394
Biden Skillfully Handled Xi Jinping’s U.S. Visit in Ways Trump Simply Never Could
(www.thedailybeast.com)
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 18 Nov 2023
394 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19072 readers
2820 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.
- 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
Sure as shit not a third party candidate.
So someone who does not support ranked choice voting. Great strategy lol.
You think throwing away your vote on a candidate who claims to support electoral reform but has no chance of winning will have any meaningful impact?
They won't have a chance to win if you don't vote for them.
They might if they joined a real party instead of a troupe cosplaying as politicians.
You want change, you join one of the real parties and fight to become a candidate in that party and gain enough influence to shift party policy.
If everyone that did the third party nonsense did that, there might be enough support in a real party to start changing things and maybe eventually make third parties viable instead of just a performative game.
That didn't work, Bernie is an independent that tried running as a Dem, but undemocratic super delegates and a biased media stopped him.
AOC and the justice democrats also failed and do whatever Nancy Pelosi says
And people have been playing with third party nonsense since the beginning of the country pretty much. It doesn't work because of our voting system, it's never worked. In the history of the country, no third party candidate for president has ever come close to getting enough electoral votes to win. The highest ever was Theodore Roosevelt, and he got 88 out of a necessary 256 to win, barely a third of the needed number.
More notably, the most successful third parties overall, with Roosevelt's Progressive (Bull Moose) party excluded, have largely been regressive, such as the American Independents with George Wallace, the Dixiecrats with Strom Thurmond, th Constitutional Union AND Lecompton Democratic in the 1860 election... Progressive third parties do not have a good track record, probably because it's a lot easier to get people to vote for a lost cause if they're doing it out of hate than it is if they actually want to improve things.
Bernie and AOC and others are being a fuckton more successful than third party candidates have been for the entire history of the nation.
They definitely need more support to overcome the entrenched forces against them, though. That's why they need people like us to support progressive candidates in primaries, and we need more people like them willing to do the hard work of getting into the democratic party and changing it from within.
Now, in a small election in a district where another party has a realistic chance, great! Vote that way. But most places aren't like that.
And don't forget voting third party when they have no chance can cause great harm. I would have thought the election of 2000 would've been enough to sear that into all our minds forever.
Then vote for candidates that support ranked choice voting.
At controlling potential third party voters and pulling them into the Democratic party so they can maintain their personal wealth.
Super delegates are not debatable. They prove the party is undemocratic, and a lost cause. The entire purpose of the justice democrats is what you said, and they failed.
The democratic party will not change, and will not save impoverished people in this country. Another party will.
You do far more damage voting for Democrats and then complaining that they have bad policy. They would be forced to have good policy if you instead left with your vote and supported the Green party.