this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

45745 readers
123 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

didn't you vote in the primary? why not?

Americans got to choose between many candidates, and out of those, it's down to 6, and of those 6, it's only really likely 2, that's true.

But it isn't quite like you imply.

[–] nobody158@r.nf 0 points 5 months ago

The shitty thing is by the time my states primary pretty much every else has dropped out. We need to run the primary like a real election not piecemeal.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The RNC never intended to run a candidate other than Trump because he controls MAGA, which is what remains of their energized base. The primaries they held were “just in case” Merrick Garland actually did something useful and successfully prosecuted Trump for insurrection, which never came to pass.

The DNC did everything they could to prevent primary elections from occurring in various states, and bullied anyone who was floating a run into submission. This included the state dept making calls to state DNC committees to cancel primaries, or remove certain candidates from their ballots. According to them, it was an insult to Biden admin and their legacy to even suggest another candidate should run. And now look where that’s gotten us.

So no, we didn’t actually vote in primaries this year because the establishment refuses to relinquish the status quo.

[–] StThicket@reddthat.com 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I didn't vote in the primary, because I'm not American.

[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

yes, obviously. but the point stands: there wasn't just two candidates, and you don't know what you're talking about.

[–] StThicket@reddthat.com 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I understand what you are trying to say. Ultimately, there are only two to vote for. Ideally, there should be more than two parties, and more than two candidates. That's how democracies work. What you have is a dysfunctional system that divides people in two groups, and there are no incentives to cooperate between parties. Proper voting is also suffering due to the two-party system.

https://youtu.be/yhO6jfHPFQU

In my country, the parties with the majority of votes and the ability to cooperate gets to form a government. We also try to make it easy to get people to vote, insted of your system of gerrymandering.

[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

there are 6 parties, but only two of the six are large ones at the moment.

[–] StThicket@reddthat.com 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yes I know, but the voting system favours the two largest. Thats why they are large. Small parties have 0% chance og getting representatives into the houses, so they are basically irrelevant.

[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

just as long as you know you're wrong. 👍

[–] StThicket@reddthat.com 0 points 5 months ago

Yes, it's important to defend the only thing you know, even how bad it might be. 😄