feddit.org

11 points

21 days ago

Wait… so you believe in spoiler candidates, but not that Jill Stein is a spoiler?

Because you fight pretty hard when anyone calls Stein a spoiler siphoning votes from the Democratic party.

report

[ - ]

-13 points

21 days ago

The very idea of a “spoiler” is a tool used by those clinging to the duopoly to scare people into submission, to keep us from voting our conscience.

You are correct that I don’t buy into that narrative, but in this community, where the term is tossed around like a weapon, I use the vernacular to communicate effectively.

Jill Stein isn’t a spoiler—she’s a voice for the people, challenging a corrupt system that fears true democracy. And she has my vote.

report

CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world

[ - ]

10 points

21 days ago

Which set of people is she a voice for, though, I wonder?

report

[ - ]

https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-ties-vladimir-putin-explained-1842620

-10 points

21 days ago

report

[ - ]

1 point

19 days ago

TLDR: It was an event for Russia Today an effective arm of the Russian government which was very supportive of Steins candidacy because of her potential as a spoiler and Putin only gave a speech to the group didn’t strategize with her personally (at that juncture).

How is this less damning

report

[ - ]

-4 points

19 days ago

It literally explained why she was there. But if you wanna think she is getting paid by him, go ahead. I mean, it doesn’t hurt my feelings for you to think that.

report

[ - ]

8 points

21 days ago

The very idea of a “spoiler” is a tool used by those clinging to the duopoly to scare people into submission, to keep us from voting our conscience.

No, it’s a tool that exists in some flawed voting systems, recognized by political scientists and used by bad actors.

You are correct that I don’t buy into that narrative, but in this community, where the term is tossed around like a weapon, I use the vernacular to communicate effectively.

Why I distrust you, in particular, is that you only recognize the spoiler vernacular, and only post these articles, when they’re about “spoilers for the Trump campaign.” You never do the same for Democrats.

Jill Stein isn’t a spoiler—she’s a voice for the people, challenging a corrupt system that fears true democracy.

We disagree. She’s a spoiler, except unlike the person in the article you posted, she doesn’t have the moral fortitude to admit it. Her position on Ukraine makes her a complete non-starter for me; even if we did have approval or ranked choice voting, she’d wouldn’t get any vote from me. The Greens need to dump her idiot ass.

report

[ - ]

-5 points

21 days ago

Why I distrust you, in particular, is that you only recognize the spoiler vernacular, and only post these articles, when they’re about “spoilers for the Trump campaign.” You never do the same for Democrats.

I’m not sure why that makes you so angry. Remember when everyone used to accuse me of only posting Green Party stuff to “spoil” the election and help Trump win? It was like they thought my whole mission was to help Trump win! Actually, people still accuse me of that! Lmao!

But I also post other party news, and you are mad because I used different wording?! lol

Bruh, I post news about third parties.

I’m focused on challenging the entire duopoly, not just one side of it.

If you’ve only seen me call out one party, that’s on you, but my goal is to shine a light on the hypocrisy and corruption of both Democrats AND Republicans.

Both sides are terrified of true alternatives, and that’s exactly why third parties need our support.

report

[ - ]

2 points

20 days ago

I’m not sure why that makes you so angry.

I’m not at all angry. Like you, I call out bullshit when I see it.

Remember when everyone used to accuse me of only posting Green Party stuff to “spoil” the election and help Trump win?

Dude. That’s not a “remember when” thing - that’s a today thing.

It was like they thought my whole mission was to help Trump win!

That’s what spoilers do: they siphon votes from one party. Sometimes the leaders are puppets, sometimes they’re aware of what they’re doing but don’t care; I don’t know which I think it’s worse, but I have a hard time believing that any national level party leader is ignorant of their impact on US elections, for which I hold them culpable.

Actually, people still accuse me of that!

K, now you’re being ironic. Because that’s me. I’m the one who consistently responds to your posts. I have a small hope that someone who might be teetering on voting Green will give a hard think, look at history, and change their minds.

And, look: I want people to be able to vote for other parties. I’ve voted Green before. But first we have to fix the election system in the US to reduce the Spoiler Effect, as we’re doing at the state level with initiatives like the Minnesota RCV effort. Until we get there, though, voting for a third party is only supporting the greater of two evils - whichever party you don’t want to win. Remember, the last time any third party won aUS presidential election was 1861.

my goal is to shine a light on the hypocrisy and corruption of both Democrats AND Republicans.

You don’t, though; you explicitly and consistently advocate for Jill Stein. If I gathered a list of all your posts criticizing Biden, Kamala, and Trump, what do you think the pie chart would look like?

Both sides are terrified of true alternatives,

This is absolutely true, and it’s why they oppose Ranked Choice and Approval Voting (the two most popular alternative voting efforts in the US) initiatives.

and that’s exactly why third parties need our support.

Efforts to replace FPTP need our support. Third parties for the Presidency do not. Third parties in Congress, I’m all for; we could do with more pressure to build coalitions in the legislative branch.

report

[ - ]

https://lemmy.world/c/socialist

-3 points

20 days ago

It’s almost amusing how you cling to the idea that supporting a third party somehow makes me a puppet for Trump.

The fact that you and others are so quick to point fingers at people like me—who dare to challenge the corrupt duopoly—only shows how deep the fear runs among those who defend the status quo.

Your so-called “spoiler effect” is just a convenient excuse to maintain the stranglehold of two parties that have failed us for generations.

I’ll keep advocating for real alternatives, whether you like it or not, because real change doesn’t come from playing it safe within a broken system.

Yeah, and make that pie chart you are talking about with my posts. And also add in there who many posts I make about socialists.

As I have noted before, the vast majority of my posts are for workers rights, socialist causes, union issues, and education. I’ve contributed over 200 posts and comments to the Lemmy socialist community I created and that I mod. I’m a member of the Socialist Workers Party, and I support them financially. You can check out the sub here:

and see my post history here:

https://lemmy.world/u/UniversalMonk?page=1&sort=New&view=Posts.

report

[ - ]

aalvare2@lemmy.world

4 points

20 days ago

You should ask this guy why he’s pushing the Green Party nominee, aka the pro-environmental policy nominee, despite indicating in other threads that he doesn’t care if Trump wins, aka the anti-environmental policy nominee.

I asked him that, then he started accusing me of bullying him and blocked me.

report

[ - ]

-9 points

21 days ago

she’d wouldn’t get any vote from me

And I totally support and respect your right to think that and vote for who you want to. As I’m sure you support and respect my right to vote for who I want to. Right?

report

[ - ]

4 points

20 days ago

I’m not sure “respect” is the word I’d chose, but “support,” sure. As I’ve said before, you have the right to write in “Bozo the Clown” for president; it’d have as much impact, but it’s your vote.

However, I will not stop trying to convince people to not make the mistake I made in 2000. I hated Tipper Gore because of her involvement in the founding of the PMRC, and didn’t want her anywhere near the White House. So I voted Green Party. I take resposibility that my vote, which would otherwise have gone to Gore (if I’d been smarter) and contributed to the election of Bush Jr. and consequently the invasion of Iraq (I believe Afghanistan was inevitable after 9/11, but Iraq was opportunistic Jingoism). My “protest” vote, among a wave of other protest votes, contributed to a needless war and very likely led to politics and policies that ultimately resulted in the Trump Presidency.

Maybe you’re able to divorce yourself from responsibility, and blame other people for your actions; if you vote for Stein and Trump wins, you’ll blame Democrats - you’ve said as much elsewhere. That’s an attitude I have no respect for. Take responsibility for the consequences of your own actions, and if the greater of two evils wins, at least have the ethical fortitude to admit you helped it happen through your vote.

I don’t say all of this for you, but for any other person considering a protest votes: please look back at the 2000 election and the measured analysis of the impact of spoiler parties and the subsequent ripple effects which have led to today.

As your yourself, I’m still not convinced you’re not an agent saboteur; your posts consistently target Democrats more than Republicans, and if you were a true Green Party activist, you’d be attacking Trump and Republicans more than any Democrat. The Democratic party plank aligns far more with the Green party than does the Republican party’s; the current conservative agenda is supposedly completely counter to the Green party’s, and yet Jill Stein and her supporters target Kamala more than Donald because that’s where they know they can siphon votes. And this is the very definition of a spoiler in a FPTP election system.

report

[ - ]

https://lemmy.world/c/socialist

-3 points

20 days ago

but it’s your vote.

It is.

I’m still not convinced you’re not an agent saboteur;

The majority of my posts are socialist, and yes, I do critique both sides. The reason it might seem like I’m targeting Democrats more is simply because the majority of Lemmy users lean Democratic, and they often assume that not supporting their candidate means supporting Trump.

I’ve contributed over 200 posts and comments to my Lemmy socialist community. I’m a member of the Socialist Workers Party, and I support them financially. You can check out the sub here:

and see my post history here:

https://lemmy.world/u/UniversalMonk?page=1&sort=New&view=Posts.

I also post and moderate communities on education, another thing Republicans typically dislike. Even in this sub, my posts are mostly news articles about third parties, not attacks on the Democratic party. When I share articles about third parties, Libertarian ones are included, and they often take votes away from Republicans.

So, would I really do all this—things Republicans despise—just to help Trump win? If that were my goal, wouldn’t it be easier for me to just vote for him?

Why is it that just because I’m not voting for your candidate, you automatically think I’m rooting for Trump? I get daily comments and DMs accusing me of being a Russian simp, a Trump supporter, or a troll—just because I post socialist articles, mainly about unions, and a few posts covering all third parties. Think about that.

Regarding your claim that I would blame Democrats if Trump wins because I voted for Stein—I’ve never said that. What I have said is that if Democrats are so concerned about Stein, they should find a stronger candidate and work harder to incorporate Green values, welcoming Green supporters into their party. I’m a good example.

Many here find out I’m voting for Stein, and instead of welcoming me, they accuse me of being a Russian Trumper troll. Does that make me want to join your party?

And a side note: Republicans hate me too, because of my socialist views. But honestly, they’re not nearly as hostile as Democrats are towards me—probably because Lemmy is overwhelmingly Democratic.

This sub often has to remove comments directed at me because of how uncivil they are. Check out this sub’s modlog for proof and an example of some Dem-generated hate. You’ll see a some ugly comments by Republicans, but the vast majority are Democrats hating and belittling people who have a different point of view than they do: https://lemmy.world/modlog/1252

report

TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world

[ - ]

1 point

20 days ago

What you and others miss is that while you have a right to advocate for whatever political positions you wish, we have a right to call them out and point out that in the system we have, the Jill Steins spoil the election for Donald Trump, just like the Libertarian spoils Trump (though realistically, Libertarians can take votes from both Major Parties for different reasons). You do NOT have the right to push your agenda unchallenged.

I disagree with the civility rule because there are Republicans and Russians posing as far-Leftists to push enough left-leaning voters to vote third party so that Trump can steal enough states by hook or by crook to win it and subject all of us to Project 2025. The civility rule has us fighting with one hand behind our back against factions that see no problem with being uncivil to us and will use our rules to censor our speech about them.

Since I can’t call people out on this sub, the only answer I have now is to point out every single time one of you people pop in with this ‘nuh, we aren’t spoiling it’ is my example of how, yes, you are. So, here it is again.

This poster would have you believe that your vote cannot result in you getting the worst possible outcome. Allow me to make it clear that yes, you can screw yourself and those you care about if you make the wrong choice on your vote.

Let’s take a class of High School students. The class is pretty evenly divided between Jocks (49) and Nerds (51), and there’s an election for the SGA coming up. Looking at the numbers, it looks like the Nerds have a good chance of winning, by two votes, but let’s say that this isn’t as clear as the numbers show.

The candidates are pretty distasteful for a lot of students at the school. On the Nerds’ side is a geeky boy, with square glasses, buck teeth, and a taste for pocket protectors. This kid is stereotypical Nerd, with the personality to match. He’s vaguely unpalatable, being too much into D&D and video games, but he’s also really damn smart, and his platform are things the Nerds would really like – pushing the school to fund after-school activities like Book Swap, the D&D Club, Debate Team, Chess Club, and so on.

On the Jock’s side is a pretty blonde cheerleader, the Homecoming Queen and heart-throb for many a boy in that school. But she’s a massive jerk, with an entitlement streak a mile wide, known for throwing temper tantrum(p)s when she doesn’t get her way, and a platform that includes taking all the money that would have gone to the nerdy after-school activities and putting it into prom and sports.

Of course, this stereotypical school of the 1980s will use the voting system used by the USA back in the 1980s, the classic voting system of First Past the Post, where all the votes are counted, and at the end, the one with the most votes wins.

In a 49 to 51 election, it’s clear that the Nerds win by a squeaker, but that’s not how elections work in the USA, and Cheerleader has a secret weapon. Most of her friends are of course fellow cheerleaders, dance team members, and athletes. But counted among her number is a bookish girl who is good with her studies, someone that were you to glance at her, you’d assume she’s with the Nerds. But she and Cheerleader have known each other since they were toddlers, and while Bookish Girl is smart, she’s also desperate for attention and acceptance. Bookish Girl is Cheerleader’s key to victory.

Cheerleader and Bookish Girl sit down after school and go over strategy. It’s clear that the numbers don’t support Cheerleader. All 51 Nerds are pretty sweet on that whole “Nerd After School Activities” thing. But they aren’t all as firmly dedicated to voting. For one thing, Nerd Boy is not well liked, with no social skills what-so-ever. He’s the kind of guy that doesn’t get a girl easily, and is awkward around girls and does things that can easily be styled as being demeaning and degrading to girls. Nerds are also notoriously flakey when it comes to making appointments when those appointments collide with what they would rather be doing.

Bookish Girl suggests three strategies to Cheerleader. They are:

Have one of Cheerleader’s groupies make an accusation against Nerd Boy that he inappropriately touched her. This should peel off two girls, who are known feminists.
Set up a nerdy game on the day of the vote, drawing out a handful of gamers.
Run Bookish Girl as a third party spoiler, who will say she stands for even more nerdy things so that she can peel off people who think Nerdy Boy can’t or won’t do the job.

Let’s say Election Day, 3 gamers skip out on the vote, one of the feminists stay home on the accusations, and the other, plus two more Nerds, vote for Bookish Girl. The tally of votes comes out to:

49 people vote for Cheerleader.
44 people vote for the Nerd Boy.
4 people do not vote.
3 people vote for the Bookish Girl.

Remember what the rules were? The one with the most votes wins. Those 7 kids ended up denying themselves and the 44 other kids the Nerd Boy’s platform. Hopefully they’ll enjoy the prom they’ll be excluded from and the constant bullying and teasing by the Jocks, because there will be no book club to go to, or D&D night to play in, or so on.

Really, all Cheerleader needed was for Bookish Girl to run, with a side dose of that other cheerleader’s accusation (let’s just call her Tara Reade…), and it’s 49 to 48 to 3, which is STILL a win for Team Jock. And that’s how narrow our elections are today.

You may think that Harris is a lockin to win, and you’re convinced by someone like this poster that you can vote third party. The problem is you can’t know how many Jocks and Nerds are in this school. Are there 55 Nerds and only 45 Jocks? Can you vote for the Bookish Girl over the Nerd Boy because Nerd Boy did something you don’t agree with in Junior High, or because he dissed your favourite pop culture icon, or he’s a GURPS player rather than a D&D player, or so on, and Bookish Girl is idealic? How will you feel when you wake up the next morning and come to school and see that Jocks won 45 to 44 to 11, and you and 10 other people are absolute dufuses who let the nerd activities go by the wayside?

And to make this REAL…how will you feel come the next morning if you wake up, see your State went to Trump, and thus gave Trump the 270 EVs he needed to win. Remember, Trump’s Jock-favoured activities can be read about in Project 2025…

In conclusion, you shouldn’t listen to dufuses like this poster. We saw what happened last time we let them poison our minds. Your vote CAN get you the absolute worst outcome, and the only people who want that to happen are accelerationists and Trump Plants. I’ll leave it to you to determine what THIS poster is.

report

[ - ]

1 point

19 days ago

Knowing that Harris and Trump are the only real options in this race and trying to get people to vote for spoilers IS supporting Trump

report

TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world

[ - ]

4 points

20 days ago

I second this.

You have the right to vote whoever you want in the election. Hell, I could say I am voting for Harris or Stein here, and do the exact opposite, and nobody would know the difference. You even have the right to try to convince others to change their votes. That’s actually how a Democracy is supposed to work. But that right extends to everyone…including those of us who think Stein is a spoiler.

report

[ - ]

-5 points

19 days ago

That’s actually how a Democracy is supposed to work.

Exactly. And I can vote for whoever I want as well. Whether the people in this community like it or not. And they don’t. lol

report

[ - ]

1 point

19 days ago

What has Jill Stein ever done for the people? Continually running and losing isn’t a public service. She’s absolutely worthless and there is a reasonable expectation that this will be so for the rest of her life.

report

[ - ]

-3 points

19 days ago

Continually running and losing isn’t a public service.

Then you have nothing to fear or be angry about. I mean, she doesn’t do anything, right?

report

[ - ]

1 point

19 days ago

She can effect the outcome of the election even if she can’t win it this should be obvious.

report

[ - ]

-6 points

19 days ago

Oh, so what you really meant was she doesn’t provide a public service to you, huh? (Referring to your comment: “Continually running and losing isn’t a public service.”)

Because seems that plenty of people disagree with you, and they think she provides enough value to vote for her. That’s why Democrats are so angry and scared of her.

But guess what? YOU don’t speak for the entire population of the U.S.

Almost half the country isn’t voting for your candidate. Welcome to democracy.

I respect your right to vote for whoever you want. You respect mine, right? Even if it’s not your candidate?

report

[ - ]

0 points

18 days ago

At least 44% are liable to vote for a literal hitler figure. At least 1-2% will vote a protest vote instead of voting against a fascist who would plunge America into darkness for a generation. Pretty sad for our educational system.

report