• Gestrid@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The Green Party is a thing in America.

    Republican and Democrat are the two biggest parties by a large margin, but a few other smaller parties exist. Plus, some people run as an Independent. They’re not affiliated with any party at all.

    Edit: I never meant to imply the other parties had any chance at winning an election in a meaningful way, which is what these replies seem to think I was saying. (They don’t have a chance, honestly.) But other parties do exist, including a party in which you can “vote green”. That is all I’m saying.

    • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      In a first past the post system of districts with single representative candidates, it almost always resolves to two viable parties. That’s the way it’s been for basically all of American history.

      The parties can change, but the shape of the system remains constant: a vote is only effective when cast for the largest opponent of your least desired candidate. It’s unintuitive and discouraging.

      The parliamentary systems used in much of Europe, for all their flaws, do allow for more robust and diverse representation.

    • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Greens in America aren’t in a position to govern. Even if Stein got enough electoral votes through the work of 30-60 literal miracles, she’d be totally unable to govern effectively. You need a deep bench and more of a base in the other branches of government to form a party that can effect changes and run this country

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        There’s more to federal elections than winning. It’s always hilarious when people that don’t understand how fucked our system is try to teach others.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Despite there being more to federal election third party remains suppressed and will always be suppressed by first past the post.

          • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            100%. But ballot access, federal funding, and being able to actually run spoilers locally are pretty important.

            • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Only if you don’t consider the third party’s we have now act as an extention to the pejorative parties.

    • MalachaiConstant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      There is no viable third party without voting reform.

      If you really want smaller parties to have any chance, go help the people within the democratic party who are trying to make that happen.

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      I love how you exactly proved their point without realising. Please go look up the spoiler effect with first-past-the-post voting.

      • Zengen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        Then we can use third party candidates to determine who the power actually goes to. At the end of the day. America is so bipolar split tlboth parties are now completely at the mercy of anyone who can garner 10% support. RFK Jr at this point can literally be the decider or who becomes president and who doesn’t. Maybe we can use that as a tool of power to force the 2 parties to open the voting system up or have their power cockblocked from them every election cycle.

        • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          No, this is not how it works. Please look up the spoiler effect.

          I can’t vote because I don’t live there, but am in the imperial core of countries, so it would be very nice to not have fascists in charge, considering we literally have prosecuted whistleblowers reporting on warcrimes at the behest of the US government. We’re your little bitches whether we like it or not.

          Y’all really do need to be hyper-focused on pushing for sweeping electoral reform, for sure.

          In the meantime though, voting for a 3rd party under your system is basically a vote for the person you don’t want.

          Vote Biden if you would dislike having Trump more. If you don’t want to do that, then yeah, you’re basically admitting you’re cool with the outcome of Trump presidency.

          Please don’t waste your vote, your vassals beg you.

            • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Look up the spoiler effect. Please! This vassal is begging you.

              The question under your system (please inform yourself about first-past-the-post) isn’t who do you want to win, it’s who you do you want NOT to win.

              If you vote for your third-party candidate, it’s equivalent to not having voted at all, if they have no chance of winning.

              You’re going to get Biden or Trump with how people vote (spoiler effect, look it up), one of those is going to win, make your peace with that.

              So, which would you rather?

              I am happy to spell out in greater detail why voting for a third party candidate is a waste of time under your system, happy to chat if there’s still any confusion about it.

              • Victoria Antoinette @lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                The question under your system (please inform yourself about first-past-the-post) isn’t who do you want to win, it’s who you do you want NOT to win.

                wrong. the question is “who do i want to vote for” and i want to vote for the person i want to win. incidentally, i don’t want to vote for someone i don’t want to win.

              • Victoria Antoinette @lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                6 months ago

                If you vote for your third-party candidate, it’s equivalent to not having voted at all, if they have no chance of winning.

                this is election misinformation. my vote is still counted for the candidate, even if they don’t win, just as trump votes were counted in 2020.

                • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  If you lived somewhere with a decent preferential voting system, you’d be right.

                  You don’t though, and it’s not misinformation to say that under a first part the post system, voting for a third candidate that is not going to win is a waste of the influence you have. CGPGrey explains it well