They aren’t doing anything except work against their supposed goals. They should be working in/with the legit campaign to influence what they can, not helping to go in the complete opposite direction.
They should be working in/with the legit campaign to influence what they can
So you think there are only two “legit” parties in the US? And you are happy about that? Is that really democracy tho?
Also plenty of third parties, run in local campaigns. Not just presidential campaigns. In my state, plenty of Libertarians have run and won local elections.
And some green party stats:
Californians have elected 55 of the 226 office-holding Greens nationwide. Other states with high numbers of Green elected officials include Pennsylvania (31), Wisconsin (23), Massachusetts (18) and Maine (17). Maine has the highest per capita number of Green elected officials in the country and the largest Green registration percentage with more than 29,273 Greens comprising 2.95% of the electorate as of November 2006.[68] Madison, Wisconsin is the city with the most Green elected officials (8), followed by Portland, Maine (7).
So you think there are only two “legit” parties in the US? And you are happy about that? Is that really democracy tho?
Yes, no, yes.
Doesn’t matter. That’s how it is. Until RCV or some other voting mechanism is instituted where third party candidates are viable all they do now is spoil, and the only way to change this is to convince one of the 2 parties to institute it. Spoiling their candidate is a bad way to do that though.
I’m a, “yes, no, no,” to that. I have decided FPTP is just not democracy. The mathematical fact is that only one of the two top parties will win. In a real democracy I could choose a different party and not be throwing my vote away.
Obviously I will not waste my vote to pass some idealistic purity test, though.
I support and respect your right to vote for who you want to vote for. As you support and respect my right to vote for who I want to vote for, right?
That’s a red herring. Calling out the foolishness of wasting your vote against your professed goals has nothing to do with respecting your right to vote.
When you actually have a chance to win the electoral college, then you have a point. Until then these 3rd party presidential candidates are a fool’s errand.
Respecting my right to vote means respecting my choice to support a candidate who aligns with my values, even if they aren’t favored in the electoral college.
Dismissing third-party candidates as a “fool’s errand” ignores the role they play in challenging the status quo and pushing for real change.
Voting isn’t just about winning this election—it’s about shaping the future direction of our politics.
No, it literally is just about winning the election. You’re confusing it with polls.
it’s about shaping the future direction of our politics.
Agreed. But as I’ve already started it is in the opposite direction you intend, unless… If I’m hearing you correctly your goal is to knowingly spoil the legit candidate so when they lose they’ll lick their wounds, look at the voting data and learn the lesson to be more sympathetic to your demands in 4 years?
No it fucking doesn’t, just like respecting your right to free speech doesn’t mean respecting what you say.
You are making a choice to have your ballot not count whatsoever in the final decision. You have a right to make that choice, but it is IMO stupid as fuck.
Do you seriously think that third parties ONLY exist just to “spoil a legitimate candidates chances”?
Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, they want change that they are not seeing, so they are doing something about it?
They aren’t doing anything except work against their supposed goals. They should be working in/with the legit campaign to influence what they can, not helping to go in the complete opposite direction.
So you think there are only two “legit” parties in the US? And you are happy about that? Is that really democracy tho?
Also plenty of third parties, run in local campaigns. Not just presidential campaigns. In my state, plenty of Libertarians have run and won local elections.
And some green party stats:
Californians have elected 55 of the 226 office-holding Greens nationwide. Other states with high numbers of Green elected officials include Pennsylvania (31), Wisconsin (23), Massachusetts (18) and Maine (17). Maine has the highest per capita number of Green elected officials in the country and the largest Green registration percentage with more than 29,273 Greens comprising 2.95% of the electorate as of November 2006.[68] Madison, Wisconsin is the city with the most Green elected officials (8), followed by Portland, Maine (7).
Also:
https://montanafreepress.org/2024/08/21/green-party-candidate-files-to-join-u-s-senate-race/
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/3127249/eight-green-party-write-ins-will-run-in-the-general-election/
Yes, no, yes.
Doesn’t matter. That’s how it is. Until RCV or some other voting mechanism is instituted where third party candidates are viable all they do now is spoil, and the only way to change this is to convince one of the 2 parties to institute it. Spoiling their candidate is a bad way to do that though.
I’m a, “yes, no, no,” to that. I have decided FPTP is just not democracy. The mathematical fact is that only one of the two top parties will win. In a real democracy I could choose a different party and not be throwing my vote away.
Obviously I will not waste my vote to pass some idealistic purity test, though.
And I don’t agree that it’s how it should be. So I won’t be supporting the duopoly.
I vote for who matches my values. And that’s third party.
I support and respect your right to vote for who you want to vote for. As you support and respect my right to vote for who I want to vote for, right?
That’s a red herring. Calling out the foolishness of wasting your vote against your professed goals has nothing to do with respecting your right to vote.
When you actually have a chance to win the electoral college, then you have a point. Until then these 3rd party presidential candidates are a fool’s errand.
Respecting my right to vote means respecting my choice to support a candidate who aligns with my values, even if they aren’t favored in the electoral college.
Dismissing third-party candidates as a “fool’s errand” ignores the role they play in challenging the status quo and pushing for real change.
Voting isn’t just about winning this election—it’s about shaping the future direction of our politics.
No, it literally is just about winning the election. You’re confusing it with polls.
Agreed. But as I’ve already started it is in the opposite direction you intend, unless… If I’m hearing you correctly your goal is to knowingly spoil the legit candidate so when they lose they’ll lick their wounds, look at the voting data and learn the lesson to be more sympathetic to your demands in 4 years?
I’m voting for who closest matches my values. It’s not JUST about making a point.
No it fucking doesn’t, just like respecting your right to free speech doesn’t mean respecting what you say.
You are making a choice to have your ballot not count whatsoever in the final decision. You have a right to make that choice, but it is IMO stupid as fuck.
Well I respect and support your right to vote for who you want. And yep, you can def have your own opinions. I don’t mind that at all.
But are you saying you don’t respect and support my right to vote for who I want? That doesn’t sound very democratic.