You were shown a simple demonstration of the Spoiler Effect, which may cause Republicans to win the race if a third party manages to draw votes away from Democrats.
You’re still endorsing voting third party, saying you don’t care.
You’re endorsing helping Republicans.
What the other poster is implying isn’t that Republicans may vote Green. On the contrary, it’s that Democrats may vote Green and split their vote, while Republicans will stand united.
At the end of the day, when the votes are counted, your ideology doesn’t matter. Why you voted the way you did doesn’t matter. What matters is who wins the election, and if you’re consciously proposing an election strategy that may aid the Republicans, you’re contributing to their chances of victory.
And if you’re helping Republicans, don’t be surprised if people call you a Republican.
Blaming third-party voters for a potential Republican victory is totally misguided. Lemmy has been crying about this in every post that is about third parties.
If Democrats are so worried about the spoiler effect, they should focus on putting forward stronger candidates who can unite their base.
Voting third-party is not an endorsement of Republicans; it’s a demand for better representation and a push for real change.
If the Dem Party fails to inspire its voters, the fault lies with their candidates. Blame them, not the people who choose to vote their conscience.
If the Dem Party fails to inspire its voters, the fault lies with their candidates. Blame them, not the people who choose to vote their conscience.
That’s bullshit. The spoiler effect is a result of the relative position of candidates, not the strength of inspiration.
Total voters: 765
The winner was favorable to 56% of voters
lachlan - 427
emma - 338
Total voters: 765
The winner was favorable to 44% of voters
emma - 338
lachlan - 312
omalley - 115
Any party or candidate can fall victim to this, no matter how strong or inspirational they are. This is simply the result of everybody voting for the candidate closest to them.
The point is that this isn’t just about conscientious voting. There is a strategic element to it. That’s the unfortunate reality, and standing on principles alone won’t change it.
Support efforts to abolish the FPTP system to replace it with something like RCV, where you could then in good conscience vote Green first and Dem second. Support efforts at proportional representation to have Green members in the Houses. Support anything thay breaks up the two-party monopoly so that voting for a candidate who truly represents your values no longer becomes a political gamble.
But if you’re saying “I’d rather split the left-wing votes and risk a Trump victory than vote for Harris”, people will rightly call you a Republican muppet, because you’d essentially prefer Trump over Harris.
I’d rather vote for a candidate who truly represents my values than settle for mediocrity just to avoid a Republican win.
Voting based on principles is essential because it challenges the very system that forces voters into choosing the lesser of two evils. Real change begins when we stop accepting the status quo and demand a system where all voices are fairly represented.
Supporting third-party candidates isn’t about splitting the vote—it’s about pushing for the reforms necessary to break the two-party monopoly that limits our democracy.
And no, I’m not a “republican muppet” just because I am not voting for your candidate. If I wanted to vote republican, then I’d vote republican.
If Democrats are so worried about the spoiler effect, they should focus on putting forward stronger candidates who can unite their base.
Voting third-party is not an endorsement of Republicans; it’s a demand for better representation and a push for real change.
If the Dem Party fails to inspire its voters, the fault lies with their candidates. Blame them, not the people who choose to vote their conscience.
Supporting third-party candidates isn’t about splitting the vote
…but that’s the practical effect
—it’s about pushing for the reforms necessary to break the two-party monopoly that limits our democracy
…which you expect to happen, if Trump wins?
And no, I’m not a “republican muppet” just because I am not voting for your candidate. If I wanted to vote republican, then I’d vote republican.
I don’t think you want to vote Republican. I don’t think you want a Republican government. I think you consider it an acceptable alternative to sacrificing principles. And therein lies the issue.
The question at the heart of it all - and try to answer just yes or no - is this:
“The demented felon rapist backed by christofascist authoritarians seeking to abolish democracy is just as bad as the lawyer that promises tax credits to the lower and middle class, banning price gouging and has sued Big Oil in the past, whose running mate publicly endorses RCV which would make additional parties viable”
You were shown a simple demonstration of the Spoiler Effect, which may cause Republicans to win the race if a third party manages to draw votes away from Democrats.
You’re still endorsing voting third party, saying you don’t care.
You’re endorsing helping Republicans.
What the other poster is implying isn’t that Republicans may vote Green. On the contrary, it’s that Democrats may vote Green and split their vote, while Republicans will stand united.
At the end of the day, when the votes are counted, your ideology doesn’t matter. Why you voted the way you did doesn’t matter. What matters is who wins the election, and if you’re consciously proposing an election strategy that may aid the Republicans, you’re contributing to their chances of victory.
And if you’re helping Republicans, don’t be surprised if people call you a Republican.
Blaming third-party voters for a potential Republican victory is totally misguided. Lemmy has been crying about this in every post that is about third parties.
If Democrats are so worried about the spoiler effect, they should focus on putting forward stronger candidates who can unite their base.
Voting third-party is not an endorsement of Republicans; it’s a demand for better representation and a push for real change.
If the Dem Party fails to inspire its voters, the fault lies with their candidates. Blame them, not the people who choose to vote their conscience.
That’s bullshit. The spoiler effect is a result of the relative position of candidates, not the strength of inspiration.
Any party or candidate can fall victim to this, no matter how strong or inspirational they are. This is simply the result of everybody voting for the candidate closest to them.
So you’d rather have a Republican victory than a mediocre Democrat?
I’d rather vote for a candidate who truly represents my values than settle for mediocrity just to avoid a Republican win.
Accepting “mediocre” candidates only perpetuates a cycle of compromise without real progress.
That’s a yes then.
The point is that this isn’t just about conscientious voting. There is a strategic element to it. That’s the unfortunate reality, and standing on principles alone won’t change it.
Support efforts to abolish the FPTP system to replace it with something like RCV, where you could then in good conscience vote Green first and Dem second. Support efforts at proportional representation to have Green members in the Houses. Support anything thay breaks up the two-party monopoly so that voting for a candidate who truly represents your values no longer becomes a political gamble.
But if you’re saying “I’d rather split the left-wing votes and risk a Trump victory than vote for Harris”, people will rightly call you a Republican muppet, because you’d essentially prefer Trump over Harris.
I’d rather vote for a candidate who truly represents my values than settle for mediocrity just to avoid a Republican win.
Voting based on principles is essential because it challenges the very system that forces voters into choosing the lesser of two evils. Real change begins when we stop accepting the status quo and demand a system where all voices are fairly represented.
Supporting third-party candidates isn’t about splitting the vote—it’s about pushing for the reforms necessary to break the two-party monopoly that limits our democracy.
And no, I’m not a “republican muppet” just because I am not voting for your candidate. If I wanted to vote republican, then I’d vote republican.
If Democrats are so worried about the spoiler effect, they should focus on putting forward stronger candidates who can unite their base.
Voting third-party is not an endorsement of Republicans; it’s a demand for better representation and a push for real change.
If the Dem Party fails to inspire its voters, the fault lies with their candidates. Blame them, not the people who choose to vote their conscience.
You’re repeating yourself.
…but that’s the practical effect
…which you expect to happen, if Trump wins?
I don’t think you want to vote Republican. I don’t think you want a Republican government. I think you consider it an acceptable alternative to sacrificing principles. And therein lies the issue.
The question at the heart of it all - and try to answer just yes or no - is this:
Do you think Trump is preferable to Harris?
They are both exactly the same to me.
I don’t like either one. I won’t vote for either one.
“The demented felon rapist backed by christofascist authoritarians seeking to abolish democracy is just as bad as the lawyer that promises tax credits to the lower and middle class, banning price gouging and has sued Big Oil in the past, whose running mate publicly endorses RCV which would make additional parties viable”
💀
“I want republicans to continue to kill environmental regulations, and bring about more climate destruction. But trust me bro, I’m really a leftist”.