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Her remarks followed chaos caused by a rescinded executive order that temporarily shut down Medicaid portals nationwide.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.”
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
That’s why it’s crucial to also promote ranked choice voting alongside third parties. Even Alaska and Minnesota have ranked choice voting, and the latter technically has a third party running the state for decades in spite of caucusing with Democrats. Alaska is actually pretty progressive with its universal basic income in spite of being Republican, with its Republicans being forced to compromise thanks to ranked choice voting.
Going on and on about FPTP and doing maths will get you nowhere and that is precisely what the establishment from both traditional parties wants you to do. It’s to discourage mobilisation by making you think in cold raw logic without thinking outside the box, looking for inspiration from outside, and acting. Socrates said theory is nothing without action. Action is more important at the end of the day.
If your strategy only works if we first fix FPTP, and you apply it before fixing FPTP, your strategy doesn’t work.
There’s really nothing more to it. Feel free to disagree, but you will be incorrect in the purest sense of the word
Why not advocate for both if not either? And look, even countries with FPTP still has other parties gaining seats. Look at Minessota and Alaska. Just look at Canada and UK. You know why? Because they organise. They have solidarity.
Again, repeating the FPTP excuse and saying nothing will ever work is what the establishments want you to think to give up and be complacent. To stick with the status quo who wants you to be comfortable with breadcrumbs. Or condition you not to form solidarity with those whose jobs have been oursourced and provided with nothing, and becoming easily manipulated voters who will support the far-right.