4 ms·

> We, the people, are pretty powerless here. Most US americans have been voting for Democrats or Republicans or not at all for decades. Of course the politics

> We, the people, are pretty powerless here. Most US americans have been voting for Democrats or Republicans or not at all for decades. Of course the politics remain the same: Wars and politics that favor the richest. Please, vote for the Green Party or another reasonable party in 2020.

FabHK 8y ago
Maybe it's worth it to first reform the political system from a first-past-the-post system to more proportional representation (otherwise, unless I'm mistaken, those votes go pretty much straight to the wastepaper basket (or trash can, in this case)).
- dfxm12 8y ago
  Even in our current system, after a third party reaches a certain threshold, they qualify for government funding. It's something to think about if you don't like the candidates the major parties are running and thus assume your vote means nothing. Search for "Minor party candidates" here for the specifics: https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understanding-ways-support-federal-candidates/presidential-elections/public-funding-presidential-elections/ https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understand...
- lustysocietyorg 8y ago
  Clinton and Trump have both been elected by roughly 26% of eligible voters in 2016. https://mises.org/wire/26-percent-eligible-voters-voted-trump https://mises.org/wire/26-percent-eligible-voters-voted-trum... If you do not vote or vote for someone you do not want, your vote is worse than lost. There is much potential for other parties. And while the presidential election is most important regarding war and the rest of the world, other elections for local politicians are important too and maybe even more important for US citizens. Related talk: How To Eliminate The "Spoiler" Vote Phenomenon w/Jill Stein pt. 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgYEFxjJaUg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgYEFxjJaUg
- FiveSquared 8y ago
  Truth. I like how the young dems are doing in terms of anti-war and pro-privacy stance.
- dakna 8y ago
  This freakonomics episode treats the major parties as a duopoly and gives some insights how the voting system would need to change: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/politics-industry/ http://freakonomics.com/podcast/politics-industry/ Unfortunately to change the law you need voters who vote for a party that is willing to change it even though it came into power under the current law.
ntsplnkv2 8y ago
The green party has terrible candidates and often I disagree with their policies. I'm not going to vote for someone just because they're different from the establishment if they have positions I find ridiculous.
- parthdesai 8y ago
  And you agree with policies of other two parties? Let take 2016 elections for example, your choices were; Hillary, responsible for a failed country right now and rigged primaries or Trump, the less said about him is better. If enough people voted for a different party, that would keep these two main parties in sort of a check as well, knowing they can't get away with whatever they want.
  - ntsplnkv2 8y ago
    There are certainly things I don't agree with with the options available. This idea that candidates need to perfectly represent everyone's opinions is just absurd. I don't agree with everything that Hillary did or that Trump is doing. That doesn't mean everything they did was bad or good. But to suggest Jill Stein as a viable alternative when she has some dubious backing doesn't really empower choosing the 3rd party, does it?
    - parthdesai 8y ago
      Yeah, thats fair. I'm with you on that. You'll never find a candidate who you agree with completely, you just go with the one that agree the most with or disagree the least with.
    - lustysocietyorg 8y ago
      I guess you talk about Russia as dubious backer. You really believe that the POTUS (notably Jill Stein and the Green Party) could be paid by Russia to enforce Russian policies to the detriment of US citizens ? This idea is as crazy as the idea that China invented global warming to harm the USA economy. From https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/0111/932446-donald-trump-climate-change/ https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/0111/93244... Back in 2012, almost three years before he declared that he was going to run for the White House, Mr Trump tweeted: "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."
Retra 8y ago
Playing Jeopardy: "What would a paid Russian troll say?"
yourbandsucks 8y ago
The war in Iraq was a direct consequence of people voting for Nader over Gore.
- BeetleB 8y ago
  Funny, I thought the war was a direct consequence of people voting for Bush. Also thought the war was a direct consequence of more Democrats voting for Bush than the total number of votes Nader got.[0] Democrats favored Bush over Nader. The number of Democrats who voted for Bush exceeded those who voted for Nader five fold. In the last state I lived in, Democrats were far more hostile to 3rd party candidates than Republicans were - putting in a lot more effort to ensure they wouldn't get on the ballet. As someone who grew up in a country where people couldn't vote, I can't imagine acts more hostile to democracy than what I saw the Democrats do to limit choices on the ballot. I may vote Democrat often, but I don't see myself as ever supporting the party. [0] https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2000 https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2000
  - yourbandsucks 8y ago
    Bush voters got what they wanted. Nader and Stein voters did not. As far as registered Dems voting habitually R.. yeah, that happens, you should see the south.
    - BeetleB 8y ago
      >Bush voters got what they wanted. Nader and Stein voters did not. And had Nader voters voted for Gore, they would not have gotten what they wanted either had Gore won. They voted Nader because they did not want Gore. The only thing I can take away from your comment is that if your candidate lost, you wanted the wrong thing. >As far as registered Dems voting habitually R.. yeah, that happens, you should see the south. I do - and I see more Dems responsible for Bush than Nader voters.
      - yourbandsucks 8y ago
        There are different schools of ethics, of course, but utility counts for something. 500k dead Iraqis on account of how that election swung. You sure showed us Democrats.

FabHK 8y ago

Maybe it's worth it to first reform the political system from a first-past-the-post system to more proportional representation (otherwise, unless I'm mistaken, those votes go pretty much straight to the wastepaper basket (or trash can, in this case)).

dfxm12 8y ago
Even in our current system, after a third party reaches a certain threshold, they qualify for government funding. It's something to think about if you don't like the candidates the major parties are running and thus assume your vote means nothing. Search for "Minor party candidates" here for the specifics: https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understanding-ways-support-federal-candidates/presidential-elections/public-funding-presidential-elections/ https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understand...
lustysocietyorg 8y ago
Clinton and Trump have both been elected by roughly 26% of eligible voters in 2016. https://mises.org/wire/26-percent-eligible-voters-voted-trump https://mises.org/wire/26-percent-eligible-voters-voted-trum... If you do not vote or vote for someone you do not want, your vote is worse than lost. There is much potential for other parties. And while the presidential election is most important regarding war and the rest of the world, other elections for local politicians are important too and maybe even more important for US citizens. Related talk: How To Eliminate The "Spoiler" Vote Phenomenon w/Jill Stein pt. 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgYEFxjJaUg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgYEFxjJaUg
FiveSquared 8y ago
Truth. I like how the young dems are doing in terms of anti-war and pro-privacy stance.
dakna 8y ago
This freakonomics episode treats the major parties as a duopoly and gives some insights how the voting system would need to change: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/politics-industry/ http://freakonomics.com/podcast/politics-industry/ Unfortunately to change the law you need voters who vote for a party that is willing to change it even though it came into power under the current law.

ntsplnkv2 8y ago

The green party has terrible candidates and often I disagree with their policies. I'm not going to vote for someone just because they're different from the establishment if they have positions I find ridiculous.

parthdesai 8y ago
And you agree with policies of other two parties? Let take 2016 elections for example, your choices were; Hillary, responsible for a failed country right now and rigged primaries or Trump, the less said about him is better. If enough people voted for a different party, that would keep these two main parties in sort of a check as well, knowing they can't get away with whatever they want.
- ntsplnkv2 8y ago
  There are certainly things I don't agree with with the options available. This idea that candidates need to perfectly represent everyone's opinions is just absurd. I don't agree with everything that Hillary did or that Trump is doing. That doesn't mean everything they did was bad or good. But to suggest Jill Stein as a viable alternative when she has some dubious backing doesn't really empower choosing the 3rd party, does it?
  - parthdesai 8y ago
    Yeah, thats fair. I'm with you on that. You'll never find a candidate who you agree with completely, you just go with the one that agree the most with or disagree the least with.
  - lustysocietyorg 8y ago
    I guess you talk about Russia as dubious backer. You really believe that the POTUS (notably Jill Stein and the Green Party) could be paid by Russia to enforce Russian policies to the detriment of US citizens ? This idea is as crazy as the idea that China invented global warming to harm the USA economy. From https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/0111/932446-donald-trump-climate-change/ https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/0111/93244... Back in 2012, almost three years before he declared that he was going to run for the White House, Mr Trump tweeted: "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."

Retra 8y ago

Playing Jeopardy: "What would a paid Russian troll say?"

yourbandsucks 8y ago

The war in Iraq was a direct consequence of people voting for Nader over Gore.

BeetleB 8y ago
Funny, I thought the war was a direct consequence of people voting for Bush. Also thought the war was a direct consequence of more Democrats voting for Bush than the total number of votes Nader got.[0] Democrats favored Bush over Nader. The number of Democrats who voted for Bush exceeded those who voted for Nader five fold. In the last state I lived in, Democrats were far more hostile to 3rd party candidates than Republicans were - putting in a lot more effort to ensure they wouldn't get on the ballet. As someone who grew up in a country where people couldn't vote, I can't imagine acts more hostile to democracy than what I saw the Democrats do to limit choices on the ballot. I may vote Democrat often, but I don't see myself as ever supporting the party. [0] https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2000 https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2000
- yourbandsucks 8y ago
  Bush voters got what they wanted. Nader and Stein voters did not. As far as registered Dems voting habitually R.. yeah, that happens, you should see the south.
  - BeetleB 8y ago
    >Bush voters got what they wanted. Nader and Stein voters did not. And had Nader voters voted for Gore, they would not have gotten what they wanted either had Gore won. They voted Nader because they did not want Gore. The only thing I can take away from your comment is that if your candidate lost, you wanted the wrong thing. >As far as registered Dems voting habitually R.. yeah, that happens, you should see the south. I do - and I see more Dems responsible for Bush than Nader voters.
    - yourbandsucks 8y ago
      There are different schools of ethics, of course, but utility counts for something. 500k dead Iraqis on account of how that election swung. You sure showed us Democrats.