We’ll spoil that party?

Yes, running third party candidates in a FPTP voting system is how the spoiler effect works.

You want to protect them from being spoiled?

Because of the FPTP voting system our democracy will always trend towards a two-party system. Until we enact systemic change, we will be stuck with the Democrats and the Republicans. As long as the Democrats are further to the left of fascism we should vote for them and avoid limiting our power with third party candidates.

We the people and our interests are what avoiding the spoiler effect protects.

What is it exactly that they’re doing successfully you don’t want to spoil?

The Democrats are neoliberals. They are easier to push on social issues and the environment. The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans. But more to the point, they do not want to kill minorities and destroy the environment.

Rather than seeking a moral victory over Democrats we should look for ways to leverage power for the people Republicans want to hurt. Doing otherwise makes the harm done to minorities the cost of doing business.

Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?

The FPTP voting system ensures that they do not have a reason.

Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?

The FPTP voting system and entrenchment of neoliberalism in the minds of the American public for over 40 years from both mainstream political parties starting with Regan. This is may be the case for western countries and democracies more broadly as well. Currently, neoliberal ideas cause a contradiction when a person encounters progressive or socialist ideas. Along the lines of:

Why would we fix our institutions if they are flawless? What’s the hurry to solve our problems if we are at the end of history?

Some useful and correct resolutions of these contradictions are:

Our institutions are flawed because they were made by us, flawed humans. The time to advert climate change, fix systemic inequalities, the reduce the wealth gap is now. Incremental changes will run out the clock, as they don’t address the root causes. There will be hundreds of millions if not billions of causalities unless these issues are addressed sooner rather than later.

Neoliberal ideas must be pulled from the minds of Americans like a weed. Or like one of those radishes in Super Mario Bros 2. Then people will be able to embrace ideas like systemic change to institutions and wealth redistribution from the rich to everyone else.

When asked about socialism, if a person responds with ‘socialism doesn’t work’ or ‘the Soviet Union collapsed’ those are the tells that a person needs to full internalize neoliberalism as a scam.

And maybe a history lesson about how the Soviet Union was actually an authoritarian communist dictatorship and not a socialist country. The government owned the means of the production, not the people, and the government wasn’t representative of the people.

Oh thank god Democrats don’t throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.

It’s better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps. Neoliberals in office aren’t going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them. Like educating people and co-opting the Democratic Party in one of their primaries. Like Trump did to the Republicans and Bernie tried to do to the Democrats.

Trump tried once and it worked. Neoliberal ideas are entrenched in the minds of Americans. Neoliberalism only allows change to the people in charge of systems as it asserts, incorrectly, that our institutions are flawless. Since neoliberals only consider changing people, it is much easier for a fascist to convince a neoliberal to change the people in society. Where as it is much harder for a progressive or a socialist to convince a neoliberal to enact systemic change or redistribute wealth respectively.

In short, people with neoliberal ideas in their head need to fully internalize neoliberalism as a scam.

Abandoning the Democrats will not result in them being replaced. They will continue to exist by moving further to the right, as Democrats like Chris Murphy have already proposed.

Starting a successful third party is mathematically impossible under a FPTP system. Third party candidates can only be spoiler candidates.

The Democrat establishment wants power and for that they have to win elections. So having an anti establishment candidate is preferable to them over a Republicans victory. If anything good came out of the last election, it is that Trump as horrible as he is can still win elections against an establishment Democrat, so the Democrats have to change.

Also changing the parties does not work. The problem is systematic and the US really needs to change its election system, to get better politics.

Third party doesn’t work. You have to do what trump did, 1 man coup from the inside.

It didn’t work with Bernie for more reasons than the parties resistance. A lot of people on the left that dislike the party don’t seem to understand that you still have to join the party and get involved with it if you want the party to move left. Party members and active involved people shape where the party goes. We absolutely can shift the Dems left, but it means holding our noses and becoming the party. The Dems have always been an open door, big tent, party. Walk into the tent and change minds…

No, I mean populist. Populism is what is popular right now.

https://www.wordnik.com/words/populism

A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite.

No, the far-right exists because of late-stage capitalism and over 40 years of neoliberalism pushed by both mainstream parties since Regan. The Democrats lost in large part because of their refusal to adopt a populist narrative. They didn’t go left enough. But refusing to vote for them or espousing accelerationist rhetoric because of that is self-defeating, harms minorities, and opens to the door to devastating climate change scenarios.