More Americans say they think former President Trump will beat President Biden if they are their parties’ respective nominees for president, according to a new poll by The Economist/YouGov. Asked i…
Hah, thanks, but the raw truth of it is that it’s probably too late in the cycle for a third-party candidate with an actual chance to emerge (and I don’t know who the hell would be a popular third party candidate in this environment). In a two-party system like our’s, you either have to win a primary of one of the two parties (which, unfortunately, will be one of the two octogenarians), or hit the ground fucking running like Ross Perot, who came out swinging at 30%+ in polling early in the year.
Unfortunately, as it stands now, with Trump’s supporters lockstep behind him, most third-party protest votes are likely to take from Biden, not Trump, and simply offer a better chance of a Trump victory. And that is… not a pretty future.
So then we really don’t have a democracy since we’re being forced to only vote for Trump or Biden, instead of other candidates we might align with better?
How does that translate to “we don’t really have a democracy”?
If people didn’t want Trump, they could very easily vote for anyone but him.
But a lot of people want Trump. That’s the sad fucking fact of it. Which means that the best option is to coalesce around a single candidate in opposition who has the best chance of beating him - which most who aren’t Trump bootlickers have agreed, however reluctantly, is Biden.
We have a democracy. It’s just that half the people in it crave fascism, and the rest of us are trying to unite with whoever the fuck we can to stop it.
Our democracy has a lot of very undemocratic things about it that put us in this situation: FPTP, the electoral college, the Reapportionment Act of 1929, and a ton of state policies.
While all of that is true, the fundamental problem being brought up is a democratic one - a near-majority of people want a shithead, so the only strategic thing to do, in a democratic election, is try to unite an actual majority around a non-shithead.
Guess the Dem party needs to work harder on actually giving voters something to vote for rather than something to vote against or they’ll lose. Voters won’t switch to vote Trump, they’ll just stay home.
American politics is too binary to be actually considered democratic. This political system has obvious issues, the biggest one you just discovered for yourself.
If there is only a choice between a and b, with one of them being completely unacceptable, you end up being forced to vote for the other regardless of if they are only marginally better. Voting for a third party under that system is technically possible but only takes away votes from the less terrible choice.
Your idealistic idea of what “democracy” means has never existed in the United States, but if you want anything close to it, you’re going to have to win it within the confines of the current system. The right seems to understand that, and they’re close to succeeding. Throwing your hands up and not voting for the only realistic chance of not devolving into an autocracy is a choice too, regardless of the principle you’re standing on to do it.
since we’re being forced to only vote for Trump or Biden, instead of other candidates we might align with better?
You’re not forced to vote for one of them. But they are the only two for whom a vote matters.
You are free to not vote. You are free to vote for a third party. You are free to vote for a joke candidate. But if you care at all about the outcome of the election, there is absolutely a correct person to vote for. Until we elect a congress that will pass comprehensive voting reform laws, it doesn’t matter who you align with; it only matters which of the “big two” you prefer to win.
The game we play has specific rules. If you care about the future, you should play by them. The hard work of changing the system into something better takes place in between elections, not during election years.
I don’t want either of them old mofos to win, we need someone younger like in their 50’s or 60’s or so, with relevant political experience and the better interest of the people and the environment in mind of course.
In the primaries maybe, in the general you have 2 options, voting anything else increases the chance of a trump win. Which is objectively worse for everyone.
Why in the flying donkey nuts do people think the only two options are elderly people gradually losing their marbles?
Jebus H Christ, there are other people you can vote for.
Imagine wanting a Trump victory this badly.
I definitely don’t care for the orange turnip, but that doesn’t mean the only other option is Biden.
Anyone for Vermin Supreme?
Glad to see you here PugJesus, you’re awesome! Hell I’d rather vote for you!
Hah, thanks, but the raw truth of it is that it’s probably too late in the cycle for a third-party candidate with an actual chance to emerge (and I don’t know who the hell would be a popular third party candidate in this environment). In a two-party system like our’s, you either have to win a primary of one of the two parties (which, unfortunately, will be one of the two octogenarians), or hit the ground fucking running like Ross Perot, who came out swinging at 30%+ in polling early in the year.
Unfortunately, as it stands now, with Trump’s supporters lockstep behind him, most third-party protest votes are likely to take from Biden, not Trump, and simply offer a better chance of a Trump victory. And that is… not a pretty future.
One theory I’ve heard is the No Labels folks picking up Haley once she’s out.
So then we really don’t have a democracy since we’re being forced to only vote for Trump or Biden, instead of other candidates we might align with better?
How does that translate to “we don’t really have a democracy”?
If people didn’t want Trump, they could very easily vote for anyone but him.
But a lot of people want Trump. That’s the sad fucking fact of it. Which means that the best option is to coalesce around a single candidate in opposition who has the best chance of beating him - which most who aren’t Trump bootlickers have agreed, however reluctantly, is Biden.
We have a democracy. It’s just that half the people in it crave fascism, and the rest of us are trying to unite with whoever the fuck we can to stop it.
Our democracy has a lot of very undemocratic things about it that put us in this situation: FPTP, the electoral college, the Reapportionment Act of 1929, and a ton of state policies.
While all of that is true, the fundamental problem being brought up is a democratic one - a near-majority of people want a shithead, so the only strategic thing to do, in a democratic election, is try to unite an actual majority around a non-shithead.
As Republicans have proven twice: you don’t need a majority to win the presidency.
This isn’t to say people shouldn’t vote for Biden, just that it might still end badly.
Guess the Dem party needs to work harder on actually giving voters something to vote for rather than something to vote against or they’ll lose. Voters won’t switch to vote Trump, they’ll just stay home.
“I don’t like the boring old guy, therefore, welcome, fascism!”
Thanks, me and all the other people to be herded into the concentration camps thank you for your stunning dedication to democracy.
Blame the Dems for not earning the votes if it happens.
This says more about the character of the voter than it does about the Democratic Party’s poor choice in candidates.
If you choose to not fight fascism because the alternative isn’t perfection, you’ve made a very foolish choice.
You’re not helping much by posting YouGov nonsense.
Is this news to you?
American politics is too binary to be actually considered democratic. This political system has obvious issues, the biggest one you just discovered for yourself.
If there is only a choice between a and b, with one of them being completely unacceptable, you end up being forced to vote for the other regardless of if they are only marginally better. Voting for a third party under that system is technically possible but only takes away votes from the less terrible choice.
So democracy is already dead in the US. Got it.
Your idealistic idea of what “democracy” means has never existed in the United States, but if you want anything close to it, you’re going to have to win it within the confines of the current system. The right seems to understand that, and they’re close to succeeding. Throwing your hands up and not voting for the only realistic chance of not devolving into an autocracy is a choice too, regardless of the principle you’re standing on to do it.
We have a kind of democracy
You’re not forced to vote for one of them. But they are the only two for whom a vote matters.
You are free to not vote. You are free to vote for a third party. You are free to vote for a joke candidate. But if you care at all about the outcome of the election, there is absolutely a correct person to vote for. Until we elect a congress that will pass comprehensive voting reform laws, it doesn’t matter who you align with; it only matters which of the “big two” you prefer to win.
The game we play has specific rules. If you care about the future, you should play by them. The hard work of changing the system into something better takes place in between elections, not during election years.
Not who will win, no. Sure, you can vote for the 1%, 3%, 5% candidates.
The winner will be either the Republican or the Democrat.
There are plenty of people you can vote for, but there are only two people who might win. Vote intelligently. Vote like the future depends on it.
Which one has a chance of winning?
I don’t want either of them old mofos to win, we need someone younger like in their 50’s or 60’s or so, with relevant political experience and the better interest of the people and the environment in mind of course.
Such as? Give me a name. Who has a chance of winning?
I’d vote for Vermin Supreme. Everyone needs a free pony and good oral hygiene.
In the primaries maybe, in the general you have 2 options, voting anything else increases the chance of a trump win. Which is objectively worse for everyone.