• Rustmilian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bruh. I’m so fuckin sick of this 2 party bullshit.

    “We Must vote for the Democratic party”

    How about no. Fuck the Democratic & Republican party.

    • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m sick of the two party system also but also recognize that’s the system in place. Requires voting reform for that to ever change, which I support. I’m still going vote for democrats in the meantime because anything else, to include third party or abstaining, is ultimately supporting the republicans whether one wants to admit it or not.

      • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        If enough people, 5% of the population, voted 3rd party in one election, it gives the 3rd party the ability to get on the ballot in every state. This goes a long way.

        Neither side wants ranked choice voting. Neither side is going to give up power.

        We have to vote something different to change the 2 party system. Not going to change itself.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      So what’s your plan to stop the US from turning into Gilead? Wear lots of black clothes and whine about it?

      • Shadywack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can’t speak for the previous commenter, but I know that not voting for either party is my plan. Everyone that votes out of fear of “the bad one getting elected” is part of the problem. How about something you can vote for instead of something you’re voting against?

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Thanks for enabling fascists because you can’t be bothered to do the bare minimum.

          • Shadywack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, the people enabling fascists are the ones voting for them. I don’t take that notion of enabling fascists to heart at all in this context, not sorry either. For the record, when the Democrat party undermines citizens almost as badly as Republicans, it occurs to me that they’re not my party anymore. Thinking railworker strike, trade deals, erosion of support for US jobs, and lacking the spine to push through socialized medicine. I’m also thinking about how Bernie should have won the nomination instead of Hillary but the undemocratic superdelegates supported her against the will of the popular vote anyway, with the literal explanation of the superdelegates being that they are there to stop undesired grassroots efforts from being successful…and here you’re pretending they’re somehow not fascist themselves?

            Dream on, we need the two parties thrown out, and to quit bickering amongst citizens and unite against the true enemy - billionaires who want us to vote the way we have been.

            • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Dream on, we need the two parties thrown out

              I’m sure you’ll get right on that, right?

              • Shadywack@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Every time I vote, and have done so for the past 6 years. Sucks that all the other sheep don’t wake up.

    • cubedsteaks@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thaaaank you. Looking at you getting downvoted cause idiots don’t understand we can do something better than this two party bullshit.

    • mrginger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      But you’re supposed to pick a side and be willing to literally lay down your life for them and their cause! Ra ra, go team go. Otherwise you’re just part of the problem according to either side.

      I agree with you and I’ll go a step further and say fuck all politicians in general. Today, they’re all owned in some way by the money that puts them in power. They’ll all tell you what you want to hear. They’re all experts in half truths. Never trust a politician.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Politicians are owned by their constituents, who they overwhelmingly vote in alignment with.

        The whole “politicians are owned” thing just doesn’t show up in any data whatsoever.

        • mrginger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Take one look at who the biggest lobbyists in the US are. Then compare that to the most glaring issues we have in the US. I’ll wait.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Here’s a link of the top US lobbies, and I’ll go ahead and spoil that it isn’t what you’d think - for instance, no energy lobby makes the list.

            Also, you’d think actual votes would be more along lobbyist lines than constituent lines but they are not.

            https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-spenders

            NAR for instance would absolutely love zoning changes that create more homes to sell. That’s a lobby we should listen to.

            But again, we don’t, because getting re-elected is always of paramount importance.

            • mrginger@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re joking right? https://www.statista.com/statistics/257364/top-lobbying-industries-in-the-us/

              From your own source. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2023/02/oil-and-gas-industry-spent-124-4-million-on-federal-lobbying-amid-record-profits-in-2022/#:~:text=The oil and gas industry,slightly when adjusted for inflation.

              And for you last point about NAR, I have doubts. I could see home builders and home buyers benefitting from zoning changes. It would drive down costs of a new home, open up more choices for home buyers, and put construction companies to work. Realtors are middle men who work off commissions. The more they can sell a house for the more commission they make. Realtors have a vested interest keeping the market balanced in their favor.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Realtors with more property to sell make more than realtors with less property to sell. Do you know actual realtors? The vast majority are not selling a few multi-million houses and calling it a year.

                Look at what they lobby for: https://www.nar.realtor/advocacy/federal-advocacy/all-federal-issues

                A recent NAR study estimates that the U.S. has developed an “underbuilding gap” of at least 5.5 million housing units over the last 20 years. This translates into more than $4 trillion in underinvestment in housing. Even relatively modest steps taken now to reduce this gap will unleash tremendous economic activity and create millions of new jobs.

                Multi-family housing proposals are a core plank of their program, for instance - and yet politicians don’t listen to them because their constituents don’t want them to

                I’m not sure what you think you’re arguing when you call me out my link then share data that agrees with my link.

                Your preconceived notions are incorrect, and lying about data doesn’t make it correct

                • mrginger@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes I do. None of them are selling affordable single family homes.

                  As a matter of fact multi-family housing is leading a housing construction “boom” as of articles published 6 days ago.

                  Here’s a quote from MReport:

                  Further, almost two-thirds of the apartments build during the pandemic are clustered in just 20 high-growth metropolitan areas, which make up about 41% of the total renter population in the U.S. Therefore, for many other places, the new supply barely made a dent in the existing supply. What’s more, around 89% of the apartments completed in the last three years are high-end and, thus, target upper-middle- and high-income buyers and renters.

                  So they are building “multi-family homes”, but targeting, wait for it, people with lot’s of money.

                  So you quit lying.

                  Come to think of it, you’re singling out the and focusing on the real estate angle pretty hard. Why is that?

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    It doesn’t matter who they’re targeting, because they’re increasing supply

                    You’re so desperate to have all lobbyists be inherently bad that you’re not thinking things through.

                    Real estate is easy because local ordinances prevent building, and congresspeople are held accountable locally. We can discuss any lobbying if you’d like and are willing to learn.

                    I’m a climate lobbyist, for example.

        • cubedsteaks@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m curious as to how being a politician is even a job? Do they get salary? If so, from what? How do they pay their mortgages?

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Politicians are almost all paid (some things like city council aren’t necessarily paid). Many politicians have “day jobs” they only leave once they reach a level of office where they can live off the pay.

            Speaking very broadly, the cutoff is generally “state rep or higher” or “in a big city” where you can lean on politician as your main source of income.

            • cubedsteaks@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I like how “day job” is in quotes. That makes it seem even sketchier than I originally thought lol

              what kind of “day jobs” are we talking about here? Are they in an office?

              And yeah, how do they have time to be a politician if they have that day job going?

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’ve worked with local politicians in office settings, as salespeople (trained a city councilwoman as a saleswoman once), etc. They also sometimes own businesses (a bit of selection bias there because that “plays” really well to the electorate).

                Most political jobs that aren’t state/federal arent very demanding of time. School board, local government, etc, is generally unpaid/low pay and very much part time. If you can carve a couple nights a week, you can work in local gov.

                • cubedsteaks@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  They also sometimes own businesses

                  Ah yeah. The kind of people who already had money to start a business in the first place.

                  If you can carve a couple nights a week, you can work in local gov.

                  That seems like not nearly enough time to be putting into something that is meant to change how things work. Government is incredibly slow though, I’m aware…

                  None of this is making them sound… well better.

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Most people start a business via a small business loan, which is surprisingly easy (in my view) to qualify for. You also only need like $50 in my state to register as a business owner.

                    Lots of relatively poor people own their own business. I ran my own consultancy for a while and I was definitely not rich.

                    Couple nights a week is plenty when you’re on city council for a town of 10,000 people. There aren’t that many hearings