this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
1046 points (78.5% liked)

Political Memes

5405 readers
5605 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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Sure you conveniently haven't, but I've seen it floated on these boards and the post in the chain above us we're replying to is aligned with antidemocratic messaging - it by no means rejects anyone who wants to ban 3rd parties.

But lets make an even easier comparison making it hard for 3rd parties to exist is not wholly different than banning them. This is in fact how republicans approached abortion before the supreme court's catholic wing decided to allow bans.

Its all working to the same goal. Anti 3rd party messaging without context and rational thought is just anti-democracy messaging which only helps republicans. Every legal tool democrats are using to beat down 3rd parties will eventually be used by republicans to prevent democrats from being elected.

The only way to fix it is to change the way we vote so that 3rd parties don't produce spoiler effects.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

OK, so claims of randos on the internet.

NOT any single elected democrat.

Got it.

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

Ah so what matters is words not actions? Taking steps to remove 3rd parties from ballots is fine as long as you don't say it?

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

What matter is context. Intentionally leaving it out is garbage.

As is not saying which ballots you're referring to. In this case, I assume its the presidential election where they are playing the role of spoiler?

Yes, it absolutely makes sense to legally challenge those.

But "some democrats" is just as garbage and useless a comment as "people are saying".

Edited to add: This is also definitively and explicitly not the same thing as saying ban all third parties.

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.