Summary
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez urged countering the Trump administration’s policies by resisting at every turn, arguing that its incompetence makes it vulnerable.
Her remarks followed chaos caused by a rescinded executive order that temporarily shut down Medicaid portals nationwide.
She encouraged activists to take offline action, citing ongoing mobilization efforts.
Her strategy focuses on making governance difficult for Trump, calling his administration “dangerous and cruel” but also “shockingly dim.”
Hey, if you organise but vote D in the cases where it’s the best chance to keep R out, I’m happy
If you don’t vote D in the cases where it’s the best chance to keep R out, you’re effectively supporting R regardless what you’re telling yourself. If you’re also organising, nice, but if your organising is to convince more people to effectively support R like you, we’d all be better off if you quit.
Who says vote D or R? Organise to have other third parties. They may not have a chance to win in federal elections, but they do well in local and state elections. Then work your way up to influence the federal government (and it’s not like there has never been a third party gaining seats in Congress and Senate).
Read the quote from Noam Chomsky. You’re being bamboozled to think tribally. You probably just don’t hear about third parties in local and state level because the media wants you think within a spectrum of thoughts they allow people to have. Think outside the box. There are many other options.
Go for it, but also vote D where they’re the only realistic option to R.
Otherwise, support for a third party becomes support for R, as previously with the greens
Lol. You’re still missing the point. Democrats are still the same people who don’t want any third parties to be elected. Why would they allow that to happen if the current system is what also puts them in power like the Republicans?
Think outside the box.
well, have fun keeping R in power then
Chomsky’s manufactured consent in action (or someone who benefits from growing wealth inequality).
do the math, it’s not particularly difficult
Like I said, organise and start at local and state level and then work way up. Third parties are successful in state and local levels. And it’s not like third parties also never got seats at the federal level either. Third parties had been more successful 100 years ago. You’re being brainwashed to believe that it’s hopeless. Americans forgot how to organise and mobilise. They simply have to remember it.
The math shows it’s hopeless in FPTP.
A third party will make it easier for the party it is least aligned with to take power.
A very successful third party (to a degree that is very unlikely to happen quickly) will simply supplant the party it’s most aligned with. The supplanted party will then either have to give up, or will take on the role of helping the party it’s least aligned with to win.
A third party on a local level that is consistently and efficiently backing the same FPTP candidate as one of the two big parties can mathematically be fine I guess. In practice I haven’t seen a lot of people both enthusiastically back whatever D chooses for a presidential candidate, and argue for voting third party only at the levels where it is mathematially rational