There’s no way you could honestly interpret what I wrote that way. I’m responding to the fans of Joe who are openly saying “Who cares about genocide when Trump is worse?”
I do care about genocide, and that’s (one of many reasons) why I’ll be voting for Jill Stein, not Joe Biden.
Good thing you do remember since he’s still ripping apart immigrant families. Biden’s border policy is only marginally better than Trumps, he just doesn’t brag about it.
If there can only be 1 winner, and there are 2 frontrunners who have the only real chance of winning, a 3rd competitor only takes votes from a frontrunner and has no chance of winning themselves.
As someone like Stein is mentioned as an alternative to voting for trump, therefore the person was never a trump voter, they were never going to ADD to Trump’s chances. Their only voting action is to either vote for Biden, or NOT* vote. By NOT* I mean not contribute to bidens vote totals.
Voting for stein is effectively a non republican voter staying home.
This is a major problem with our voting system, there can only ever be 2 realistic choices, and a third party vote has greater game theory implications than independent voters like to accept.
every vote must be earned. so-called “third parties” dont take votes from other parties: they earn them from voters.
Voting for stein is effectively a non republican voter staying home.
for a party who believes they deserve every non-republican vote. but in the elections offices across the country, it’s effectively a vote for Jill Stein.
If you’re not familiar, the US uses a two party system. Not voting is no different than voting for Jill. There’s no difference between not voting for Biden and voting for Trump.
The problem is that, in a democracy, you have to vote for the best candidate. Otherwise, democracy doesn’t work. If you decide to vote for a candidate "you don’t like* (i.e. “strategic voting”), you are contributing to the problem.
People call it “voting for the lesser evil”, but a vote for a lesser evil…is still a vote for evil. So, while it isn’t as wrong as voting for Trump, it’s still wrong.
Unfortunately, it’s not up to “the Democrats”, it’s up to the DNC and there is no way they will back anyone else unless Joe has a major medical event between now and election day.
Even if he did drop out, they would push Harris who is poison right now.
There’s no way you could honestly interpret what I wrote that way. I’m responding to the fans of Joe who are openly saying “Who cares about genocide when Trump is worse?”
I do care about genocide, and that’s (one of many reasons) why I’ll be voting for Jill Stein, not Joe Biden.
That’s a really fucking dumb straw man.
So you’re voting for Trump, got it.
If he wins just remember that you share responsibility for his atrocities. Just like everyone else who let him win.
Does everyone who voted for Biden share the blame for the atrocities he’s supporting?
Ah yes I remember when Biden ripped apart immigrant families and banned Muslims from travelling /s
Good thing you do remember since he’s still ripping apart immigrant families. Biden’s border policy is only marginally better than Trumps, he just doesn’t brag about it.
tehy said explicitly they are voting against trump: jill stein is running against trump.
The top level argument is that voting for anyone but Biden is effectively a vote for trump. Stein is effectively a democratic spoiler
but that’s not true. a vote for anyone who is not trump is by definition not a vote for trump.
Do you not know the concept of a spoiler?
If there can only be 1 winner, and there are 2 frontrunners who have the only real chance of winning, a 3rd competitor only takes votes from a frontrunner and has no chance of winning themselves.
As someone like Stein is mentioned as an alternative to voting for trump, therefore the person was never a trump voter, they were never going to ADD to Trump’s chances. Their only voting action is to either vote for Biden, or NOT* vote. By NOT* I mean not contribute to bidens vote totals.
Voting for stein is effectively a non republican voter staying home.
This is a major problem with our voting system, there can only ever be 2 realistic choices, and a third party vote has greater game theory implications than independent voters like to accept.
every vote must be earned. so-called “third parties” dont take votes from other parties: they earn them from voters.
for a party who believes they deserve every non-republican vote. but in the elections offices across the country, it’s effectively a vote for Jill Stein.
It’s ok to hold your opinion, but it is not realistic with the game theory actually occuring.
I’m not supporting the system that makes this so, I’m only informing you of what is happening, what is real life.
Your only real choices are the 2 frontrunners.
Any non-trump vote for anyone but Biden aids the trump campaign as much as staying home.
i expect to have at least 4 real choices on my ballot.
that’s very gracious of you.
right. but the same is true in reverse: any non-biden vote for anyone but trump aids the biden campaign as much as staying home.
because that’s how voting works. when you don’t vote for someone, you don’t help their campaign.
If you’re not familiar, the US uses a two party system. Not voting is no different than voting for Jill. There’s no difference between not voting for Biden and voting for Trump.
This isn’t true, even if Jill loses.
It shows the level of support for Jill’s platform.
If the Green Party gets 5%, they qualify for a huge government grant which will help them become a more viable party.
Jill won’t win. It’s slightly better than not voting but ultimately you’re just helping Trump.
my ballot often has 4 or more parties on it.
yes there is. not voting at all is NOT voting for trump OR biden.
wrong. voting for jill adds 1 vote for jill. not voting adds 0 votes for jill.
Unfortunately, when the votes are counted, whoever has the most votes wins.
It doesn’t matter if the “not Trump” vote gets split across 1 candidate or 4 candidates, if Trump gets more votes than any one of them HE WINS.
Trump - 40%
Joe - 35%
Jill - 15%
West - 10%
Trump wins. Even though “not Trump” is 60%.
The problem is that, in a democracy, you have to vote for the best candidate. Otherwise, democracy doesn’t work. If you decide to vote for a candidate "you don’t like* (i.e. “strategic voting”), you are contributing to the problem.
People call it “voting for the lesser evil”, but a vote for a lesser evil…is still a vote for evil. So, while it isn’t as wrong as voting for Trump, it’s still wrong.
Coalescing behind a candidate to defeat the worst choice is not wrong. Especially when the worst candidate will win otherwise.
Now, in an election that goes to a run off if nobody gets 50%+1 - Great, vote for who you want. But be prepared to coalesce in the run off.
Unfortunately, presedential elections aren’t subject to a run off.
yep. i guess the democrats better drop out and throw their support behind a candidate other people can stomach.
Unfortunately, it’s not up to “the Democrats”, it’s up to the DNC and there is no way they will back anyone else unless Joe has a major medical event between now and election day.
Even if he did drop out, they would push Harris who is poison right now.
lets hope a miracle happens and the next president decides to oppose genocide.