Really you don’t need to read more than one chart:

If you vote for anyone other than Harris, you’re voting for Trump:

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    The entire reason they have a vote base at all is not dissimilar to Trump: civic illiteracy. Unfortunately she appeals greatly to these newcomers to politics or those who care not about watching the other side literally take a sledgehammer to the country but rather point to the other side for not fixing the damage quickly enough. There was a brief moment in time when I was a new voter and at a very shallow level liked the Green Party platform and Stein…

    … But it didn’t take long for me to realize that was utterly self-defeatist. And if Stein actually cared about the issues she pretends to care about, then she would simply run for Congress as AOC or Sanders have done and influence change in the Democratic party. Changing the party from the inside is far easier than going against the mathematically-impossible 3rd-party vote that ultimately results in a proven Spoiler Vote. So you’re right… Some naive folks do support Stein; and those naive folks absolutely have more in common with the Democratic coalition than the Republican ones. So why would they ever want to support Republicans via Spoiler vote?

    Anyways, we should all be advocating for Campaign Finance & Election Reform so we can truly vote for who we most ideally want without risk to supporting the person or party furthest from our views.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      Anyways, we should all be advocating for Campaign Finance & Election Reform

      You’re not going to get that with an incumbent party. How do you abolish FPTP inside an organization that won’t give DC it’s statehood?

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/news/press-releases/committee-democrats-demand-statehood-for-dc-defend-district-s-right-to-home-rule

        An Incumbent party already supports DC statehood and it would benefit their party greatly no less. It is completely possible to transform a party (e.g., how Democrats used to be what Republicans are now) and also push another party out (e.g., the Whigs) from within. We do that one Representative at a time, such as how Bernie Sanders and AOC have transformed the Democrat party.

        I’ve written extensively elsewhere on the topic of abolishing & replacing FPTP and more, and ultimately, I believe it’s going to require a groundswell bipartisan effort state-by-state on a scale as big as the civil rights movement to pressure for a new Constitutional Amendment, along with an accompanying state-level Constitutional amendment in each state. To me it’s the only way to truly fix all the core problems while also making it immune to the corrupt Supreme Court.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          2 months ago

          An Incumbent party already supports DC statehood

          They failed to pass a statehood bill in 2009 and again in 2017. That would suggest the party does not, in fact, support the change.

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            In both cases the outcome was overwhelmingly a result of Republican obstructionism with the vast majority who voted to support DC Statehood being Democrat. There is no reason Democrats wouldn’t want another state that would be the bluest in the country to statehood lol. Democrats had a filibuster-proof super-majority for like, two months, and if you recall that kind of had other things going on at the time in 2009—including but not limited to health care reform and recession recovery.

            In 2017… You know who was President and who controlled the Senate, right…?

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              2 months ago

              In both cases the outcome was overwhelmingly a result of Republican obstructionism

              Democrats claiming they need 60 votes to do anything are as big a pack of liars as Republicans claiming Unitary Executive is a thing.

              These are institutions that are hostile to a majority black state.

              • lennybird@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                They did and they do. Especially for partisan policies.

                Show me the Republican Senators in 2017 willing to support DC statehood that would get it across the finish line.

                These are institutions that are hostile to a majority black state.

                Major Citation need for an extraordinary claim. Where is your proof Democrats of today whose presidential nominee is black is trying to stop this? Lmao?

                How is DC statehood bad for Dems? Lol.