this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
198 points (92.7% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7192 readers
1 users here now

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

How many of us know by heart the old adage "voting third party is throwing your vote away"? Where did we learn this?

Through a basic understanding of the First Past the Post election mechanism. Voting third party does not help move the establishment parties left, it only hurts the left. The best thing for the left to do is turn up every single election (especially local elections) to vote D down the whole ticket en masse, until the Republican party is defunct. Additionally, voting for progressives in the primary.

The only way out of "voting third party is throwing your vote away" is to move away from FPTP. That means showing up and holding your nose until we elect enough candidates who support Ranked Choice.

[–] c0c0c0@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is truth. The old adage about throwing your vote away isn't exaggeration, or even opinion. In a First Past the Post election, is just math. And math doesn't care about anyone's sense of moral righteousness.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

until the Republican party is defunct

Everything is true except this. It's good to have at least two healthy parties competing for voters. So often, single party states allow the dominate party to get lazy because it no longer has to work hard to get votes.

At least ideally, the end result would be an electorate that is further to the left and Republican party that is not as crazy conservative. Overton window shifting and all that.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You misunderstand me. Once the Republican party is defunct, the Democratic party can fill in as the center-right neo-liberal party while a progressive party can emerge to the left. Two healthy parties.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I think your misreading the US electorate as being much further to the left than it actually is. What we have now is a fairly delicate dance between the two major parties, attempting to suck up various constituencies. It's resulted in an almost perfect equilibrium nationally. What you're suggesting leaves an enormous group of ex-Republican voters without a political home. In that scenario, the Democrats would move right to appeal to ex-Republicans for political advantage and the Progressive Party would move to the center to appeal to center-left voters. You would land more or less where we are now in the end.

Eh, the further left portion of the electorate has much lower turnout that the further right, largely due to apathy toward the centrism of Democrats. I think you're right that a Democrat/Progressive landscape would result in both moving right, but I think the Progressive would be firmly to the left of the modern Democrats, and the Democrat would be firmly to the left of the modern Republican.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Actually what we currently have is unbridled capitalism specifically the military industrial complex, with two vaguely different coats of paint. Culture warrior shit is just used as a rhetorical differentiator, "nothing fundamentally changes" under either party. I don't really want to ote for the party the has roe v wade abolished under it's watch, and then just uses it as a fund raising talking point.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But why would any current candidate that benefits from first past the post prefer ranked choice voting and why is it that magically a candidate that supports ranked choice voting will inevitably be preferred choice?

It really sounds like you are using RCV as a Shangri-La, but really just enforcing the status-quo.

This has happened already. Even though the landscape is dominated by the power hungry, there are in fact principled people who run to actually make a positive difference, from time to time. And yes, I would say that generally candidates who support ranked choice also agree with me on other issues.