Allow me to address the elephant in the room:

The Trump administration is not setting the course for a four-year term.

The Trump administration is setting the course for an everlasting dictatorship.

If Americans don’t want that, the window to stop them is closing quickly.

@Strandjunker

The window closed when 11 million people who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 couldn’t be bothered to vote in 2024. Now everyone is up in arms because nobody bothered to read the writing on the wall that’s been there since 2016.

@HamonWry @Strandjunker

@benroyce is probably the best person to comment on this, but I'm not sure it's just that people "couldn't be bothered”. There was an epidemic of #ToxicIdealism spread perhaps primarily by the “G-n-c-d- Joe” brigade leading a non-trivial number to not vote as some sort of masochistic protest.

The left wing must, finally, learn the lesson:
Fight in the primaries, unite in the election

@mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

It's rather weird still encountering people, as I have recently, who think "teaching Democrats a lesson" is more important than {gestures broadly}

It's also extremely entitled

That the bad effects of the Trump administration won't affect them

(Or, rather than entitlement, extremely fucking stupid to think it won't effect them.)

@benroyce @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker I think it's much deeper than just idealism, having 2 choices and having to choose something you disagree with because the other option is... well, unacceptable is a rotten system.

We've seen how a two party system keeps shifting right. Eventually your options will be just far right or farther right.

@Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

yes but you have cause and effect backwards

it's not "this shifts right, so i won't participate"

it's "i'm not participating" and then as a consequence, things shift right

it's a feedback loop that accelerates

the only solution is more participation

you're never going to get perfect, it will always suck in some ways

but if you hold your nose and participate you can iterate on that and proceed left

in fact, that's the only way it will ever happen

@benroyce @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker IMHO a solution is to have more parties, and someone to dares to do far left

@Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

100% no

clarification: i want 3rd parties

but to have them, we need ranked choice voting

currently in the usa we have an FPTP voting system

what that means is if we were to add a new 3rd left party, we divide the left, and we guarantee MAGA wins

we need ranked choice first. so we need to get candidates that support that

that has to come first. without that, we are guaranteeing failure

the left has to take over the democratic party

it is the only way

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

> we need ranked choice voting

False: see Israel. The country with the most parties in the world.

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker you do need to switch from FPTP to coalitions.

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Which you get with ranked choice voting

Why are you lying about Israel using RCV?

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker I'm not???? What????

Why're you blaming me out of the blue? I explicitly said you DO NOT need RCV. you need coalitions instead of FPTP.

Israel has the most parties in the world DESPITE not being RCV.

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

"> we need ranked choice voting

False: see Israel"

😂

Just change the wording of your comment then. You have to admit it is a different meaning then what you're speaking now. I'll delete my comments after it

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker
Ben, what? "The country with the most parties in the world". Read till the end

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

🤦‍♂️

Look I'm constantly not communicating my exact meaning and needing to clarify in order to not create a false impression. We all do. Im not attacking you I'm just saying what you wrote implies the opposite of your meaning. That's all. It's a simple fix to edit your comment

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker people thinking Israel = evil is their problem, not mine. If you hadn't assumed that...

*Well, it is my problem, but differently, lols.

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

I'm not attacking you. Please just admit your wording was off. Whether Israel is utopia or hell or anything in between, that has nothing to do with the fact your wording made a wrong impression

That's it. That's all. That's the beginning and ending of what I'm saying to you

Also the issue is israel has proportional representation. We dont have that in the usa so we cant do multiparty. Our shit fptp means were stuck with two parties

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker I'm not saying you attacked me.

All I'm saying is that my wording is clear.

My point was that RCV is not the only way to have lots of parties, and I made it.

People on fedi have the tendency to assume what Israel does is bad, and I'm not gonna change my wording to account for that, as a prencip.

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Look i got nothing but love for you. And I am saying nothing wonderful nor venomous about israel, thats a whole other thing.

I just had a problem with your wording on the topic of electoral systems with rcv quote and then "false."

That's it. But I'm over it. I see what you intended to say now

Having a single national multi member electorate is certainly a way to get multiple parties. But is that a useful observation? I’m not sure it’s easier to achieve than RCV would be.
@Sh41 @lax @mmalc @Strandjunker @benroyce @HamonWry

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

That's a lie. Israel does not use ranked choice voting

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker shu that's a lie? We have lots of parties, and we don't use RCV.

We have lots of parties because of *coalitions* and because of being a multicultural society, not because of ranked choice.

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

"> we need ranked choice voting

False: see Israel. The country with the most parties in the world."

You, a few minutes ago

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker
Yes, you do not need RCV, as I said. See how Israel has a fuckton of parties WITHOUT having RCV.

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

da fuq

you should edit your comment and change your wording

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker my wording is perfectly clear, I said "false" to "we (america) need RCV", because you don't need RCV, you need coalitions
@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker 🤦‍♂️ come on. just admit your wording is off

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Also Israel has proportional representation. That's how its able to have so many parties. We can do that in the usa with our current system

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker yeah, that's what I'm saying

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

but you didn't say that 😂

Look ill drop it. I got no hard feelings for you. Im just saying your wording was not clear. That's it. That's all I'm saying to you. ☮️

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker oh, one sec. You *can't* do it in the US with your current system. You gotta have coalitions, which will probably require a constitutional amendment.

@lax @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Yeah. Parliamentary democracy is a whole other thing. I wish we had parliamentary

@benroyce @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker I love in Europe, our political party and voting system is quite different, it also changes from country to country 🤷‍♀️

@Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Right

so a general comment for Europeans:

what you need to do is not comment on the American voting system if you don't understand it

many of you speak of a solution: 3rd party

but we're not parliamentary

we're FPTP

which means 3rd party divides the left and hands MAGA more wins

You don't want that

But that's what you get

Please Europeans:

understand our voting system is completely fucked up

we need to change our system before getting 3rd parties

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Traditionally in USA, one party falls over the edge, and a new second party emerges from the opposite side of the surviving party.

As I recall, that has already happened three or four time - which is why you no longer have a "The Whigs" party.

Fundamentally however, USA has always been a one-party system cosplaying as a two-party system.

The only documented cure for that is to have a revolution.

@phloggen wrote:
<">
Fundamentally however, USA has always been a one-party system cosplaying as a two-party system.

The only documented cure for that is to have a revolution.
</">

Do you say that the one-party systems in Fascist Italy; Nationalsocialist Germany; Frankist Spain; the Soviet bloc; Yugoslavia ended with revolutions?

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

@vnikolov @benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

I was only talking about one-party systems cosplaying as two-party systems.

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

"we need to change our system before getting 3rd parties"

Speaking as a dual US/UK ctizen, changing the system is almost impossible if the Democrats refuse to embrace progressive ideas. It's from that quarter that the sort of system change you hope for will come. The Democrats are comfortable with FPTP because at least sometimes they're in office. They're essentially conservative and will always try to preserve the system. See also the UK.

@riggbeck @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

"changing the system is almost impossible if the Democrats refuse to embrace progressive ideas"

false

and an impotent self-defeating mentality

1. you show up in the primaries and you *replace* spineless centrists. you don't think of centrists as some omnipotent force. they're weak. boot them

2. demanding centrists magically turn into leftists before you vote is a joke. all that happens is you don't vote and you don't matter. you're ceding power

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

1) When Democratic candidates are at all progressive, they are either viewed with suspicion by the leadership or actively connived against.

2) I didn't say that. It's important to vote Democratic even if the candidate isn't all you want them to be.

But, they'll never ditch FPTP unless there are sufficient progressive Democrats to make it possible. The party has to change. That's a stone cold fact.

I'm just describing the political reality.

@riggbeck @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

" The party has to change"

yes

and you only achieve that by showing the fuck up. especially in the primaries to jettison the centrists

if you don't show up, nothing changes

nonvoting is moronic beyond belief

"they are either viewed with suspicion by the leadership or actively connived against"

who gives a fuck!

"adversity exists in the world, therefore i give up"

da fuq?

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Where did I say anything about giving up or not voting? You seem to confuse seeing a problem clearly with not wanting to do anything about it.

@riggbeck @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

you're asserting centrist democrats are some omnipotent alien force that are impossible to dislodge or defeat

this is the rationale of giving up and not voting

it's also a lie

in truth, the centrists are massively weak and the democratic party is primed for take over by the left

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

"you're asserting centrist democrats are some omnipotent alien force that are impossible to dislodge or defeat"

No. Where did I say that?

"in truth, the centrists are massively weak and the democratic party is primed for take over by the left"

I think that's delusional. The leadership will lurch to right for fear of offending Republican voters. Which makes it even more important to elect progressive candidates.

I'm actually agreeing with you.

@riggbeck @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

"i'm actually agrteeing with you"

good. then that closes the discussion, with a caveat:

"where did I say that?"

🤦

@benroyce @riggbeck @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker I am surprised nobody has tried to "trump" the D party yet. They are wide open for it.

You can just as easily attack the media as shills for Big Pharma and Big Money, as Trump attacked them for being leftist.

The same argument of "what have you done for your base lately?" is wide open here.

Is their primary system just too corrupt? The Rs initially tried to block Trump but eventually got on board. The Ds will not do that?

Speaking as a dual US/UK ctizen, changing the system is almost impossible if the Democrats refuse to embrace progressive ideas.
Well I got a rope. And there's a nice tall tree over there. You think it matters what the Democratics refuse to embrace?

CC: @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

@cy @benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

Obviously it does, since the Democrats are one party in a two party system that neither party wants to ditch.

Short of a revolution, the system won't change unless the Democrats change. The Republicans are very happy with it the way it is.

So apart from trying to elect progressive candidates, which has already been talked about in this thread, do you have any other suggestions?

My best idea is to go talk to your neighborhood, try to establish some kind of community association where you keep each other up to date on your lives. Don't mention politics or two party systems or anything. Just help each other out, and once you've got people supporting each other, then you can think about protecting yourself from the loonies off in DC.

It's honestly not a very good idea, but that's the best I got.

CC: @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

@cy @benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker

I think that's a very good idea. My daughter in Bloomington, IN, campaigns for Indivisible. She works with local volunteers.

I'm still divided about that org. Why a well funded, heavily marketed nationwide organization? Are they really helping, or just soaking up activists to keep us from making any real change?

CC: @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

@benroyce @Sh41 @HamonWry @Strandjunker

If you’ll forgive me, I’m not understanding your point here.

“Parliamentary” and “FPTP” seem orthogonal? In the UK, for example, each seat is determined by FPTP, which is how Labour ended up with a landslide even though they barely had a third of the popular vote.

(Other than that agree about 3rd left party and dreadful election system)

@mmalc @Sh41 @HamonWry @Strandjunker

you are correct that FPTP and parliamentary are not directly related

the important point is that parliamentary and FPTP introduce aspects in the system where 3rd parties are enabled or denied

so however votes are tallied in a parliamentary system, parliamentary enables stable effective 3rd parties

while FPTP, alone, denies 3rd parties

it's about where 3rd parties become possible or not

it's not a direct contrast, you are correct

@benroyce @Sh41 @mmalc @HamonWry @Strandjunker we need to start at the local and state levels to develop a viable left party.
I would bet less than 25% of the population can name their school board members and I’m being generous. It is however where change begins and the right is not only aware of that but actively involved in those elections.