• olivebranch@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago
    1. They don’t shift policies, they shift marketing. They will continue to support Israel because they are treating you with Trump and you have to vote for them whatever they do. So change is never going to happen.
    2. Either vote third party or don’t waste your time voting. You are getting nothing better with democrats. Trump is a candidate that was placed there by the democrats so they can have a better chance in the elections. In next elections they will simply move the goal post and get someone even worse for Republican party and whatever you are voting against in these elections will be the democrat position in the next one.
    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Either vote third party or don’t waste your time voting. You are getting nothing better with democrats. Trump is a candidate that was placed there by the democrats so they can have a better chance in the elections. In next elections they will simply move the goal post and get someone even worse for Republican party and whatever you are voting against in these elections will be the democrat position in the next one.

      Ladies and gentlemen, a wedge-driving operative seeking to undermine Democrats and get Trump into office. There is literally zero evidence that “Trump is a candidate that was placed there by Democrats”. There is zero historical evidence voting third party does anything more than get the worse of two evils in office — and Ukrainians and Palestinians would much prefer Biden over Trump any day.

      This is the rhetoric of someone either not either not familiar with the political system, or intentionally trying to undermine the left by opening the door for conservatives.

      • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        There is zero historical evidence voting third party does anything more than get the worse of two evils in office

        no such evidence is possible: you can’t prove a counterfactual. you can’t know who the worse evil would be. further it’s not clear that so-called “third party” voters actually impact elections at all unless their candidate wins.

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

          No, we can. 3rd parties have been around for decades and won nothing and only exacerbated the goals of said parties by undermining the only party that has tangible results.

          You prove my point.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            3rd parties have been around for decades and won nothing and only exacerbated the goals of said parties by undermining the only party that has tangible results.

            this simply isn’t true and reflects a myopic view of history. so-called third parties have been with us almost since the inception of the us, and have accomplished things inconceivable to modern politicians.

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

              It simply is true. Even the longest serving Independent in congressional history caucuses and ran as a Democrat.

              But do tell what any third party from Libertarians to the Green Party have accomplished, relative to Democrats for the working class.

              Have you even heard of Nader or Perot?

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Have you even heard of Nader or Perot

                yes, and i also know that their candidacy had nothing to do with who won the two elections they are (erroneously) credited with spoiling.

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

                  They’re (accurately) credited with spoiling said elections and it is yet another example of the complete toothless value of 3rd-parties.

                  • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    any amount of research will show that, in fact, perot’s candidacy decreased clinton’s margin of victory, and gore won that election.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                what any third party from Libertarians to the Green Party have accomplished

                the prohibition party got a constitutional amendment passed. the republican party completely usurped the whigs.

                  • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    as i said, so-called third parties have been with us much longer and have accomplished things modern politicians could never conceive.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Even the longest serving Independent in congressional history caucuses and ran as a Democrat.

                so? that doesn’t prove that so-called third parties are impotent. it shows that one person made some questionable decisions.

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

                  “Questionable decisions,” said the individual who had to dig back 100 years to find an example of any tangible progress made by such a 3rd-party…?

                  I think I’ll go with the party that actually has a track-record of progress this half-century.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            we can.

            it’s impossible to prove a counterfactual. you are either unfamiliar with the scientific method or you are deliberately lying.

      • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        This is the rhetoric of someone either not either not familiar with the political system, or intentionally trying to undermine the left by opening the door for conservatives.

        false dichotomy. they may be familiar with the political system (even more than you or i), and not believe the same things you do. they may be a leftist. you are making up attacks on their person instead of dealing with the substance of their claims.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            that’s a thought-terminating cliche like saying it’s common sense. if you can’t support your position, that’s no reason to go off attacking other people as malevolent or incompetent.

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

          Nobody in the entire country would’ve disagreed with that strategy at the time, for quite literally everyone including Republicans thought Trump would doom the party. Hindsight is 20/20

          That, however isn’t the same as saying Trump is a Democratic plant colluding in disguise lol.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Nobody in the entire country would’ve disagreed with that strategy at the time

            you are now shifting the goalposts from “it didn’t happen” to “it was a good idea”.

            That didn't happen.
            And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
            And if it was, that's not a big deal.
            And if it is, that's not my fault.
            And if it was, I didn't mean it.
            And if I did, you deserved it.
            
            • lennybird@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              lol logged into a different account I see, wow.

              (funny this is the only comment you didn’t respond to, isn’t it FederatingIsToohard LOL)

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Trump is a candidate that was placed there by the democrats so they can have a better chance in the elections.