Calling them a spoiler party only reinforces the power of the two-party system that stifles real choice. Third parties actually push important issues into the spotlight, challenging the status quo. And they give voters more options. We need more than this duopoly that we are under.
Acknowledging the reality that third parties cannot win under the current system is more useful in moving towards the alternatives you want that endlessly banging your head against the wall by running and supporting futile campaigns.
It’s not that we haven’t found the right moment or candidate. The electoral system in the US simply prevents third party candidates from being functional alternatives. You need to reckon with and change that reality if you want real alternatives.
How do you see these campaigns leading to reforms needed to break the two party stranglehold? Are these candidates working together to raise awareness on the issue? Or are they just looking to boost their own brand without actually achieving anything? To me it looks like the latter.
There are organized movements to get rid of the electoral college and first past the post voting. But I haven’t seen any of these candidates participating. Why not spend your energy posting about those organizations instead?
Breaking the two-party stranglehold isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution, and while I don’t have all the answers, I do know that raising awareness and running independent campaigns are crucial parts of the struggle.
These candidates are out there challenging the system, putting pressure on the establishment, and inspiring others to question the status quo. Just because they aren’t always front and center in every movement doesn’t mean they aren’t contributing to the fight.
It’s a multi-front battle, and every effort counts in pushing for real change, even if it doesn’t fit neatly into one box.
Brother, it’s not a matter of choosing one battle over another—it’s about fighting on all fronts.
I can raise hell about the stranglehold of the two-party system while also supporting efforts to abolish the electoral college. Revolution doesn’t demand we pick and choose our fights—it demands we fight them all, with everything we’ve got.
Calling them a spoiler party only reinforces the power of the two-party system that stifles real choice.
No, I mean that being spoliers is their function. They exist to siphon votes off Democrats, not as a side effect of gaining votes for a sincerely held belief in any cause, but as a cynical and deliberate attempt to decrease their chances and increase Republicans’ chances.
No, I mean that being spoliers is their function. They exist to siphon votes off Democrats
It’s absurd to claim that third parties are nothing more than tools to weaken the Democrats.
Many of us who champion third parties do so out of a fierce belief in the need for real, transformative change—not to play into the hands of the Republicans.
I’m beginning to think that maybe your real aim is to keep people shackled to the same two-headed beast that fears any challenge to its power.
And now I think you’re just another mouthpiece for the duopoly, terrified of the revolution that true independent voices could spark. And you are only saying this stuff to confuse people and make them second-guess themselves.
Who is a third party and doesn’t changed anything in my reply. It seems to me that you’re trying to stir up confusion and discontent because you fear the change that threatens the status quo. What party do you really work for?
To hear centrist Democrats say it, I’m a shill for Putin himself because I don’t like the Bidenyahu genocide. To hear you say it, I’m a shill for Democrats because I don’t like your spoiler candidate and her spoiler party.
To hear centrist Democrats say it, I’m a shill for Putin himself because I don’t like the Bidenyahu genocide. To hear you say it, I’m a shill for Democrats because I don’t like your spoiler candidate and her spoiler party.
Sounds like you’re caught in the crossfire of a broken system that labels anyone who challenges the status quo as a “shill” for one side or the other. Welcome to my world.
But let’s be real—standing against genocide and calling out the failures of the two-party system doesn’t make you a shill for anyone. It makes you someone who refuses to accept a false choice between two evils.
Whether you support third parties or not, the real fight is for a democracy that represents all voices, not just the ones convenient for those in power.
But it’s hard for me to feel sorry for you when you’re so adamant that Jill Stein is a shill for the Russians and Republicans, parroting the same baseless accusations that keep real change from happening. And those are the same accusations that you’re now facing yourself.
Third parties actually push important issues into the spotlight, challenging the status quo. And they give voters more options.
Jill Stein has run for public office a total of 8 times. Of those she was successful in getting elected and completing her term one single time. This office was: Lexington Town Meeting, a representative town meeting, the local legislative body in Lexington, Massachusetts. 3 years later she ran for the same office and won again…but then resigned during her term. source
This doesn’t look like a realistic candidate interested in a political career to change policy. How is this giving voters more options?
I’s about challenging a rigged system and giving a voice to those who are fed up with the same old politics. Her campaigns have always been about pushing the boundaries, forcing issues into the spotlight that the two-party system would rather ignore.
If you measure success by who stays in line, she’s not your candidate.
But if you value someone who stands up, even when the odds are against them, then Jill Stein represents the fight for real change.
Third parties are the relentless pulse of revolution, defying the chains of the status quo and daring to ignite the flames of true change in a system built to silence them.
You call it a “spoiler” party because it shakes the chains of the very system you’re too comfortable in.
The reality of the situation is that this so-called “zero chance” is exactly what terrifies the ruling class—because it’s a reminder that the people are waking up. Spoiler or not, the fight is about breaking the stranglehold of the two-headed beast that’s been robbing workers blind for generations.
Calling them a spoiler party only reinforces the power of the two-party system that stifles real choice. Third parties actually push important issues into the spotlight, challenging the status quo. And they give voters more options. We need more than this duopoly that we are under.
Acknowledging the reality that third parties cannot win under the current system is more useful in moving towards the alternatives you want that endlessly banging your head against the wall by running and supporting futile campaigns.
It’s not that we haven’t found the right moment or candidate. The electoral system in the US simply prevents third party candidates from being functional alternatives. You need to reckon with and change that reality if you want real alternatives.
Recognizing the flaws in the system is crucial, but waiting for the “right moment” without challenging the status quo only ensures nothing changes.
I personally think that supporting third parties is part of the fight to break down those barriers and push for the alternatives we need.
How do you see these campaigns leading to reforms needed to break the two party stranglehold? Are these candidates working together to raise awareness on the issue? Or are they just looking to boost their own brand without actually achieving anything? To me it looks like the latter.
There are organized movements to get rid of the electoral college and first past the post voting. But I haven’t seen any of these candidates participating. Why not spend your energy posting about those organizations instead?
Breaking the two-party stranglehold isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution, and while I don’t have all the answers, I do know that raising awareness and running independent campaigns are crucial parts of the struggle.
These candidates are out there challenging the system, putting pressure on the establishment, and inspiring others to question the status quo. Just because they aren’t always front and center in every movement doesn’t mean they aren’t contributing to the fight.
It’s a multi-front battle, and every effort counts in pushing for real change, even if it doesn’t fit neatly into one box.
Brother, it’s not a matter of choosing one battle over another—it’s about fighting on all fronts.
I can raise hell about the stranglehold of the two-party system while also supporting efforts to abolish the electoral college. Revolution doesn’t demand we pick and choose our fights—it demands we fight them all, with everything we’ve got.
No, I mean that being spoliers is their function. They exist to siphon votes off Democrats, not as a side effect of gaining votes for a sincerely held belief in any cause, but as a cynical and deliberate attempt to decrease their chances and increase Republicans’ chances.
It’s absurd to claim that third parties are nothing more than tools to weaken the Democrats.
Many of us who champion third parties do so out of a fierce belief in the need for real, transformative change—not to play into the hands of the Republicans.
I’m beginning to think that maybe your real aim is to keep people shackled to the same two-headed beast that fears any challenge to its power.
And now I think you’re just another mouthpiece for the duopoly, terrified of the revolution that true independent voices could spark. And you are only saying this stuff to confuse people and make them second-guess themselves.
A 23 day old account desperately shilling for third parties and telling everyone else they are a “mouthpiece”…
Really?
How long should I have an account before I can start posting stuff I am interested in? I didn’t see a timing reference when signing up.
Can’t say before posting inflammatory shit.
Something to consider before posting inflammatory shit… It’s almost like your content means more than your age… but you’re focused on what?
So because I am not voting for your candidate, and I believe in workers rights, this is “inflammatory shit”?! Say what, brother?!
I’ve already posted my opinion and views. I’m not sure what you seem to be unclear about. What can I help you understand, friend?
Substance and content matters? Maybe your posted “opinion” is disagreeable?
What can I help you understand as everyone downvotes you?
Oh, I am very sure what I post is disagreeable to you. It’s quite obvious that you don’t want the Duopoly Regime to change.
Ah, the downvotes—proof that I’ve struck a nerve in the belly of the two-headed snake you seem so enamored with.
If my words shake you to your core, it’s because they expose the rot of a system that thrives on keeping us divided and powerless.
I don’t need your help, friend; it’s clear you’re too busy worshiping the duopoly to see the truth staring you in the face.
And I’m still not gonna vote for Harris. Nor are many of my friends. You haven’t changed my mind at all. :)
I didn’t say third parties. I said the Green Party in particular.
Who is a third party and doesn’t changed anything in my reply. It seems to me that you’re trying to stir up confusion and discontent because you fear the change that threatens the status quo. What party do you really work for?
To hear centrist Democrats say it, I’m a shill for Putin himself because I don’t like the Bidenyahu genocide. To hear you say it, I’m a shill for Democrats because I don’t like your spoiler candidate and her spoiler party.
Sounds like you’re caught in the crossfire of a broken system that labels anyone who challenges the status quo as a “shill” for one side or the other. Welcome to my world.
But let’s be real—standing against genocide and calling out the failures of the two-party system doesn’t make you a shill for anyone. It makes you someone who refuses to accept a false choice between two evils.
Whether you support third parties or not, the real fight is for a democracy that represents all voices, not just the ones convenient for those in power.
But it’s hard for me to feel sorry for you when you’re so adamant that Jill Stein is a shill for the Russians and Republicans, parroting the same baseless accusations that keep real change from happening. And those are the same accusations that you’re now facing yourself.
Then don’t.
I don’t.
Jill Stein has run for public office a total of 8 times. Of those she was successful in getting elected and completing her term one single time. This office was: Lexington Town Meeting, a representative town meeting, the local legislative body in Lexington, Massachusetts. 3 years later she ran for the same office and won again…but then resigned during her term. source
This doesn’t look like a realistic candidate interested in a political career to change policy. How is this giving voters more options?
I’s about challenging a rigged system and giving a voice to those who are fed up with the same old politics. Her campaigns have always been about pushing the boundaries, forcing issues into the spotlight that the two-party system would rather ignore.
If you measure success by who stays in line, she’s not your candidate.
But if you value someone who stands up, even when the odds are against them, then Jill Stein represents the fight for real change.
Third parties are the relentless pulse of revolution, defying the chains of the status quo and daring to ignite the flames of true change in a system built to silence them.
You mean: it clarifies the reality of the situation - that the spoiler party has zero chance of winning.
You call it a “spoiler” party because it shakes the chains of the very system you’re too comfortable in.
The reality of the situation is that this so-called “zero chance” is exactly what terrifies the ruling class—because it’s a reminder that the people are waking up. Spoiler or not, the fight is about breaking the stranglehold of the two-headed beast that’s been robbing workers blind for generations.