Trump Allies Have a Plan to Hurt Biden’s Chances: Elevate Outsider Candidates
nytimes.com
This works because almost all the US uses first-past-the-post elections for the Presidential general election. So you get outcomes like this:
Scenario 1:
Biden: 10 votes
Trump: 9 votes
Kennedy/Stein/West: 0 votes
Biden wins the state
Scenario 2:
Biden: 9 votes
Trump: 9 votes
Kennedy/Stein/West: 1 vote
Tied vote, decided by game of chance/lawsuit
Scenario 3:
Biden: 8 votes
Trump: 9 votes
Kennedy/Stein/West: 2 votes
Trump wins the state
This is why you see huge financial support from Republican billionaires for third party candidates who have no chance of winning.
You can see the attempts even here on Lemmy to convince people to vote for a third party. Virtually anyone hyper focusing on Gaza and suggesting we should “show Biden what we think” is attempting to convince you to vote against your own interests.
Take a look at the post history of anyone who calls him genocide Joe, and you’ll see “subtle” suggestions to vote for a third party candidate.
Hit the nail on the head. Theres been noticeable push back these last 2 months, but i expect worse as we edge closer to november.
They also completely ignore bringing the Ukrainian genocide when its brought up, even though russia has repeatedly now called them a stepping stone in denazifying Eastern Europe.
For all of Status Quo Joe's issues (and theres a million) he still doesnt compare to trump (and his billions of issues) in terms of how much damage they can do/are doing to the country and the planet as a whole.
As much as I would love for there to be more options and the two-party system dismantled, voting third party right now in the presidential election is just stupid. A real third party has to start from the ground up or be a genuine splinter party from one of the two primary parties. Trump almost created a third party, but Republicans chose power over principle and party over country to make him their golden calf.
Not saying you are saying this, but it's as good a post as any on which to say it:
You can't dismantle the 2 party system by voting for a third party. Even in the extremely unlikely situation that that third party wins, it will just quickly, if not immediately, go back to a two party system. It's the nature of a FPTP voting system.
It's a process you have to start from the ground up. You can't just vote for a POTUS and then magically we have multiple parties. You have to focus on your local politics and get people into office who will push to get our voting system changed. And that will have to "trickle up." It's not something that will be solved overnight, and people focus too much on the POTUS, when they should be putting their effort in where they have the most influence: locally.
It's the classic establishment's pincer maneuver.
All progressive change needs to be attacked from both sides:
All left wing candidates / laws / tax / regulations / proposals are both too left and not left enough.
Only ideals that have no chance are "pure enough" for some on the left.
This is an organised attack from the right / establishment for decades. Yeah, we are finally waking up and seeing through this shit.
Junior is not going to get that many Dem votes. He's clearly MAGA, or at least MAGA adjacent
His campaign is built around on attracting low-information voters, and he has a ton of money to do just that — Kennedy's vice-presidential pick is the former wife of a Google founder who broke up with him after allegedly sleeping with Musk.
Which still only appeals to MAGA supporters.
The Kennedy family name is something that has meaningful appeal to people who aren't like that and who don't know anything else. Put a bunch of money into ad campaigns emphasizing that over any actual policy position, and he may well peel off some votes from people like that.
That's not entirely true. There is one proven left-leaning group that can be drawn in by MAGA talking points, and that's the Antivax moms. During the height of the pandemic, QAnon influencers were pretty effective at getting the cruchy-granola-crystal-healing-antivax moms into Trump. The guys at the QAA Podcast covered it really well, but the indoctrination path was basically: The Vaccine is Bad-> The Pandemic is Fake/Overblown-> Face Masks Actually Help Child Traffickers ->You Know Who's Fighting Traffickers?Trump! Anyway, if an Antivax message can get these folks to support Trump, it can get them to support RFK.
People need to start looking at the polling around this. RFK is more of a threat than people realize.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4568220-biden-trump-kennedy-polling/amp/
“Only the other side will vote for this third party” is the constant refrain of someone about to lose because of a spoiler
What makes these financers so sure their spoiler candidates will only take votes from Biden?
Polling. Right now the polls show RFK and West pulling from Biden more than Trump, which is why right wing strategists want to promote those candidates more.
Edit:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4568220-biden-trump-kennedy-polling/amp/
It kinda makes them look even more short sighted tbh. Like yeah, you can look at "there's a few polls where he takes from Biden" and call it a day, but it's kinda missing the fact he's lost a lot of relevance already with no signs of stopping.
It's kind of a catch 22: he's stealing votes from the low-info pool, but at the same time if he's not defined at all he'll make no impact by election day. Elevating him can fix that, but that risks those low info voters realizing what they're getting into and then start biting into Trump's numbers as expected.
They don't need that. All they need is to take more votes from Biden than they do from Trump. And the the polling makes it very clear that the 3rd party candidates as a group do exactly that. The benefit is something around a 3 percentage point advantage for Trump with the 3rd party candidates on the ballot vs not.
Yeah idk, I haven't heard any Dems say they're going to break from Biden for someone like RFK, the dude is an anti science nut job and at least my circles see right through it. I have heard trumpists say they'd consider him if trump ended up in jail or whatever though. 🤷
Hopefully this strategy backfires spectacularly.
Honestly, the bigger issue for dems has always been low enthusiasm leading to a lot of voters just refusing to vote.
It's almost as if more people need to vote in the primaries
Yeah it's more difficult with an incumbent because the Smarter Than You DNC decides a primary is bad, but if we actually voted in numbers then instead of just allowing the old people who actually vote in primaries to decide who is the one running, we'd actually have a candidate people can be excited for.
So far the polls don't show that kind of backfire. Would take a bunch more people hearing about why he's actually running to create it.
Republicans have done this for decades to great success. Usually they'll push a wedge-driving issue with online operatives sometimes posing as grandstanding leftists who will vote 3rd party, independent, etc.
It rarely works for Dems, but Libertarians did screw over Trump to some extent last election thanks to Jojo
"Shit, Rita, that's what we're getting paid to do, not what we're getting paid to say!"
This is 'splitting the vote' nonsense. We wouldn't support your candidate if they were the only person on the ballot.
This is 'splitting the vote' nonsense. We wouldn't support your candidate if they were the only person on the ballot.
Consider the possibility that the game here does not depend on Trump winning in the Electoral college- all that needs to happen is Biden not winning 271 or more EC votes for the congress to decide the presidency via the Contingent Election process outlined in article2, sec1 clause3 of the constitution, later modified in the 12th amendment.
In that scenario, each state delegation has 1 vote- and the GOP has enough state-level gerrymanders to control enough state delegations that if it comes to pass that the 12th Amendment process decides the presidency, they are very likely going to be able to install whoever they want.
If the smart money in the GOP has decided Trump won't win but it still wants him in the oval, anything that prevents Biden from getting 270+ gets them better odds than any other pathway
I'm not so sure of this. On paper, the split is 27-23 in favor of Republicans. However, there are 3 Republican governors in Democrat states that voted for Biden: Nevada, Vermont, and New Hampshire. The question becomes whether those 3 Republican governors would override the votes of the people in their state and install Trump even though the voters voted for Biden? I'm not so sure any of them would want to go down in history as having effectively ignored the election and installing a dictator. I mean....they could. Anything's possible. But if you're a Republican governor in a Democrat state that voted for the Democrat nominee, do you really want to be the one to ignore that, essentially tell the public that their votes don't matter, and install Trump as a dictator?
If all 3 Republican governors in Dem states honor the will of the people, it would essentially be a 26-24 split in favor of Democrats. Even if only two of the 3 states do, we'd end up in a tie. Either way, I don't think that sending it to the governors would be a guaranteed win for Trump. Significantly more likely, yes. But a slam-dunk win? No. There would be absolutely enormous pressure on those 3 governors who would basically be deciding the election.
Ah, the old russian tactic
Trump AlliesRussia has a Plan to Hurt Biden's Chances: Elevate Outsider Candidates.A lot of it is US billionaires:
Well yeah, project 2025 is backed by the heritage foundation.
So, Kanye for President 2.0?
Probably more like Perot.
He'd probably be at least as awful a president as Trump, though it's a different West who is on the ballot in some states this year.
Sorry—my comment was in reference to this not being a new playbook since that’s exactly what the GOP did with hawking Kanye as a candidate. He would never win but maybe he would steal votes from the democrats.
Definitely the same playbook. It's been used for decades at this point.
Ah. Using Hillary Clinton's strategy. That famously worked out real well for her.
To be fair, her husband arguably got into office because a third party candidate disproportionately ate more into his opponent’s votes.
Not that I disagree with your point, but implementation is everything.
This is such a dumb take. The strategy has worked numerous times throughout history. "Well it didn't work for Clinton. . .so obviously it's dumb!" is such a narrow-view, mindlessly parroting a talking point.
This is fucking asinine. How do you possibly think that anyone who would vote for kanye West or RFK would otherwise be Biden voters you dummy. Do you not understand that the Nazis in the vaccine conspiracy heads are all conservatives, who would vote for Trump?
The third party candidates you have to worry about stealing votes from only Biden or Jill Stein Dr. West and Claudia de Lacruz. So congrats you got Jill Stein right. Now compare the share of the vote. RFK is getting compared to Jill Stein and the others. Dumbass.
This insane worldview where anything that's not a vote for Biden is a vote for Trump is fucking crazy and it's why no one likes neoliberals.
Just gonna note that this is a strategy as old as political parties.
This goes on the false narrative that 3rd party voters would support a duopoly candidate if there were no 3rd party options. If Biden wanted to earn our votes he should have started about 30 years ago.
There are hundreds of women that will die needlessly if Trump is elected due to withdrawn healthcare. It fucking sucks but it's important to vote.
That doesn't just mean "think about voting" either — it means checking your registration to make sure it hasn't been purged, talking to people you know about how you're voting and why, volunteering if you're able, and financially supporting the campaign in an amount that's within your budget
Are these different than the hundreds of women who are dying because of abortion law changes that happened while Biden was President because he failed to stack the supreme Court like he said he would?
Doesn't matter if he wanted to pack the Supreme Court; there weren't enough Senators on board. Manchin and Sinema in particular were not, along with each and every Republican. That left Biden with at most 48/100 votes for expanding the Supreme Court.
Wait, are you telling me the Democrats don't actually do the things they say they're going to do and always find some way to f*** it up?? Oh my God I had no idea. Maybe we should vote for actual left-wing people instead of you know Democrats.
The Democrats are a coalition, and not every part of the coalition is on board with everything proposed by everybody else in the coalition.
More and better Democrats would be better for sure, but tough. Manchin represents a state which went 68% for Trump; Sinema basically pretended to be left-wing (having even been a Green Party candidate at one point) and flipped once in power.
Coalition: an alliance for combined action, a temporary alliance of political parties(plural) forming a government or of states.
So you're incorrect there.
By the definition you seem to be implying than every political party is a coalition because there are multiple people in them and people don't have hive minds.... So that's kind of irrelevant and worthless.
Moving on, let's focus on the Sinema thing. Pretending to be left-wing is the thing I'm talking about! Democrat or Republican all of these politicians do what they're paid to do. When team dumb, looks like they're finally about to score a point, we're always going to lose just enough people that we don't quite have the vote. Because that's what the people that pay them to do their job tell them to do.
This idea that we have to back the Democrats because otherwise the Republicans will get in. I get it. Republicans are blatantly fascist instead of secretly fascist . They do horrible s*** and make stuff worse all the time. I hate them too.
But it's also what the Democrats want. Have you heard of the pied Piper strategy? If not, I implore you to stop arguing with my asshole self and Google it. If you don't want to do that, I'll summarize it briefly for you. The Democrats literally send money to the most far-Right candidates in order to scare people into voting for them. They know about this trap and they want us constantly caught in it so nothing can get better.
The Democrat and Republican parties are Siamese twins. They are attached at the hip. One cannot survive without the other.
That's my best attempt to get through to you dude. I'm not going to respond after this✌️
You're using a very narrow definition of coalition — the Democratic party is a coalition of groups within the US.
Despite what you say, there are very real differences between the parties, and ones which make the Democrats a group where it is possible, at least some of the time, to get good policy. It's happened before, and it will happen again if we give them the power to act.