The White House and Democratic members of Congress called Georgia Republicanā€™s comparison a ā€˜complimentā€™

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    people are tired of choosing between 2-3 old people

    Youā€™re NEVER going to get a good option. You vote for the least-worse. Always ā€“ lather, rinse, repeat.

    Iā€™m not sure how this is confusing. Show up at the polling station, with some idea of each loserā€™s plan, and pick the one who can pull off the most of a decent plan ā€“ or, said a different way, whoever will suck the least.

    • DragonAce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      Ā·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Youā€™re NEVER going to get a good option. You vote for the least-worse. Always ā€“ lather, rinse, repeat.

      That is the entire problem and telling people ā€œThats just the way it is, deal with itā€ is not going to solve it. Our ā€œdemocraticā€ system is completely broken, we are given the illusion of choice when in reality all candidates are preselected and paraded in front of the public as if they have our best interests at heart, when in reality they all have the same mandate from their corporate overlords. The US is a corporatocracy masquerading as a democracy, we as ordinary citizens have no real say in the matter. That needs to change, full stop!

      • Wiz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        That needs to change, full stop!

        Americaā€™s system of voting ā€œfirst past the postā€ ensures that one of the top two candidates will win. It pretty much guarantees a two-party system will win.

        So, the strategy would be:

          1. Try to get an alternative voting system like ā€œRanked Choice Votingā€ in place. This has been done successfully in Maine and Alaska, I think. We need more of it. [Yes, I know Ranked Choice is not perfect, but itā€™s definitely better than we have.]
          1. Until then, your best vote (mathematically) is to vote for one of the top two candidates that is closest to what you want. Yes, youā€™ll have to hold your nose a few times to vote for the ā€œleast worstā€ of the two, but honestly, itā€™s better than the alternative, of having the ā€œworst worstā€ of the two.

        Hope this helps.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          Ā·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You donā€™t even have to oppose the two party system to support ranked choice. I like ranked choice, especially for state reps/senators, and Iā€™m very pro two-party system.

          I know it opens the door to other parties I donā€™t necessarily want to exist, but itā€™s just a good idea full stop.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Itā€™s not a broken system when the most popular person wins. No one was preselected.

        A majority of people think Biden is in their best interest.

      • MossBear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        If you want things to change, you have to accept that itā€™s rarely going to be a sudden, profound moment. Itā€™s small steps adding up over time. If people arenā€™t willing to take the small steps, just because theyā€™re not big steps, then weā€™ll all soon find ourselves pulled backwards through our own apathy.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      Biden was literally my favorite in the primaries. I got my first pick as President.

      Frankly I think if people wanted some wacky, off the wall, Williamson-style candidate, theyā€™re too dumb to try to reason with so their votes really just should be assumed not to happen