• JiveTurkey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    In a race with more than 2 people it shouldn’t be uncommon to have less than 50% of the overall vote and still win. I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make. In this race he got the most votes compared to the other candidates.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Many countries use variations of runoff voting, where if no candidate gets a majority then the top two candidates move on to a second round and the other candidates are eliminated. This is actually the most popular way to run elections worldwide.

      • JiveTurkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I’m aware but even assuming all of the non trump votes would go to Kamala, she still wouldn’t have won in this case.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          He got less than 50% of the vote. If you add all the non Trump votes together you get more than 50% of the vote.

          • JiveTurkey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Roughly 50.1% but that’s still assuming none of these people would’ve switched to trump and this is how US elections work. Based on how things work Donald won the popular vote with less than 50%. I’m not saying it’s the best way but it’s also not like we suddenly switched up the rules. I assure you that I’m just as mad as you are about the system we have but when I look around no one honestly wants to do anything but complain about the way things are instead of being the change they expect to see. A president isn’t going to fix our problems. If people cared more about taking back the power and less about consuming we might see some real change. The only thing that matters in this country is money and despite all the complaints we just can’t seem to stop giving the ass holes running the show more of our money in one form or another.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Roughly 50.1% but that’s still assuming none of these people would’ve switched to trump

              That’s not assuming none switched to Trump, merely that most switched to Harris. I think having such a close runoff race would also be likely to change how people voted more broadly. Turnout would be through the roof if everyone felt like their one vote would be the one that swung the election. It’s really hard to say what the results would have been.

              And we’ll never know because this shithole country doesn’t do runoff elections.

              and this is how US elections work

              Yes, and it’s bad. I’m saying the way US elections work is undemocratic. They are designed from the ground-up to favor the ruling class and suppress the will of the People. They are meant to be undemocratic. This was all intentional.

              • JiveTurkey@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                35 minutes ago

                I get all of that. I’m saying a president (in this case Kamala) isn’t going to fix this. No flavor of voting will fix our problems imo.