blazera @ blazera @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

977

Joined

1 yr. ago

Yes they did. They jumped through all the hoops and got all the electors they needed.

Yes thats what we are currently discussing. They done the paperwork, they got the signatures.

But uh oh democrats decided those signatures arent allowed, in a challenge brought upon by democrats to a democrat controlled supreme court.

Just a reminder you are arguing against letting a political party participate in an election. The gravity of that is immense to me, i think it would be to you too if you were seeing it from an outside perspective. Like we see Russia banning candidates.

Yeah, im talking about Nevada too. What should they have done differently, they even went to the secretary of state to make sure they were doing things right. How many frivolous obstacles do you want to put in the way of letting people vote for someone?

Oh whoops, i did say only democrats do it. I didnt know there even were conservative third parties still around. I democrats and republicans are anti-democratic

This is just a long page of comments on this post on my end.

Im calling the elected officials murderers

Green party didnt show up late, they did all they needed to do and on time

Of course it hasnt, theyre the ones in power. Theyre the ones making and deciding on forms and regulations and choosing which challenges to eligibility go to courts they control

You make it sound like its her decision whether or not she gets elected

What a surprise, guess who supports ranked choice voting? The green party! Yet another reason democrats fight so hard to keep them from competing

We need to address the foundational issues FIRST

Thats what Im doing, youre vehemently opposing that change

Yes

None of this addresses any of my accusations?

For extra context the PA supreme court is majority democrat

following a challenge supported by the Democratic donor-funded, anti-third-party Clear Choice PAC.

Every story you ever see about a candidate being thrown off a ballot is prompted by a democratic effort to do so. There are multiple such stories posted today, ill let you go look into their context.

I know it improves their odds. But its by virtue of making elections more democratic. You let progressive parties in and then democrats lose, because democrats dont represent progressives. You want to ban progressive candidates, democrats should become more progressive to compete.

If electoral success is your standard, then yes. The US is way more comparable to third world fascist states than anyone wants to admit, and a dominant political party leveraging its power to ban competition is one such similarity.

Oh man wait til you hear about the Workers Party of Korea if election success is your measurement of democracy support.

Yeah those muslims just need to rollover and accept democrats or republicans murdering them

Heavens no, not ballot representation!