• @sfunk1x@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    13
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    That would be after FPTP voting is replaced with RCV or STAR in all 50 states. Trying a third party before those steps will hand the federal government to the GOP for the remainder of my life.

    • Cowbee [he/they]
      link
      fedilink
      31 month ago

      I don’t think RCV or STAR is either enough to disrupt the status quo with a third party nor feasible enough to get in place.

        • Cowbee [he/they]
          link
          fedilink
          -11 month ago

          I doubt it, the DNC will likely run a faux-progressive campaign next election and perhaps win. However, the answer has always been revolution.

          • @sfunk1x@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I’m talking less about the executive branch than I am the legislative branch. Congress has been firmly in conservative control for over 30 years (I’m old enough to remember third way Democrats, Reagan Democrats and the moral majority), and without a change to FPTP voting, we’re going to be stuck with it veering further to the right.

    • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      That would be after FPTP voting is replaced with RCV or STAR in all 50 states.

      If we ever get that, there will be a new “that would be after” to replace it. If Democrats want to stop Republicans and are so worried about splitting the vote, maybe Democrats should abstain from running.

      They’re clearly not up to the task and would rather appease fascists here and abroad.

      • @sfunk1x@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        21 month ago

        Not really. What you’re asking for is for some unknown third party (like the Pacific Greens 😂😂😂) to pop up into place and immediately take the national reigns like a boss. That ain’t happening, bruv, otherwise it already would have. Ditching FPTP at least gives the average voter the opportunity to vote for different people (like Sanders not having to caucus with Democrats, or Working Families Party not having to caucus with Democrats, etc).

        Or you can sit back and vote third party in a defacto two party system. It’s worked well so far. 🤷🤷‍♀️🤷‍♂️

        • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 month ago

          Ditching FPTP at least gives the average voter the opportunity to vote for different people

          And it only requires having people who are willing to pass it in office. Which isn’t ever going to happen. Which means it’s a great prerequisite that needs to be met before something you don’t want to happen.

          • @sfunk1x@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            21 month ago

            Perhaps in your state, but in Oregon, we can bring initiatives to the ballot through voter signatures. It’s how we got RCV in Multnomah county, and it’s how the (failed) Measure 117 landed on our ballot this year. Sadly, it was badly written and Oregon voters are gunshy after the (also horribly written and implemented) Measure 110 (narcotics decriminalization) got onto the ballot.

            • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Perhaps in your state,

              Yeah. No real referendums in my state. So naturally we’ll need it in all 50 before we consider changing the sweetheart deal centrist Democrats and their Republican buddies have.