• geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Democrats spent their entire life understanding what FPTP is and their entire political understanding hangs on explaining it to other people any time Democrats get criticized.

      • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Democrats hugely benefit from FPTP so they will never advocate for replacing it.

        It is a catch22 where the only answer is to call the Democrats bluff and vote for other parties until the Democrats cave to voter demands.

        Democrats also refuse to acknowledge that not voting for them is the only way left to pressure them.

        • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          3 days ago

          Democrats hugely benefit from FPTP so they will never advocate for replacing it.

          Key point, Newsom of California vetoed a bill to enable more ways to vote then just FPTP.

          FPTP is in the benefit of both parties. It rallies and polarizes so any other idea besides “Let’s not find war, let’s fund education and help people” is considered too unpopular to win.

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          I will advocate to replace it when I’m in office and a Democrat, against the protests of some of my co-workers. As the other commenter pointed out, Newsom killed an anti-FPTP bill, but that means there’s enough support in the California legislature to get a bill to his desk.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Democrats will pull every dirty trick they never use against Republicans as soon as the duopoly is endangered.

            • Liz@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              Man, I guess there’s no point in even trying to improve the system if there’s going to be opposition.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            As soon as it got a slight amount of traction both sides of the oligarchy started attacking it.

            Case in point as user pointed out down below:

            Gavin Newsom vetoes bill to allow ranked-choice voting throughout California

            More than 17 years after San Francisco approved ranked-choice voting over the objections of then-Supervisor Gavin Newsom, California’s first-year governor got a chance for some payback, vetoing a bill that would have allowed more cities, counties and school districts across the state to switch to the voting system.

            The bill, SB212 by state Sen. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, was overwhelmingly approved by both the state Senate and the Assembly. An analysis of the bill found no opposition.

            “Ranked choice is an experiment that has been tried in several charter cities in California,” Newsom said in his veto message Sunday. “Where it has been implemented, I am concerned that it has often led to voter confusion and that the promise that ranked-choice voting leads to greater democracy is not necessarily fulfilled.”

      • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        3 days ago

        Hey, that system is pretty cool. I like it. You should keep in mind, though, the social relations of production that undergird political reality are much more impactful over the outcome of elections or any other political process, than which specific voting system we have. If the world switched to proportional approval voting tomorrow, it wouldn’t change the relationship between the international imperialist institutions, the workers of the imperial core, and the workers of the periphery. >80% of productive labor would still be done in the periphery, imperialism would still just find ways to quiet dissent and destroy its opponents.

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          I hold no illusions that fixing one aspect of this flawed existence will fix all the other aspects of this flawed existence.