Really you don't need to read more than one chart:
If you vote for anyone other than Harris, you're voting for Trump:
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
215 points (87.2% liked)
politics
19072 readers
3757 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A similar article will be posted every time Monk posts one supporting a 3rd party spoiler from now on.
so you're gonna have to find like 20 articles a day.... also don't forget to copy paste a 6 paragraph defense of "I swear I'm not Russian I just post the articles" in the comments of every post
I do have the time... :)
Genuine question: why has he not been banned? To me he seems to repeatedly violate the rule about arguing in good faith, and - to be honest - his passive aggressive civility feels at times more hostile than straight up attacks.
We've talked about it amongst ourselves with the mods and admins and have concluded that having a shitty opinion is not infringing.
They do post legitimate sources with legitimate opinions. They're BAD opinions, but you aren't going to get banned for having a bad opinion.
I don't much have an issue with the material they chose to post - the nature of a link aggregator will sort them to the bottom regardless due how how voting works and as you say, they're legitimate sources.
My issue is more regarding their conduct in the comment sections.
Their conduct is more cordial than the responses they get.
Have ya ever heard of Southern politeness? Cause ya can technically be cordial while being a complete shitbag, a good example being "bless your heart" more or less meaning go die in a hole.
Would you correlate to being a shitbag is someone that you happen to disagree with
Spoiler implies we would vote for a Democrat if there were no 3rd party options. We would not. There's a larger chance you would vote for a republican than us voting Democrat
For you, personally, that may be true. Statistically speaking, in general, it's very much the opposite:
https://www.thirdway.org/memo/the-data-how-third-parties-could-be-spoilers-that-elect-trump
"Similarly, Third Way’s polling has found that Biden’s voters are 13 percentage points more likely to consider voting for a third party than Trump’s voters. While Biden has a higher ceiling, with his possible vote totals well north of 50%, Trump has a stronger floor: his voters are more loyal, so third parties are less likely to draw them away."
If you lean left, and you fail to vote for the Democratic candidate, you only help the Republican candidate.
There's the confusion, we dont lean left, we are left. Democrat voters lean left then vote for non left leaning candidates. In rhetoric the DNC may sound like they lean left but in action they do not.
Compared to Trump, Nixon is to the left.
I mean shit, Dick Cheney is left of Trump. What does that say?
No kidding! When Cheney and Fucking Frank Luntz are like "Hey, maybe he's too extreme..." you know you're in trouble.
Has anyone talked to Karl Rove lately? LOL.
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-harris-debate-karl-rove-verdict-b2611340.html
Republican Karl Rove says Trump got ‘crushed by a woman he called dumb as a rock’ during ‘train wreck’ debate
By Obama's own admission, Nixon was to the left of Obama.
This is mind-bogglingly weird. I’ll never understand it.
I don’t think it’s all that weird to recognize that neither party is what you want or will advance your political goals.
It’s pretty weird to insist on a course of action that won’t result in something you want. If you think both parties are the same, you’re wildly misinformed.
I don’t think anyone suggested both parties are the same.
If they aren’t the same in their view, they they would be sensible to care about which wins. They have a stake in a less harmful result.
But literally throwing away their vote on a third party, they are inflicting harm on themselves, the electorate, and the world.
Who are you talking about?
Third party votes get counted and have an effect. The whole idea of throwing one’s vote away is so nonsensical that it was lampooned in a simpsons bit.
If third party voters are inflicting harm on all the groups you mentioned, does that mean they’re responsible for the harm caused by one or the other party? Would you extend that to people who actively voted for those two parties? To the people enacting those parties policies? Deciding them?
Just how responsible for Bidens genocide in Gaza would you say a person who voted third party or trump in 2020 can be held?
Did you even READ the original linked article?
Seems like not.
Voting third party is the same as voting for Trump. THAT'S the effect that third party votes have. You're deluding yourself if you think they have any other effect in this upcoming election.
Wait how is a third party vote the same as a trump vote, they’re for different candidates?
Third party votes don’t get counted towards trumps total and the president isn’t elected by popular vote anyway.
Did you READ the original article??
Are you being intentionally dense?
I did read the article.
It doesn’t make a convincing case that a third party vote is the same as a trump vote. That’s why I asked you to explain how you came to that conclusion.
The article also claims third parties can’t possibly expect to get any electoral votes but then says if they did then it could create a situation where the house chooses the president.
If dems want third party voters to support them and are in danger of losing for want of third party voters, dems can simply pick up platforms and policies that third party voters want.
I’m at the point where I’m convinced you’re being willfully dense.
Before you asked about the article, I asked how third party votes are the same as trump votes. I explained that the votes aren’t counted for trump so they can’t be the same and that they are counted so they’re not thrown away.
Instead of asking incredulously if I’d read the posted article, why not just engage with what I’m saying?
Is this your first election?
No. You?
Then grow up
lol. Two party-ailures btfo