It’s handled through keyring I think.

Can you tell me what’s bad about that platform?

Even with the uncharitable wording you used on some items it seems like a huge list of good policies and goals that would help the American people. How come it’s bad?

i’m already convinced to vote for her, you don’t need to make the case.

First things first: a third party vote isn’t throwing your vote away. Third party votes get tallied just like votes for republicans and democrats and even if the parties and candidates those votes are cast for don’t win, they confer real material gains like ballot presence, mandatory funding, event presence, media coverage and public awareness, like I said.

Second, I am not voting to prove a point. I am voting to make my voice heard. If one of the two major parties hears my voice and decides to adopt some of the positions of a party that I voted for then that’s great, maybe I’ll give them a chance next time.

It is not possible to vote against a candidate. You can only vote for a candidate. There is no second, different colored pen they hand you to fill in the bubble next to the candidate you don’t want to win.

I cant vote against trump, I can only vote for some candidate. My vote will never be interpreted as a vote against trump, it will only ever be interpreted as a vote in support of the candidate I cast it for.

If my vote doesn’t have an impact on the outcome then how can it help or harm either major party?

Why do you think so?

Exit polling from 92 showed that if everyone who wanted to vote for Perot but didn’t had actually voted for Perot he would have won both the electoral college and the popular vote.

I do think a third party can win this election for president.

But why not assume I said that I don’t think a third party can win and respond to that? It would probably be more interesting for both of us.

So leaving aside your war on terror ass parting shot there at the end, if the democrats are really worried about project 2025 and they know that the last time trump was declared the loser there were people ready to do January 6, why do you think pushing people to vote against it this time is the best response?

Why, if it is how you just said it is, would the democrats not be training, organizing and arming a group to actually oppose it?

It’s like if the American idol call in vote was to keep a puppy from getting smashed on live tv by a slowly advancing steamroller. The democrats are in power. There was just a Supreme Court ruling codifying the powers of the executive, who is a democrat. The democrats don’t need our vote to stop project 2025, they’re in the studio watching the steamroller advance on the puppy!

They can literally actually do something about it!

For how much though? If the bullet vending machines are cheap that’s aight…

Next time it does that, run the “journalctl | tee journalctloutput.txt “command and see if it has lines from before the boot. If it does, paste the output of the lines from that boot to see when and how it’s failing or succeeding.

Lincoln literally ran for his second term under a third party, the Union party, which was a coalition formed of his own republicans and others like the nativists.

I’ve tried really hard to not be idealistic and only talk in material terms about the way things are.

The only thing I’d like to show the democrats is what they need to do to get my vote. I plan on doing that by voting third party. My vote will also support in a measurable, material, real way a party and candidate that has nearly the same politics as I do. I’m not petulant or using my vote to express anger at the democrats.

How will it go when the democrats lose?

I never claimed there was a third party president and I already proved your claims wrong in my last post.

But if you want a third party president, look into Lincoln’s second term running as the Union party candidate, a coalition formation that came from triangulating around a bunch of smaller third parties.

If the democrats are afraid of a split they can change their platform to get more votes.

that’s not true.

third party votes provide access to funding, ballot and event presence, media coverage and public awareness. third party votes do matter and they have a measurable positive impact.

third party votes tell the two major parties exactly what positions they need to integrate into their platforms in order to pick up those ballots in those particular districts. even if a person doesn’t think it’s worthwhile to build support for a third party, a third party ballot is an undeniable record of what the two major parties can do to get your support.

when people start talking about this kind of thing i generally like to bring up perot 92, which had a serious effect on domestic policy and was proven not to be a spoiler multiple times in the years that followed.

Damn, you got a lot of replies and no one said to just use paper forms.

Idk if the uk allows it still, it’d be surprising if it didn’t though.

They’ve got their work cut out for them, she didn’t just fall out of a coconut tree!

I don’t buy that. Both major parties, all the donors, the media, the lobbying groups and all the party machines in all fifty states are heavily invested the system we have.

I’m not gonna wait till we tip the whole system over to record a vote that actually represents my political positions.

If the two major parties are afraid of third party spoilers then they can adopt the platforms of those third parties.

No one has said it in this thread, and there’s a lot of people talking about how they wish there was another option:

I’m voting for the Party for Socialism and Liberation and you can too!

They’re running Claudia de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian statehood and an end to arms shipments to Israel.

There are many alternatives.

No, fireworks are cool and fun and people enjoy them.

Listen, I’m not a lawyer, I’m not trying to say I am.

It’s widely understood that civil litigation is held to a lower level of scrutiny than criminal proceedings are.

It’s widely accepted that jury trials are more prone to error than other types of hearings.

The legal meaning of the word “implicit” in that sentence is something close to “we didn’t ask the jury about this, but something they did rule on could be interpreted as implying it”.

I’m not making an excuse for trump or normalizing rape when I say the following:

That is paper fucking thin.

Am I reading this right that it’s because a civil decision by jury implies rape?

I actually agree with your last sentence. it’s a no-win situation for the democrats and there’s a seemingly growing contingent that thinks the best loss they can take is one where a new candidate or set of candidates are introduced to the electorate.

polls are wrong all the time, you’re right. what does it look like if against all odds, biden wins? the man has shown himself to be incapable of cognitive function. should voters fall back on trusting his cabinet and handlers “our competent administrators, their unelected sycophants” style?

hes facing significant opposition from the other branches of government and even at the end of his life when faced with a supreme court ruling that gives him the legal go ahead to enact his administrations policies he won’t do it.

that’s not looking like a great second term. if he lives through it then they’re the do-nothing democrats who can’t accomplish their agenda and abandon their constituents, if he dies then they’ve got kamala who would be very funny but is incredibly disliked.

the democrats are between a rock and a hard place right now because they ran on trump being a dictatorial fascist who will crown himself god-king and now that hes going to win they’re at fault for cynically using the threat of fascism to get votes instead of building the kind of base to oppose fascism that one and a quarter centuries of history would dictate or being the boy who cried wolf if it turns out there’s a peaceful transition of power in 2028.

basically there’s no way forward with their current messaging and platform because when trump wins and institutes american fascism (it’s already here, but i’m typing from the perspective of democratic strategists) they’re naive buffons who pissed away their time and resources trying to get people to vote for an inadequate candidate on a shuffling the deck chairs platform and when trump doesn’t send the brownshirts into the streets and has a largely uneventful second term theyre the people who pissed away their time and resources on a candidate and platform which aren’t up to the challenges we face because of orange man bad.

they’re done for and the best possible outcome is an uneventful trump presidency with a smooth handover complete with “restored faith in our electoral process”. in that case it’s best to go ahead and start getting their benchwarmers out on the field to find out whos up to the task in 2026 and 2028.

There’s also a cost to transitioning to the new technology.

Normalizing arbitrary size removable media makes physical exfiltration much easier because no one is asking why you’re using an illegal technology in the government building.

Floppy disks are not able to identify themselves as a keyboard and release a payload of keystrokes on command, or hide entire soc computers complete with network adapters.

There is also the matter of retraining on an institutional scale, and if you think it’s as simple as “put this into the computer, not that” you’re woefully underinformed.

Just as an aside, it’s pretty fraught to compare a language transition caused by centuries of forced resettlement to switching the kind of computer thingy government employees use over the course of two years.