likewise, voting for a third party, also equally i would argue, supports a genocide. Due to the fact that the US is almost explicitly two party, the third party is really just the 12 people in a city who think they're better than whatever the fuck else exists, even though ultimately about 14 people will vote for said party, and one of those is someone who doesn't know any of the candidates.

Politics is hell, life is hell, the world is hell, i consider this to be a form of astroturfing to be completely honest. Nothing you do is going to make a significant difference, you need to be conscious of that, unless we have a ranked choice voting system with like 5 candidates, where the win is by plurality and not the fucking majority percent, then it literally does not matter who you vote for. (when it comes down to this kind of proxy war bullshit that seems to inflame people so aggressively, on a macro scale, it's different, i'm just making a point)

Just for the record, so you don't think im some sort of morally superior fuckhead twat, i'm not voting this cycle. I'm worse than anybody voting. Literally anything you do is going to be better than me. At the very least, nobody can say i support genocide, because i am ambivalent to it. This is the road you are toeing close to my friend.

[–] Woozythebear@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What kind of Backwoods fucking logic is that.... so choosing not to vote for the two candidates who are pro genocide makes me pro genocide? The fuck are you saying?

God you fucking neo libs are dumber than fucking conservatives at this point.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

i'm saying that it makes no quantifiable difference, in the same way that me not voting, literally does nothing. The fact that you are also basically not voting (third party candidates pull basically nothing most of the time)

As a result, the likely people to go into power, are well... The two candidates who "support genocide" This is just how two party systems tend to work. You need like 5 different candidates with plurality voting for it to really matter. Once you start having that level of candidacy the numbers become significantly more spread out due to the fact that candidates have more varied policies. Moving it from majority vote win, to plurality vote win. I.E. Significantly more attainable, stable, and a lot more applicable to an entire countries governmental policies.

Maybe i'm fucking wrong, and maybe this third party individual is fucking incredible, once in a lifetime political handling abilities and is going to bump straight through all the bullshit and right into the presidency. I'm not willing to bet on it though. Currently the political system is so aggressively polarized, that we are "voting between a fascist, and someone who isn't that fascist" so if we want to "not be fascist" our best option here is going to be voting for the party who is "not fascist" because you can be sure as hell that conservatives aren't voting third party. Maybe they are, but not in any significant numbers, likewise can be said for the democratic party.

I simply do not see a situation where we come out of this without either trump, or biden in power. Unless i start hearing shit like, tomorrow, about this supposed third party. I simply don't think it's feasible for any other result. I can't imagine republicans are voting in any significant number against trump, most people who would are probably swing voters, so democrat this time around. Those who are voting for trump are going to be a significant portion of the base, probably at least 30% of the votes of that party. The democrats have the same issue. Most people are going to prefer voting for biden because incumbency and shit hasn't fucking exploded completely yet. I mean sure some people involved in the israel palestine stuff are probably voting third party, but i can't imagine they're a significant part of the populous. If they were we wouldn't be in this position that we are now.

At best, what voting for third party this time does is say "i didnt vote for joe biden, or trump" which like, you do you. But uh, good luck have fun with that one.

[–] Woozythebear@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm gonna let you know right now that shaming people who don't vote for Biden is not a winning strategy and never will be.

Also saying Republicans are fascist and democrats aren't only appeals to liberals. Lefties fully believes both parties are fascist so that argument doesn't work either.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 months ago

just for the record i'm not shaming people for how they vote, i'm shaming people for believing that there is some form of altruistic meaning in whoever you vote for. There isn't, there isn't a way to win, the entire point of voting is democratic compromise, you shouldn't feel like an in group, you shouldn't feel like an outgroup, you should feel like a contributor, because that's what you did. You contributed.

The rest is fair enough, but i wasn't going to interject a complete political paper into a comment about how voting is fucked up. Regardless, it serves it's purpose. Also i don't fully align with your interpretation of my statements, i bunched center leaning moderate types into the "swing voters" people who regularly change who they vote for because they generally don't care. This often leaves people who consistently vote for republican/democratic presidents. So most of who would be left is going to be maga/far right people, i.e. primarily trump voters. I don't want to say most left over democratic voters are going to vote biden, because i think there will be a significant upset, but i think it'll be most voters that end up voting for biden, like i said unless the third party gets like 30% percent votes or something, nothing unusual has happened.