this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2025
1576 points (97.4% liked)

Political Memes

8745 readers
3370 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] grte@lemmy.ca 105 points 5 days ago (29 children)

I wonder what all the people who shamed 3rd party voters will say if establishment Democrats start throwing their support behind an independent Cuomo.

[–] octopus_ink@slrpnk.net 66 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (15 children)

This one would say all the things Harris would have done wrong are still better than all the things Trump is doing wrong. I'm not and have not been a fan of Harris. She's still not Trump.

Edit: While I actually did not truly shame anyone for their vote (I hope) it was always true that third party vote was going to help Trump get in, and I do think folks shouldn’t pretend it wasn’t true. If you are going to make a principled vote in the name of sending a message, I think it’s only reasonable to be honest about the effects of that decision.

[–] srecko@lemm.ee 28 points 5 days ago (9 children)

I'm not from US, but why not ask for something more than lesser of two evils?

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 13 points 5 days ago

Because our elections system is fundamentally broken in such a way that creating or promoting something other than the existing two makes the side you like least more likely to win. As such, unless you can get literally the entire base of one of the major parties to switch to you in the span of a single election cycle, "asking for something more than the lesser of two evils" has mostly the same practical consequences as "asking for the greater evil".

This largely breaks the premise of democracy, of course, because the two main parties don't have to follow "the will of the people", they just have to look slightly better in the eyes of their base than the other party. The way to fix it would be to greatly reform our election system, but that's difficult to do (admittedly not entirely for bad reasons, it probably would not be ideal for authoritarians to make changes to that for example), and made worse by the fact that both parties benefit from the current system vs one where even more competition can exist.

That latter point means that what it would really take, is first usurping control of one of the existing parties from those that currently run it, and then getting those newcomers into enough power at a national level to get election reform done. That's not a terribly likely path to work out, I'm afraid, but it's probably all we've got short of an actual violent revolution (which have a high risk of failing or getting co-opted by authoritarians, and in any event are a lot harder to start than some people on the internet seem to think they are). This is probably why the establishment democrats hate this guy so much, despite him only running for mayor (of a large city admittedly, but still, not exactly president or anything). Popular candidates from outside their established group are exactly the kind of thing that you would need to start this process, and if successful that group would lose much of their power.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)