Stephen Starr in Hamtramck, Michigan
Mon 14 Oct 2024 11.00 EDT

  • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I’m not arguing against RCV, I’m arguing against the idea that

    1: it will ever pass, and

    2: the idea that if it passed, it would change anything.

    Revolution is necessary, something you’d think was obvious given your username.

    • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      1: it will ever pass, and

      https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-partisan-plot-to-disrupt-elections/

      you’re wrong there, by your own reasoning, it would be hugely beneficial for the democrats to pass ranked choice.

      2: the idea that if it passed, it would change anything.

      Of course it would change things, you’re clearly all or nothing, but the fact of the matter is ranked choice voting is OBJECTIVELY a better system, and it would allow you to actually run candidates and potentially make meaningful change. You would never have to hopelessly strategically vote and end up accomplishing nothing, you could have a socialist candidate that you could freely vote for without helping fascists. This is massive even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

      Revolution is necessary, something you’d think was obvious given your username.

      I agree, revolution is necessary to fix everything, but I don’t think revolution is more realistic than passing ranked choice voting, because i’m not braindead. The fact is, passing ranked choice would still be of great benefit to the working class, just because it doesn’t become your ideal utopia overnight doesn’t mean ranked choice doesn’t matter at all and isn’t worth doing.

      By your own logic, if no policy has ever benefitted the american people without a revolution, why did the ACA pass?