Every system has limitations and flaws. The trick is tailoring your system elements to serve your use case.

I prefer the generic ones that say “Thank You”

This just looks like a curved didgeridoo, am I missing the saxophone part? I don’t see a reed, or valves, or any brass. Curving an instrument isn’t a characteristically saxophone thing, it’s just a cumbersome instrument thing.

So? Why is this person’s relationship any of your business? Some people are into that.

You didn’t?

Not me, we. Stop trying to weasel out of your mess.

Which is different from you how exactly? All I see are failures.

deleted by creator

Keep up the “I’m rubber you’re glue” act buddy, it’s age appropriate. I wanted Trump to lose, you wanted Harris to lose. You got your wish, this is on you. Or keep blaming everyone else who tried to warn you that it was a stupid idea, how dare they point out the glaring flaws in your strategy. Let’s see if that makes a leftist plan materialize.

Flagrant hypocrisy! This was your plan, not mine. How’s it working? Did a third party win? Did we end the genocide in Gaza yet? Don’t equate your plan’s failure with our recognition that it failed. You gambled, and this is what we get. Own it, maybe learn something about implementation.

A bunch of shortsighted cosplayers with no sense of praxis or political literacy protested the do-nothing Dems and we got the freewheeling fascism MAGAs. How’s that working out for you? How’s the glorious revolution coming?

Up until the moment we have enough confirmed support for a progressive movement, status quo is a hell of a lot better than accelerated fascism; if only to buy more time to build the aforementioned progressive support. I’m all for actual leftward movement, but gambling on unconfirmed support is stupid. Even the liberals understand that, in their sports-team monkey brain.

The left has no plan sufficient to deal with this. I hear vague rumblings about strikes and revolutions and the power of the working class united, but the working class isn’t united yet. There is no organized, validated plan to effect that revolution. There’s no leftist Project 2025. That’s a natural consequence of the commendable independence of leftists, but it has the unfortunate consequence of being tactically untenable. The right uniform under the banner of their dictator, the left squabbles about trivialities.

It’s not that I wish it to be so; I would vastly prefer the left to have a functional plan to secure power. But it is the reality; I see neither such a plan, nor the necessary organization to implement such a plan. That’s why we vote lesser evil. We strive for the stationary phase of the ratchet to avoid the freewheeling phase, because we don’t yet have the organized strength to break the pawl from its housing.

Once we have that organized strength, and not sooner, we can break the pawl. Sooner, and the ratchet spins freely to the right.

Yeah I don’t think the protests are going to accomplish much in and of themselves. However, getting frustrated, like-minded people together in one place for one cause is powerful. It shows them they aren’t alone in their anger, it shows them the magnitude of support for their cause, and it connects them with others, which opens the door to much more effective organization.

She’s not yours

As in cervical vertebrae? Displaying them does tend to make an impression

A histrionic straw man.

People will seek out alternatives and there will be enough that aren’t disillusioned with electoralism that go for that option.

A baseless claim unsupported by anything but your own wishful thinking. I’d love for that to happen, but I’m not fool enough to gamble on it.

Without organization sufficient to convince at least a third of the country that a specific party is viable, you cannot beat a strategic party with principles alone.

Incorrect. I can justify any number of results with such a monumental “if”. Any strategy based on such a large number of people suddenly changing their voting tendency in such a way is unworkable. As one party splinters, the other is heavily incentivized to stay together and easily win. It’s a game of chicken; the first party to break ranks is doomed. People understand this on an intuitive, tribalistic level. Fracturing the less monolithic party will only strengthen the more monolithic one. That is reality.

Without organization sufficient to convince at least a third of the country that a specific party is viable, you cannot beat a strategic party with principles alone.

If you voted 3rd party in a FPTP election, you are functionally indistinguishable from a non-voter. You can talk about your principles all you want, but by the mechanics of the electoral system you are exactly equivalent to a non-voter.