• Numberone@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Almost like Clinton should have run a real campaign in MI😃. Stop running unpopular candidates and blaming it on greens. How embarassing lol.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s possible more than one thing contributed to Clinton losing…

      At any rate Harris is running a great campaign. So much so that every single potential voter is being considered, even the people that might be getting scammed into voting for Jill Stein. I don’t think the Hilary’s campaign even considered going after the people voting green because it was assumed those votes wouldn’t be a significant factor. The Harris campaign isn’t leaving any stone unturned. That means challenging people who are promoting third parties more.

      • Tinidril@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Harris has declined in popularity with every day that passed after her coronation. She is running a mostly adequate campaign, and trying to please everyone has never been a seriously effective Democratic strategy, especially in the long term.

        Harris has her strengths. Very few Democrats would have stood their ground as well as she did in the Fox ambush interview. That’s where she really shines, when she can let out that inner prosecutor. Waltz was a great addition, but the campaign hid him away the second Harris took on most of Hillary’s campaign advisors.

        Just like Biden before her, Harris’s greatest advantage is how much Trump is despised outside of his cult. Let’s not be deifying her for that.

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          trying to please everyone has never been a seriously effective Democratic strategy, especially in the long term.

          Do you think it would be more effective to piss off people? Maybe she could start telling us which voters she thinks are “deplorable”? Is that more effective than trying to please as many voters as possible?

          The Dems have won three out of the last four elections. Not sure why you’re saying this strategy is not effective given the one they lost was the one where their candidate called some voters deplorable.

          Waltz was a great addition, but the campaign hid him away the second Harris took on most of Hillary’s campaign advisors.

          The VP candidate is not supposed to overshadow the Presidential candidate. Walz has been on the campaign trail basically non-stop, and doing local interviews which may actually be more important than national interviews. The national media doesn’t pick up on things Walz is doing all the time, but don’t confuse that with the campaign hiding him away. Harris’ debate performance and national interviews are much stronger than Walz’s debate performance on the national stage. So why would they be trying to push a guy to do national interviews that he’s not great at instead of doing rallies and local interviews which he is good at?

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah how dare the dems pick the candidate the majority of their primary voters picked! They should have chosen someone more popular, like the guy who got even less votes than her during those same primaries!

  • Userpc933@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Evidence that third party votes would of voted otherwise? If people don’t like any candidates, they might not vote at all

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Or, they might vote Republican. In 2016, Clinton was na clear establishment candidate and Trump was a (fake) populist. Voters who went Green or Libertarian as a vote against the establishment were unlikely to swing to Hillary.

      I’m not sure that dynamic still holds now. The MAGA faithful think Trump is a populist, but I don’t think anyone else does.

    • kibiz0r@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s the official count, but we’ll never know what the actual count was. A bunch of people who “voted” for Nader were trying to vote for Gore but got screwed over by the format of the ballot.

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Holy shit, 2,912,790 people voted for Dubya in Florida?! How come nobody noticed this before? I feel like that might have affected the outcome of the election.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      the electoral votes column juxtaposed with the other columns is just documenting what should be a crime.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      My brother is voting for Jill Stein to “send a message to the Democrats” that they can’t automatically rely on liberal votes. He voted for Nader in 2000 to “send a message to the Democrats” that they can’t automatically rely on liberal votes. When I mention the 24-year gap here his response is “what’s your point?”

    • JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Since all ‘electoral votes’ go to the winner in the US, why do they even bother mentioning it? Its seems entirely vestigial

    • madjo@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Ah yes, the true stolen election. But Al Gore conceded, even though it really was too close to call.

    • taipan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I double checked the subtraction with the NYT numbers you linked to, and the numbers look correct to me. Which numbers are wrong?

  • Lanky_Pomegranate530@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Jill Stien only had 2% of the vote in 2016. That is nothing. Most of those people would have stayed home. The reason Hillary lost was because she was a bad canidiate who was unable to resonate with young voters.

  • Wisas62@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Maybe if everyone that posted threads like this voted 3rd party, maybe 3rd party would get enough votes for once to push a reelection and get on the radar? Instead of trying to get people to vote for 2 candidates that don’t support their needs and/or wants.

    You do realize that the winning president has to win at least 50% of the electoral college vote in order to win. If no one president does then the top 3 candidates go to the house of representatives to be chosen. Just the media if this happened would finally put a third party on the radar, even if they only won one state.

    https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/faq

  • Rooskie91@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Maybe the Democratic party should consider what not following through on their campaign promises gets them. I don’t how their failure to realize their promises to their voters is the fault of people voting for third parties

    • Limonene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      But I didn’t want Clinton to win. My picks were: 1. Lessig, 2. Sanders, 3. Stein, 4. Johnson (Gary), 5. blank. Knowing only what I knew in 2016, I disliked Trump and Clinton equally, and would never have voted for either one.

      (And yes, I did know that Sanders had endorsed Clinton.)

      • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I would hope that you learned something from your error, but this comment shows clearly you haven’t. I learned it when I voted for John Anderson and in my tiny way contributed to Reagan winning: in America, you vote to keep the worst fascist out of power, and if it means voting for someone who isn’t perfect but has the numbers to do it, that’s who you vote for. The primary may be your opportunity to show support for other parties, and you can go to rallies and spread the good word to influence the discussion, but until the day your third party candidate has enough potential votes to actually win it, you help hold the wall.

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Shit, I wouldn’t even discount trying to vote 3rd party when it comes to local elections or state elections. You have to chip away at the power the big parties have at the peripheries first, before trying to do big stuff like voting 3rd party in the big presidential election where they are basically guaranteed to not win.

          • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yeah but saying that you vote third party during local elections doesn’t rile people up. Many of these third party voters only come out of the woodwork during presidential elections just because they want to be contrarians.

      • Omega@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        We wouldn’t have a 6-3 conservative supreme court with Clinton, along with a rash of conservative lower courts. Not only have we had extreme fallout from this already. But it will be affecting us for decades.

        A bunch of our red states likely wouldn’t have swung to extremism, like my home state which went from Asa Hutchinson to Sarah Huckabee-Sanders. I don’t know if my kids will legally be allowed to learn that slavery existed in school.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          We would absolutely have a 6-3 conservative court with Clinton. We just wouldn’t call it conservative.

          We probably wouldn’t have a fascist court like we do now though.

  • Asafum@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I didn’t actually realize the numbers were that high for her… Ffs.

    They know what they’re doing. The elections in swing states are always down to razor margins. The right spoiler is almost a guaranteed win for the opponent :/

    • Limonene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Third parties certainly know what effect they have. Their motivation is not to make the second party candidate win. Their motivation is to change the first party candidate.

      According to Hotelling’s Law, a two-party political system with FPTP voting results in candidates that are very similar. This is why the Democrats won’t run real progressives for most offices, and why Sanders was forced out in 2016 with the excuse that he wasn’t “electable” enough.

      Third parties running for president aren’t trying to win. They’re trying to eat some of the votes on their side, thus pulling the main party candidates toward that third party candidate to reclaim those votes.

      • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Third parties certainly know what effect they have.

        Third party candidates that are running specifically in presidential elections and nothing else.

        Third parties that actually want to move the needle participate in local elections, caucus with a major party for ballot access, etc. (WFP)

        Their motivation is not to make the second party candidate win.

        Bullshit.

        Green’s team literally stated the goal was for Kamala to lose.

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      They weren’t. Check out PA. Trump won by 68K, Stein got 48K, Trump would still take PA, the EC totals would be 280 Trump, 258 Clinton. The whole thing is just a lie.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Third parties help the democrats because the biggest third party is more right-aligned.

      In Michigan Gary Johnson got 172,136 votes, in Pennsylvania he got 146,715, and in Wisconsin he got 106,674. If all Greens voted Clinton and all Libertarians voted Trump then New Mexico would’ve only been won by Clinton with around 1,000 votes, Colorado would’ve also been nearly Trump. Nevada, New Hampshire, and Minnesota would’ve been won by Trump. Maine might’ve gone majority Trump.

  • scops@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Stein wasn’t even the only third party candidate stealing votes. I voted for Gary Johnson with the Libertarian party as a “protest vote”. Glancing at national results, he had almost three times as many votes as Stein did.

    I was 100% the moron this meme is targeted towards. I voted for Harris yesterday.

    • billwashere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      But you aren’t a moron if you learned from your mistakes. It means the opposite.

      I wish we had ranked choice voting. Then these protest votes would still work and not screw with the system so bad and we could fight the stranglehold of the two party system.

      • kofe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        My state is trying to constitutionally ban the use of ranked choice systems 🫠 fingers crossed the muppets just drew enough awareness to implement it after we reject this amendment

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I want something like this where I live. We have FPTP here, but we have a viable third option in some areas. I’d be happier to to have more than 2 robust parties on the national stage.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The Jill Stein hate requires a lot of ignorance and very little faith in the candidate running at the head of the Democratic Party.

      Obama crushed McCain and Romney, green party be damned. Biden squeaked by Trump on thinner margins than Trump beat Hilary. Nobody cared about Stein in that race.

      What changed? Why are Democrats so terrified of the green party all of a sudden?

      • madjo@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Because Biden just squeaked by Trump. Leading to 50%-ish of the US population and 80%-ish of Republican voters believing that the last election got stolen. Also leading to a lot of election officials in key states being replaced by fair election denying nutjobs.

        Haven’t you been paying attention in the past few years?

        I’m not even in the US and I’m already exhausted with the BS that’s upcoming, if there’s no landslide victory for any of the candidates.

        Be aware that any third party vote will be a vote for trump. If that’s what you truly want, I fear for your sanity.

        Btw, it’s not true that nobody cared about Stein in the previous election. Back then they too said “a vote for Stein is a vote for trump”. You may not have heard it personally, but that message was out there. And it’s still true today!

        • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m voting Jill. All your liberal gaslighting just hardens my resolve. I don’t care how many convoluted explanations you come up with to say I’m voting for Trump. My ballot never said Trump and never will.

          • gi1242@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            either trump or Harris will be president. you can throw away your vote, or choose the one that better aligns with your position.

          • Soup@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Someone not even from the US understands this better than you?

            Man… you have no excuses.

            At this point it’s clear to me why you’re here and what you’re about.

            • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              No, your refusal to field an actual popular candidate with actual progressive policies helps Trump win.

              • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                Homie, I do not control who the DNC fields. I am basing my strategy on the facts of the situation as they are presented to me. Where’s your popular candidate?

                • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Right, you only tirelessly shill for them by browbeating anyone that has a problem with their candidate currently overseeing a genocide.

      • Soup@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        And the Shill Stein love requires zero common sense, and a shit load of entitlement.

          • Soup@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            No one is insisting anyone is entitled to anyone’s vote. We are however insisting that you try and understand how voting statistics and simple grade-school math works.

            Everyone else has this figured out already? Why are we so close to an election and you still don’t? Do you seriously think that you have some big hidden secret figured out? You know better than the overwhelming majority of an entire country?

            Every generation does this shit. You think you know how it works. You don’t.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              No one is insisting anyone is entitled

              a shit load of entitlement.

              :-/

              Everyone else has this figured out already?

              There arguments have been made. You simply don’t like the conclusions other people have reached.

      • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        This, but since dot world is infested with Reddit liberals you’re getting down voted into oblivion.

        • Soup@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          They’re getting downvoted into oblivion because everyone here knows better.

          It’s always easy to be the most ignorant one in the the room if you ignore everyone that tries to tell you how and why you’re wrong.

    • zanyllama52@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Third party voting; the really real reason Democrats and Republicans can’t get their candidates elected. lol

    • gi1242@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      anyone who acknowledges and leans from mistakes is the smartest of the smart. the dumb ones double down and repeat mistakes no matter what evidence is presented to them.

      thank you for admitting and learning from your mistake. I wish everyone was like you.

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Me too Stein in 2016. I was so mad at Clinton for what they did to Sanders. I am voting Harris as soon as voting is open here.

        • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Don’t forget 2020. They even made Warren stay in through super Tuesday just to fuck him over more. Not to mention thar snake trying to claim Sanders as a sexist with that hot mic. I never forgive her for that.

  • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s Jill Stein’s fault the dems ran Hillary, it was all her master plan all along. She’s also the one who did whatever the email shit was they people screamed about for 6 years

    • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Stein can run AND you can be a dolt for voting for her AND we legally permit you to vote like a dingus, but (also legally) you go on a vote tally and we know how many dolts there were and we get to mock you as a small comeuppance for your ruination of everyone else’s attempt to improve our daily lives and those around us.

      Not to suggest that we get to mock you specifically! Because we protect everyone in that way. SO FAR. But you’ll know who we’re mocking. Because we protect that, too.

      SO FAR.

      Hope that helps you make a better comment next time.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        your ruination of everyone else’s attempt to improve our daily lives and those around us

        The absolute anger at people who didn’t vote for the shitty guy instead of those who did is goddamn sad. To blame third party voters at all for 2016 is heavy copium of some seriously pathetic levels

        Hope that helps you make a better comment next time.

        and so smugly full of themselves in a weirdly threatening way, because voting only counts if you vote exactly how they want you to

        • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I disagree that it’s “goddamn sad” when people get mad about others refusing to mitigate harm through votes, and cause irreparable damage instead. Loads of people have been using votes as a way to mitigate harm for decades now. They don’t have the luxury to do otherwise. What makes you so special? Why are you above reproach?

          I think it makes sense to be mad about that. It’s awful to see a chance to prevent harm and refuse to. I won’t pretend it’s okay just because you think you can chunk up my post to dunk on select blurbs from it.

          I do think they can make a better effort in their posts. I think you can, too.