This Latina Socialist Doesn’t Want “The Lesser Evil.” So She’s Running for President
This Latina Socialist Doesn’t Want “The Lesser Evil.” So She’s Running for President
www.msn.com
MSN
51 comments
-
-
They don’t want to game the system or work with what we already have to make things better.
She doesn't want to do everything she can to make things better?
So she is also a lesser evil.
-
She definitely could have worded that better, for sure!
-
-
If you don't want the lesser of two evils, stop painting good people as evil.
-
But the "good" people you are talking about are good in YOUR eyes. Not everyone agrees with you. Welcome to democracy. What YOU want isn't what some other people may want.
And that's ok.
I don't like Harris. I don't like Trump. So I'm not voting for Harris. And I'm not voting for Trump.
-
-
I don't assume this for others or often, but I think this account is actually part of an election influence campaign in favor of Trump.
It's 4 days old, instantly super active, and you can see the responses are repeating typical 2016 deflections whose only functional effect will be to split the left vote. The OP's comments are canned bullet points, they don't sound like legit conversation. Every legitimate concern is instantly deflected and misdirected in a way too calculated to be coincidental. (OP, save yourself the time, I won't be responding to you - in the 1% chance you are representing yourself in good faith, please listen to all the others already trying to help you.)
So on to the main issue: I can block this user (to prevent spam on my All feed), sure. But the more users who are aware of this who block this user, the more skewed the remaining voting and responses become and the more concentrated the propaganda effect will be on unwitting new viewers.
What's the best move here? I guess just down vote and move on? Report?
-
What's the best move here? I guess just down vote and move on? Report?
There’s not much to report and the community mods haven’t seemed bothered by any of the borderline trolling comments.
They seem pathologically (or programmatically) unable to refrain from replying. Just look at this thread that’s been ongoing for nearly an entire day: https://lemmy.world/comment/11736052
I honestly think downvoting and ignoring is the best route. But we all no people wound be able to refrain. Maybe a “don’t feed the trolls” campaign could help but it’s honestly too easy to get sucked in.
-
There’s not much to report and the community mods haven’t seemed bothered by any of the borderline trolling comments.
It's interesting in a way that being overly friendly in a passive aggressive, almost hostile manner seems to be able to skirt around the edges of the civility rule while still being absolutely infuriating - and effective bait.
They seem pathologically (or programmatically) unable to refrain from replying.
I'm starting to think they just really, really like arguing with people on the internet.
-
There’s not much to report and the community mods haven’t seemed bothered by any of the borderline trolling comments.
Because I'm not trolling. And I'm still here, by the way. And still posting relevant political news stories to this political news community.
-
-
Report anything that's reportable, but this account has been skillful so far in skirting the line. Otherwise downvote, and if you want to go the extra mile, spread awareness of issues with Jill Stein like per this comment as a form of countermeasure. Maybe also include messaging about the general issue of third-party voting
Ideally maybe a pre-written text with sources that can be copy-pasted as a top level comment in threads promoting third parties.
-
Yeah, it doesn't seem like there is enough to report, but I hoped maybe I was missing something. It's not good enough propaganda to influence people aware of it, but it is probably good enough to pick off some easily-misled voters, help radicalize and sow division for others, and avoid obvious rule-breaking.
It might be helped by ChatGPT or another AI LM. It certainly matches an LM's slightly over-wordy structure, responding to some parts with clearly human direct response, and others in ways just barely responsive but never failing to hit bullets pushing counterproductive voting. Would be nice if OpenAI released their ChatGPT detection tool they've been sitting on.
I appreciate the link and suggestion - I hate copy-pasting things, but it may be appropriate here.
-
-
It’s 4 days old, instantly super active,
And here I am, still here, now 12 days old. And still posting. And I've posted articles on Libertarian candidates, who actually bleed votes away from Trump. So exactly how am I trying to influence campaigns in favor of Trump?
-
I don’t assume this for others or often, but I think this account is actually part of an election influence campaign in favor of Trump.
It’s 4 days old,
This sub is called "politics" which means ALL political articles are welcome, not JUST pro-democrat ones. They have pro-democrat subs here on Lemmy if that's the only thing you are interested in.
And you assume wrong. Yes, the account is 4 days old. Because I started it 4 days ago. On a weekend. Is there some time period after I state and account that I should wait before I post stuff I in interested in? How long did YOU wait before you made your first pots.
And most of my posts have been to the subs I created and moderate, two of which are Green Party and a Socialist community. Along with several other communities that have nothing to do with politics.
If I were a Trump plan, Lemmy would be the worst place to do it. This platform hates Trump and REALLY hates 3rd parties.
I don't like Trump. Never have voted for him. Never will. If I wanted to vote for Trump, I would. But I don't.
I'm voting Green Party because I want to. And just because YOU don't like it, doesn't mean my viewpoints are any less valid than yours.
Feel free to disagree. But please don't accuse me of doing things I am not doing. Thank you.
-
-
Even if the chances of winning are low, De la Cruz sees this election as a first step toward showing Americans a different reality, demonstrating that it is possible to radically uproot the systems of oppression that keep them from thriving. “People ask whether voting for a third option is a wasted vote — what is a wasted vote is to continue to do what we’ve been doing historically, which is choosing from the neoliberal Democrats and the far-right Republicans,” De la Cruz says. “That is a losing strategy. It’s been a losing strategy for many decades, and for as long as we continue to work in that duopoly, the far right is going to keep coming back. The threat is not going to be eliminated. We need to be able to create a third lane where people have real options and where solutions are actually concrete. ”
-
On the ballot in like 14 states? Yeah, I would say her chances are…low. Would be far more impressed if instead of running for President with no chance to win, she ran for a state legislature seat, hell even county board. Encourage others to do the same. You don’t build a coalition or party by just running for President with no experience or support. So she’s either grandstanding, a useful idiot, or so hopelessly uninformed that she’s got no idea what she’s doing. We need better third parties and you don’t do that by trying to “raise awareness” every four years, you do that by running and winning smaller races until they can’t ignore you anymore.
-
51 comments
How would SHE get Trump elected!? She's not voting for him.
Tell me you don't understand FPTP without telling me you don't understand FPTP
I must have responded to you with the Wikipedia article about spoiler candidates in First Past The Post election systems at least twice. You either disagree with accepted political science theory, or you're simply refusing to read it understand it. If it's the former, it implies that you believe that your gut instincts make you smarter than people who study this field professionally; the latter implies you're a blind ideologue.
I would be thrilled if there's a third option and you are able to respond - even if only with a link; I'm not too lazy to read a paper - to a counter-theory or counter-argument to strategic voting and the political strategy of employing spoiler candidates from an even halfway respectable source.
It'd also be heartening if you could confirm that you understand the fundamentals of the current US presidential election system, and how it differs from other systems such as Approval, Ranked Choice, STAR, or any other system. Bonus points if you understand what a Condorcet Winner is, and how it relates to the US Presidential General Election. Otherwise, it feels as if you're thinking with your genitals, or consulting crystals, or something.