POLL: Do you WANT to heal our divisions?

Do you WANT to see our divisions healed?


  • Total voters
    68
Some people say our divisions are not that big a deal, that we've seen them before. Personally I don't think that's true. One thing that concerns me the most is the amount of people who don't seem to WANT our divisions healed. It seems they'd rather have some kind of final, winner-take-all war, thinking the other side can somehow be eliminated.

Do you want to see our divisions healed? It would certainly require communication with people who disagree with you, and you would have to bend somewhat, regardless of where you stand politically.


No. The Dems are pure Evil. Tranny this. DEI that. Riot here. Take over Schools there. Support thuggery and looters.
 
Viable alternative candidates handpicked by the partisan douchebags who control the system.
No. People can become candidates now without being "picked". So that's total nonsense.



I'm not afraid of rich people. This is just socialism pitch.
I'm not either. Ruch people (and corporations) are not the only donors. The source of the money matters not. The vume of money is what matters. So your failed attempt at ad hominem is rejected, with prejudice.


Which is why we need RCV.
Yet it doest actually give your desired result, when we try it. For the reasons I already mentioned. So no, that alone would do exactly jack shit.
 
Some people say our divisions are not that big a deal, that we've seen them before. Personally I don't think that's true. One thing that concerns me the most is the amount of people who don't seem to WANT our divisions healed. It seems they'd rather have some kind of final, winner-take-all war, thinking the other side can somehow be eliminated.

Do you want to see our divisions healed? It would certainly require communication with people who disagree with you, and you would have to bend somewhat, regardless of where you stand politically.


I voted yes, then I clicked to see who voted which way, and as far as I can tell all the "no" votes are tRumplings.

Telling, IMHO
 
Viable alternative candidates handpicked by the partisan douchebags who control the system.
No. People can become candidates now without being "picked". So that's total nonsense.



I'm not afraid of rich people. This is just socialism pitch.
I'm not either. Rich people (and corprorations) are not the only donors. The source of the money matters not. The volume matters. So your failed attempt at ad hominem is rejected, with prejudice.


Which is why we need RCV.
Yet it doesn't actually give your result, when we try it. For the reasons I already mentioned. So no, that alone would do exactly jack shit.
 
No. People can become candidates now without being "picked".
And how far will they get when their source of funding is the government? Especially if they oppose the current status quo??
Yet it doest actually give your desired result, when we try it.
And what is it you think my "desired result" is? Hint - it's not about getting third parties elected. It's about muting the insane, divisive partisanship destroying the country.
 
And how far will they get when their source of funding is the government?
As far as the voters take them. Just like now.


And what is it you think my "desired result" is?
Not the two party system.

Now let's look at RCV where we have tried it. Guess which two parties dominate every time?

It's just not gong to cut it.
 
As far as the voters take them. Just like now.
Yeah. The voters are really doing awesome at that.

"Just like now" is the problem, not the solution.
Not the two party system.

Now let's look at RCV where we have tried it. Guess which two parties dominate every time?
Again, you're ignoring the point of RCV (on purpose?). RCV gets rid of "strategic voting". It neutralizes "lesser-of-two-evils" and allows voters to vote their conscience, vote for the candidates they actually prefer, instead of voting for a crappy candidate out of fear. That's the core problem with the two-party system and it's why we need RCV.
 
Yeah. The voters are really doing awesome at that.
Oh, did you forget that the voters would still get to decide? Sounds like a you problem.

Since they will be hearing equal time from the candidates, no doubt alternate party candidates would get more votes than dhey do now. Then your RCV fantasy might actually accomplish something.
 
Oh, did you forget that the voters would still get to decide? Sounds like a you problem.
Our voting isn't working. That's the problem we're trying to solve here.
Since they will be hearing equal time from the candidates, no doubt alternate party candidates would get more votes than dhey do now. Then your RCV fantasy might actually accomplish something.
You are deliberately mis-characterizing the goal of RCV.

Gee... I wonder why?
 
Our voting isn't working.
Because of money in politics. Already covered. Only a fool would waste his vote on a sure loser, thus casting a net vote for the major patmrty cabdidate he least prefers . Rational adults understand that the choice is usually binary. The math simply does not recognize third party fantasies.

Make alternative party candidates viable, and voting patterns will change. And the only way that EVER happens is taking the unnatural amounts of money out of campaigns.

So when you are done waste your time on the pile of nonsensical and failed ideas, let's talk about the only one that will make a real difference
 
Because of money in politics.
Heh. Sure. You're a socialist. Politics = money is your fantasy. But it has nothing to do with the topic. We're discussing the insane partisan divide destroying the country.

That divide is driven by lesser-of-two-evils fear mongering. RCV gets rid of lesser-of-two-evils. Why would you oppose that?
 

Forum List

Back
Top