By most definitions (some require national malitia backing) it’s fascism. Why mince words or pretend the current rhetoric isn’t following the exact same route as previous iterations?

Fascism is fascism, not sure what you are on about. A vote for Trump or Jill is just a vote for genocide here with the rhetoric the right is currently spouting. But I guess fuck trans rights, immigrants, the climate, and the economy because your hill to die on is peace in the Middle East. JFC

Somehow “not facism” isn’t enough for some people

Only one party has implemented ranked choice while the other has fought against it. That would be a great first start.

Look at the Trump trials, he could eke it out until the end

You could argue that his oath of office requires it. But yes the Supreme Court only meant this power to be used by people they approve of

In reality there would be a consultant being paid two or three cookies to convince them. The rich guy would be on a beach in the Seychelles.

All of those HN comments are fake right?

Trump has 88 really good reasons not to drop out. Without control of the justice system he’s going to be in jail for the rest of his life and republicans have shackled themselves to him.

Unfortunately current polling hasn’t shown someone like that yet. Harris would probably be first up but it’s not an advantage starting again this late unfortunately.

To deliver value to our shareholders

In what way? I’m not sure how someone could make the “both sides” argument this broadly with the current state of both parties but I’ll bite.

Sometimes it feels better to rage than to compromise but I’m guessing there is nothing I can say to change your mind. For those on the fence who may read this though: a third party will not win and not voting Democrat will cause real harm to any community that does not strictly adhere to Christian nationalism ideals.

Stein and Johnson had between 2 (FL) and 20 (MI) times the number of votes making up the margin between Trump and Clinton in FL, WI, MI, and PA. That would have made a difference.

Either way, no third party is viable under the current system and pretending otherwise is the luxury of people who won’t be targeted if the Trump administration is allowed back into power.

There were absolutely changes in the separation policies across administrations. While it’s not perfect, we are compliant with international law and it was Trump driving from the sidelines that killed an immigration reform bill earlier this year.

He could have only possibly have voted for 2 of the five in the majority in Dobbs. Any Democratic nominee to the court would be better for human rights and policy reform. Congressional majority beyond Sinema and Manchin could bring real court reform.

The point still is that the philosophical argument for third party ignores the reality of the current system and the real cost for not presenting a unified front with the current voting system. Republicans are working to lock in any systematic advantage they can so the odds are already skewed. Democratic governments, currently at the state and local levels, are the only ones addressing gerrymandering (CA) and ranked choice (MA) which could make third parties viable but right now they are a vanity vote that distracts from the real harm being caused by one party.

Ideological purity is great from the privileged position you must be in. The real results of Stein voters in the last election is millions losing rights to bodily autonomy, children being forcibly separated from families, a Christian nationalism Supreme Court, and a president playing favorites during the worst pandemic in living memory. There may be some compromises needed to fix a broken system but third parties are not likely to do anything except split the vote and cause harm

Who is this pointing it out to? The major players are already very aware that it’s fucked but only one party is doing anything about that (ranked choice). If your voting block is so fickle then they will turn their focus to shoring up their core bases, ignoring yours. The other side sure isn’t interested in any improvement.

After 2016 there was no one saying “wow we should have talked more about basic income”, the existential threat to democracy was kind of the bigger deal there. Even after 2020, the slim majority in congress limited the progressive power and handed the decisions to the center right dems (Sinema and Manchin).

But sure, splitting the vote to dilute the pool further or hand a win over to the other side will sure move the needle.

Isn’t this the same idea behind Firecracker?

A lot of the long-term support for OSes are for security updates. I’m sure they haven’t added new features in a decade or more but security patches keep rolling out. These cover not just actual bugs in the code but also addressing evolving standards for encryption, hardware insecurities, etc.

https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id-17153/Microsoft-Windows-7.html

Hubris may have lead to Clinton’s loss but Trump voters made him win. If the powers that be didn’t fully understand the hostility of voters that lead to Trump’s victory then maybe they are not as smart as they think they are but not actively malicious. Trump is actively malicious and surrounds himself with the same. The Democratic Party may have tipped the scales a bit for Hillary but they also must have thought she would get the most votes and was one of the most qualified candidates from either party. I’m not going to defend the two party system but only one is pushing for ranked choice voting, electing by popular vote, and reducing voting restrictions. Not voting or third party isn’t going to make this any better