electoral system, there are only a few reasons why someone would try to get people not to vote for Harris:
I mean that. I think the majority of people playing that particular game are paid to. Doesn't mean they all are, of course, but it's impossible to ignore the massive uptick in content from them right now, especially from shiny new accounts and from accounts that have been mostly inactive until now. There just aren't that many third-party true believers or Republicans who want to spend all day, every day, pretending to be abrasive leftists.
What about new accounts posting pro-democrat articles. Are they agents of the democratic party being paid to post articles too?
Given the much greater size of the population that plans to vote Democrat, not likely.
Let's take this out of the realm of politics for a sec, and bring up a topic nearly everyone can agree on: Chocolate. A full 90% of Americans like chocolate and prefer it to other candy categories. (Seriously, look it up. Americans fucking love chocolate.) Now imagine if you went to a candy discussion forum, and found that there was a flood of similarly-phrased and comments from a bunch of new accounts, all extolling the virtues of gummy bears and denigrating chocolate as a candy choice.
Would you find that believable? Or would you suspect some gummy bear aficionado had set up bots to spam the forum?
But is everything a fucking conspiracy?! I mean, a full HALF of the country is not voting for Harris. Half.
Are there some people paid to promote? Yeah, I'm sure there are. For EVERY party. I just don't think it's nearly as much as you do.
Also, it would be a total fucking waste of money to pay someone to shill on Lemmy. Lemmy hates third-parties with a passion anyway.
People hate me so much, that when I have posted non-political posts to say a science community, within 30 seconds there will be 10 downvotes. And not from the science community, because even they get confused why so many downvotes so fast.
Why? My name. And why? Because I posted third-party articles.
I'm very proud to vote third-party, but the amount of bullying and false accusations I get from Democrats are much more hateful than what I get from Republicans. I mean, Republicans hate me too, but nothing like the Democrats on Lemmy. lmao
And I promise you, any slight motivation I had for even considering switching to Democrat, was obliterated by the comments and hate I get here. I'll never vote for Harris now. I don't care what happens. lol
I don't hate you. I think you're incredibly naive, and I think you've likely inadvertently consumed Russian propaganda specifically designed to split the left in the United States, but that doesn't make me hate you.
It just makes me sad.
I have a couple kids, as I mentioned, both LGBTQ+. People like you, I don't think you intend my kids harm. But your vote will potentially boost Donald Trump. And your rhetoric online, if successful, would further boost Donald Trump. And Trump is a direct threat to my kids.
So no, I don't hate you. But I'm scared of what you and people like you could do to my kids in the name of ideological purity.
But half of the country is not voting for Harris. Not everyone is under the influence of Russian propaganda. Lots of people just have a different opinion.
I'm going to blow your mind:
https://www.prri.org/press-release/new-prri-report-reveals-nearly-one-in-five-americans-and-one-in-four-republicans-still-believe-in-qanon-conspiracy-theories/
It's certainly not half the country, but a shockingly, disturbingly large portion of the Republican electorate fell for "QAnon" junk being spread largely by Russian sources posing as conservatives. The left is far less susceptible to outright propaganda tactics like that, but Russia is pushing for division extremely hard.
And from how many people here who think that every single poster who isn't voting for Harris, is some paid russian agent, it seems like a pretty big chunk of the Democrat electorate is gullible and paranoid too.
You need to account for sampling bias. This is a forum that strongly attracts a self-selecting group comprised almost entirely of those on the left. Very few Republicans actually find their way here, and the few that do are typically downvoted into oblivion.
At the same time, there's a flood of supposedly leftist accounts, most new, trying desperately to get Trump elected, at the same time as news comes out that... well, that Russia is doing an awful lot of that shit.
So people here are suspicious.
So then why would Russian lackey's come and post in a forum where they know no one will change their minds?
So actually your argument proves to me that they are not Russians trying to turn the vote. I get accused of being Russian, every single day here. lol
I thought that would be obvious. Again, this is a self-selecting group of lefty folks. If someone works in one of Russia's troll farms, and their job today is to try to divide the left, then they're gonna go to where the left hangs out.
If someone like that shows up shouting, "Trump 2024! MAGA!" then they're not going to make any headway. Like I said, Republicans here tend to get downvoted into oblivion.
So instead, they show up and go, "I'm a lefty, too. Very left. In fact, I'm so leftilicious that I hate Harris. Don't vote for Harris, she's just like the Republicans! Instead, vote for [INSERT CANDIDATE WITH NO CHANCE OF WINNING]! Because believe me, [INSERT CANDIDATE WITH NO CHANCE OF WINNING] is much, much better! Be ideologically pure! And whatever you do, don't worry about Donald Trump becoming president, because I'm sure that with enough of us voting for them, [INSERT CANDIDATE WITH NO CHANCE OF WINNING] will totes win!"
And they get downvoted to oblivion. And even stalked. It happened to me actually! lol
It's true, they do. But not always. It depends on how many there are in any given post, spam-upvoting each other. And... it depends on how successful their divisive arguments are. As far as they're concerned, it doesn't matter if 99% of the time they fail to get traction. They're going for that 1%, that one susceptible person who can be convinced to throw their vote away on a third-party candidate in a FPTP election where that vote has a 0% chance of electing that third-party candidate.
Personally, I don't think you're one of the Russian trolls. I think you're one of their victims.
Friend, I've been voting since the 1988 election. Almost always third-party. Based on my social connections and third parties and groups I have met and protested with.
And before that--even when in grade school--I never liked the idea of two main political parties running things.
I've been doing this long before "Russian propaganda" was a thing. We didn't even have internet when I started questioning things.
The truth is, it’s the system designed by those in power that ensures third parties never get a fair shot, not the fault of those of us trying to break free. Every vote for a third party is a step toward tearing down the walls built by the ruling class, and you’d better believe that’s a vote well spent.
Personally, I don’t think you’re a Duopoly worshipper. But I do think you’re one of their victims.
I want to ask you something. Don't answer immediately, stop to really think about the answer and what it means.
How many politicians have you voted for that either won or got second place? In our FPTP system, those are the only outcomes that matter. Winning means you got into an elected position. Second place means you may still have a political future.
If you've been voting mostly third-party your entire adult life, there is a very good chance you have literally never had any effect on any election whatsoever. You and every single other voter who voted for your preferred candidates could have stayed home on election day and not only would the winner have remained the same, the person who came in second would have stayed the same.
I'm willing to bet that if you stop and add up every single time your preferred candidate won or got second place, and every single time that person was running as either a Democrat or a Republican, you'll find that it's the same number.
Let’s break this down. Seems like you’re saying that unless my candidate wins or places second, my vote doesn’t matter.
But if the vast majority of people are convinced that only the "top two" matter, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why? Because everyone keeps voting for who they think'll win instead of who actually represents them.
This mindset locks us into the exact duopoly that keeps the same tired system in place. The moment we accept that third-party candidates don’t matter, we’re giving more power to the existing system that thrives on limiting our choices. Voting isn’t just about winning today, it’s about showing that people do want alternatives, and that sends a signal that can’t be ignored forever. I vote for who best represents my values. I don't just vote for who I think will win.
YES. That's exactly what I'm saying. In a FPTP election system, that's literally how it works.
I'm not a fan of it. I'd love for a vote that goes to a third party to actually count in some way. But in the current system we all live under, that's not what happens. Instead, at best you get a Ross Perot - someone who pulls votes from both parties. He became a media darling for a while because of it. But you know what? All his voters may as well have stayed home, because he got neither first nor second place. We had Bill Clinton, we had Bush the Elder as a one-termer, and both Perot and his independent party faded into obscurity.
That won't change until we get rid of FPTP elections. That's a prerequisite for third-party votes mattering.
Until then, you have literally thrown every vote you've ever cast for a third-party candidate away. It didn't matter. And it even helped the candidate you were most ideologically opposed to.
If you dispute that, you dispute math.
And by you being so adamant about it, and trying to pressure people not to vote for third party, you are actually contributing to the problem.
You're actually reinforcing the very system that we're stuck with. Instead of allowing space for new voices and genuine alternatives, that pressure discourages change and keeps the duopoly alive.
I'm voting third party. Proudly. I don't care how many people try to pressure me or bully me. I'm sticking with the Socialist party. Thank you!
What you really mean here is that you don't care about facts and that you want other people to adopt that same attitude.
I'm not being "adamant" about it, just realistic. Until we do away with FPTP voting, I will continue to encourage voters to pick the candidate that is furthest to the left and also has a good chance to win, because that's the pragmatic solution and the only route to viable third-party candidates.
Which neither the Democrats nor the Republicans want to change. I will continue to encourage voters to pick the candidate that best fits their values, regardless of political party.
Right because that's absolutely and inarguably true.
Me and most of the people in my social circle. Look at the campaigns of socialist Claudia De la Cruz and the crowds of people showing up at her demonstrations. You think most of those people are getting paid?
And how do you think people just magically get paid to start posting articles? The reason I am asking is because I get accused of this DAILY. lol
That's a statistically insignificant blip unless your social circle is, for example, Delaware.
No, of course not. I was referring specifically to online, where a single person can operate thousands of bots spamming nonsense. You can't do something like that at a physical event.
That said, her rallies attract hundreds of people at best. Harris' rallies attract tens of thousands of people, with thousands more standing outside. And De la Cruz is polling in the low single digits. She's barely a statistical blip. Yet online forums are absolutely flooded with support for her and for Jill Stein.
And I know people like myself get accused of getting paid daily. And why? Because we post news articles about third parties. Not everything is a conspiracy.
And also, to your point, if these third parties are such a statistical blip, then you have nothing to be worried or angry about. So why even get mad at posts that aren't pro-harris?! Such small statistical blips shouldn't affect the outcome of the election at all, right?
You know why people accuse you of that and that you're lying about it here.
I'm not mad at posts from actual people, which I do think you are. You've engaged in ways that thoroughly convince me you're not a bot or troll. I happen to disagree with you, but that's okay.
I can accept that, brother. We'll agree to disagree. Which I think is fine. :)