young_broccoli

That kinda makes sense, but for the dems to consistently get 70 what needs to change is the political views of the voters, right? For that to happen they need to believe the dem party is actually the best option and for that to happen the dem party must lean way more left. But again; Why would they do that if you are already rewarding them for being “not as bad”.

I forgot to mention before that you are basing this strategy on another fallacy. “First past the post” means nothing when hillary won the popular vote in 2016 and still lost the presidency.

Yó también, amig@. De toda la puta vida.
La centralización de agencias gubernamentales, los milicos haciéndola de policía, sus ataques a instituciones diseñadas para fiscalizar el gobierno (INE e INT), La “aprobación” de proyectos como el chaifa y el tren maya por orden presidencial, brincándose las leyes que supuestamente regulan este tipo de proyectos son ejemplos de su autoritarismo, específicamente, el autoritarismo de morena que es el nuevo pri.

En cuanto a demagogo; Que no has visto las mañaneras?

Their voter suppression is meant to stop from voting a very specific and relative small group of people not comparable to what an organized sabotage of the elections would be.
Gerrymandering is meant to dilute the vote of those who are already voting in favour of one party and its an example of how fallacious your democracy is.

I already admitted that I might be wrong, but something must be done to change this and believing you can fix a rigged game by playing it, is also naive.

What I fail to understand Is how will you split the left party (step 3).
Do citizens in the US can choose what candidates the parties push forward?
If not: Why would the left party propose leftier candidates? They know that as long as their guy is not as “bad” as the competition you will vote for them and they are “sponsored” by the same corporations which dont like leftist policies.
Theres no incentive for them to turn further left; Is it?

I mean, for starters, how does it work.

He is definitely an authoritarian demagogue, so close to fascists, and about doing his job well… it depends of what you consider to be “his job”.

Fixed it

What even is the log in this scenario, another insurrection? Not voting isn’t throwing a log, it’s just not pulling the lever.

As I see it, the lever is the choice being made, in this case dem. or rep., the tracks are the electoral system and the log is the third option they dont want us to give and have taught us it doesnt exist.
In a true democracy we should be able to say “we dont like options given, do better” but those voices are conveniently ignored.

What makes you think the accelerationist position of “exposing the fallacy” would actually make anything better?

The first step in demanding the true is to realize you’ve been lied to. If everyone is voting it must mean that they agree the system works because people dont usually waste time in tasks that they believe are fruitless. I believe people will realize something is wrong with their “democracy” when its minorities choosing for everyone else and start demanding true democracy.
Also, the fact that they, the rulling class, seems to be afraid of it. As I mentioned before, australia making vote compulsory when the numbers were geting “too low for comfort” is a good example.

Personally, I don’t think that’s a gamble with very favorable odds.

Its possible it could backfire, yes. And, as I said in another comment, right now wouldnt be the best time to do it. Vote, but be aware that the system you participate in is just mitigating the symptoms of a desease and not treating it. Pretending otherwise is not a good gamble either.
Actions must be taken to change it. An organized effort to sabotage the elections by not voting could be one option.

And you forget the fact that even if most people votes theres a chance trump will still win. Even if biden gets the popular vote, just like it happened in 2016. Who will you blame then?
The way these types of conversations can get so heated is an indicator that people is still not placing the blame where it should be. People need to be shown the truth, which is hard when our whole lives we’ve been “educated” to believe a lie, and again, I think electoral sabotage is a good attempt at that.

Absolutelly agree, I guess thats the power of indoctrination :c

I made that comment before you showed up

Yes I only replied that so you wouldnt get a “gotcha” reply from someone else.
Your views on these democracies match mine perfectly, I think, and you express them way better than I could ever do so I didnt want to “hurt” your arguments any further.

I did, sorry. But it has to be done in big enough numbers, which would not be possible right now. So, vote and start organizing for the next elections.

Throw a log at the tracks.

I understand the logic that not voting might give the presidency to Trump but its also a good way to expose the falacy of our “democracies”. The less participation there is the harder it gets to keep the lie.
Theres a reason why Australia made voting compulsory.

And the electoral college can overrule your vote.

I believe so called democracies around the world are a farce but the US’ “democracy” is so shameless about how they do it that Im surprised most people doesnt seem to realize.

Thats another subject.
You were making excuses for the pigs’ incompetence (how were they supposed to know?), I pointed out, from the article, why the excuse is not valid.

They forgot to pay the “Record Renovation” fee to Guiness.

Why is this news?
World records are mostly meaningless and it is known that guiness sells some of those “world records”

BTW, I’m not complaining about this being posted here (Thanks to MicroWave for their service) but about this being presented as “news” on a newspaper I thought was somewhat respectable.
It feels like the world becomes more ridiculous/absurd every day :c

…and to err on the side of calling in help if there is a potential health issue.

Seth Stoughton, a former police officer who is now a law professor at the University of South Carolina, said it can sometimes be hard for officers to tell whether a person’s behavior is a result of mental illness, substances or a medical episode. The latest training recommendations, he said, call for officers to be on the lookout for indicators of medical problems and to err on the side of calling in help if there is a potential health issue.

“Officers are not doctors, not paramedics,” he said. “They really don’t have, and are not expected to have, the expertise to diagnose what is causing medical distress. But they are supposed to be able to identify indicators.”

Hows this?

Shoes are prisons for the feets.
Still i think this is dumb tho.

Te word “libertarian” was redefined by an-caps to mean Ultra-neo-liberalism. It has no real connections with the origin of the term except for an-caps insisting on calling themselves anarchists.

pashang fong, inyalowda!!1!

You hate saturn’s rings? :c