Matty Roses

Buddy, you’re the one advocating voting for people you claim to oppose. Think about that real hard

Do you not understand how primaries work?

It really seems you don’t.

You’re conflating general voting rights with access to ballot lines and closed primaries.

These are very different things, and the Democratic Party (and GOP) have different goals with each of them.

The Democratic Party has led numerous lawsuits to remove 3rd party, especially Green, candidates from the ballot line. The greens even have a list here - https://www.gp.org/third_party_suppression_a_problem

The Democratic leadership strategy falls apart with a challenge from the left. They’re able to keep leadership and candidates that are far to the right of what their base and voters are and want because, while they’re inept at attacking right, they make very sure to deal with any threat to their left as the existential threat to them it is. If there’s a block to their left that doesn’t subscribe to VBNMW, then they can’t continue that grift and pretend the left has nowhere else to go.

Between the Democrats and the Republicans, who do you think is more likely to?

Look at the 2016 primary. It’s mainly due to the McGovern 72 campaign, but the GOP has actually less top down control than the Democratic currently. It’s why the Dem leadership was able to stop Bernie twice, while the GOP couldn’t with Trump.

The Democratic Party has likewise been involved in many more legal efforts to get especially the Greens removed from ballot lines than the GOP.

So while neither of the major parties is going to support ranked choice (why would they?), the Democrats are more active in their currently opposition.

Why would the Democrats ever support ranked choice voting?

Seems like you feel that they care about how you vote but not anyone else.

That’s not what I said. I said they don’t care about why you vote for them if you do.

They might very much care about why you don’t vote for them. That’s why the Democrats always tack to the right, btw - the most marginal voter controls the platform, and Democratic leadership believes that the imaginary moderate Republican is more marginal than the left.

And that’s why voting third party is a much more effective thing than not voting (as plenty of people did not in 2024). Voting for a non-Democratic candidate shows exactly what they’re losing and why. It’s quantifiable and can’t be argued.

Democratic loyalists often want to claim that third party voters lose elections for them. They don’t - but if they actually do, then the answer to that problem becomes obvious. Per Duverger’s law, how it’s worked since the collapse of the whigs, is that the party needs to either adopt those positions, or die.

I have. And you’ve said you’ll vote for the Democrats be cause you think that votes against the GOP.

I don’t think it does, but regardless, they don’t care why you vote for them. You’ve made it clear they have your vote no matter what, and so your questions don’t matter.

Iraq wasn’t just the GOP. Most Democratic leaders - including Hillary Clinton and Biden - supported and voted for it

Deploy the Jodi Brigade

One of the main cheerleaders of the Iraq War. The point stands.

Worked as an American consultant for the Dutch government in IT, can confirm this absolutely. It’s a case of finding private companies to funnel money to instead of actually creating capacity, all because of the incorrect illusion that the private sector is magically efficient.

My unofficial advice to my colleagues while leaving my posting was “stop hiring people like me. Spend the money on developing good internal devs”.

Or maybe a worldwide workers’ state? Think we’re getting there now . . .

Do you not understand that just because something is to Russia’s advantage, and Russia wants it to happen, does not mean that Russia can make it happen?

If you think Brexit was to the benefit of Russia, and you oppose Russia’s government (as you should) - OK. Then why wouldn’t you want to address the root causes that are powering anti-EU parties all over? Take away the fuel.

OK, so you’re calling for Russia to be dissolved?

Removed by mod

Sure, and I get that.

But demonizing entire peoples is part of how warmongers get us to support this awful shit to begin with. It’s one reason why my take is no war but class war, personally.

Try this: “Russia is bad for this world”

is what I was responding to

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

To aid it and make it worse?

The West pretty much showed to Russia in the 1990s and 2000s that it was going to consider international relations a zero sum game. So Russia is of course going to work to make the problems the US and UK have worse, as the US has done with Russia.