MoveOn on Instagram: "Every four years, some third-party presidential candidates appear, eager to cash in on genuine frustrations with our political system. Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen this time."
www.instagram.com
15K likes, 1,260 comments - moveon on November 1, 2024: "Every four years, some third-party presidential candidates appear, eager to cash in on genuine frustrations with our political system. Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen this time.".

I live in LA and I seen this guy before spewing endless dumb stories about his tv show to young poor innocent women.

I just imagine this video as a POV of a 22 year old girl he randomly approached at the bar and started talking to about politics for no reason.

  • heggs_bayer [none/use name]
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Wow, our current political system prevents us from getting someone who's third party elected for president, making our votes spoilers than can prevent one of the mainstream candidates from winning? No one I've ever encountered has brought that up before! WTF I'm pro Kdolf now! wowee /s

    • Parzivus [any]
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Fucking unbelievable that Kamala got endorsed by Cheney. I knew America was sliding toward fascism but it's been much faster than I expected

  • ryepunk [he/him]
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I mean he made a Netflix show about government and had Obama on and didn't yell at him at all so I saw this coming a mile away.

    • viva_la_juche [they/them, any]
      ·
      9 hours ago

      10 years ago I was a big “ranked choice could fix everything!” lib and I guess for that reason it feels like a very juvenile and poorly thought out bandaid slapped on the problem. I mean if we switched capital would just find a way to capture it in the same way they do fptp now. They still have all the money and lobbying isn’t going anywhere

    • buckykat [none/use name]
      ·
      7 hours ago

      We have a thing for ranked choice on the ballot in my state but it comes with nonpartisan primaries that will send four of the same ghoul to the ranked choice general and get rid of write ins.

    • gramxi [they/them]
      ·
      7 hours ago

      They probably would if participation gets low enough or a third party gets enough repeated success, but be prepared to see crony parties being propped up to sheepdog the less ideologically committed or single-issue voters into ruling coalitions. "Here's your seat at the table now shut the fuck up."

  • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]
    ·
    7 hours ago

    "This will continue to be the case until one day, we get proportional and ranked-choice voting."

    Democrats could spend 20 years worth of political capital to try to get this, and still come up 3% of votes short.

    It's never going to happen. Nothing is ever going to progress with the Democrats.

  • miz [any, any]
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Adam Ruins Everything Except Electoralism Which Is Cool And Good And You Should Definitely FALL IN LINE

  • FuckyWucky [none/use name]
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Democrats had 8 years under Obama and 4 years under Biden to implement a more democratic system. Clinton lost despite winning popular vote by over 2%, they still did not care. It's in their interests to not have third parties in legislature/executive.

  • eldavi@lemmy.ml
    ·
    9 hours ago

    he's blaming 3rd parties for a chicken and egg problem; but somehow believes that it can be solved by the foxes.

  • adultswim_antifa [he/him]
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I wouldn't vote for Kamala in a ranked choice system either and that's why I'm not voting for her. I've voted for democrats in the past for that reason. In a ranked choice system, I would rank the democrat above the republican, my preferred candidate would not get elected and my vote would elect the democrat, so I just pretended that was happening and voted for the democrat. I would still rank Kamala above Trump, but I would not vote for either of them in this election because I do not vote for genocide enablers.

  • JayTreeman [none/use name]
    ·
    10 hours ago

    MSM: why would we cover third parties between election cycles? That's ridiculous. General population: These people only pop up when it's time to get elected! It's all a grift.

  • Fishroot [none/use name]
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Third parties have no chance because the 2 parties system. So we need to vote for one of the 2. So that third parties have no chance because the 2 parties system. So we need to vote for one of the 2. So that third parties have no chance because the 2 parties system. So we need to vote for one of the 2. So that third parties have no chance because the 2 parties system. So we need to vote for one of the 2. So that third parties have no chance because the 2 parties system. So we need to vote for one of the 2. So that third parties have no chance

  • buh [she/her]
    ·
    9 hours ago

    We should be calling them 2nd parties instead

    • HamManBad [he/him]
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Call them opposition parties, since both the Republicans and Democrats are effectively always "in government" as a coalition, with one being the junior partner depending on election performance.

      • Lurker123 [he/him]
        ·
        6 hours ago

        In a European coalition, if the minority of the coalition disagree with some law being voted on, does the whole coalition still vote for that law? Or would minority legislators break and vote with the opposition?

  • nothx [he/him]
    ·
    8 hours ago

    talking to about politics for no reason.

    Talking AT about politics for no reason.

    Show