this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
130 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19148 readers
1981 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
[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 51 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

I mean it sucks because everyone's vote should be counted, but I also don't really feel bad for Jill fucking Stein.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 28 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Is her middle name "fucking"? I thought it was "asset".

[–] ravhall@discuss.online 18 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Asset is her maiden name. It’s a pretty common name in Russia.

[–] abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think it's more likely she's a useful idiot for Russia and an asset to the GOP. But I suppose there's not too much practical difference from our standpoint...

(Incidentally, according to Wikipedia, her actual middle name is Ellen.)

[–] ravhall@discuss.online 7 points 3 weeks ago

Jill Ellen Asset-Stein? I guess it has a ring to it.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Their votes will be counted.

First they will count the Trump and Harris votes that actually matter. Then they will quickly tally the rest of the ballots and easily conclude that no other candidate stands a chance, and then they will declare either Trump or Harris the winner.

Splitting the "other" category up into different third party candidates is a waste of effort since all of them will lose, and that outcome can easily be determined by tallying all the ballots not going to Trump or Harris. There are no 2nd or 3rd place winners.

[–] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

In principle, under a First Past The Post system you can get vote splitting parties and those votes for those representatives should still be counted because if they got more votes than last time and are on an upward trajectory then those candidates can measure how well they're resonating with their voters.

But with the USA's FPTP and electoral college system, I'd agree with you, there's zero point in counting those votes before declaring the winner because ultimately the electoral college comes down to red or blue which is the only thing that matters in US politics.

This is a shame because a private continent like the US could be the greatest tapestry of all flavours of political candidates and ideologies with debate and compromise if it wasn't for:

  1. The electoral college and FPTP making it into a two party system.

  2. The hugely biased news media which has no obligation to report factually and fair.

  3. That both sides (with the Republicans being the one that is objectively worse because of their abhorrent behaviour that's somehow only gotten worse of late) vying for that insider trading perk and getting to control the worlds largest military and therefore dictate history.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

I agree it could be useful for the politicians. That's not the purpose of the groups who count votes though. Their goal is to determine who won. They are not there to tell the candidates if they're on an upward trajectory or not.