this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
621 points (87.4% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2860 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (5 children)

For the editor and anyone else who does not understand math: people voting for Trump means Trump gets a vote.

A vote for Jill Stein means Trump does not get a vote.

Would you rather have someone vote third party or vote Trump?

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The whole thing feels like an argument intended to push people away rather than rally support.

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

For industryStandard and whoever else may not understand FPTP: a vote for Kamala is a vote against Trump

A vote for Jill Stein is not a vote against Trump, and in fact hurts Kamala's chances the same way a Republican voting for RFK hurts Trump's chances

Would you rather have someone vote to stop Trump or throw away their vote?

[–] eacapesamsara@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

This is illogical, as it assumes someone voting for stein would vote for Harris, which isn't the case.

[–] PeggyLouBaldwin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Jill stein is running against Trump

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Jill Stein is literally only running to steal Kamala votes to improve the chances of Trump winning

[–] PeggyLouBaldwin@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

that's not what her platform says

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz -1 points 1 month ago

Breaking news; politicians lie to you

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 month ago

Cornell West 2024!

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

In 2016 many Bernie Bro's spite voted for Trump. Stein is leeching votes from Harris but also provides an alternative for what could have turned into spite voters.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Corporate says spot the difference here.

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

For industryStandard and whoever else may not understand FPTP: a vote for Kamala is a vote against Trump

A vote for Jill Stein is not a vote against Trump, and in fact hurts Kamala

Would you rather have someone vote to stop Trump or throw away their vote?