Well the civil war pretty clearly established this and if we try we would absolutely have to fight and win a multi year war during which in addition to millions or tens of millions of deaths there would be ample pretext to not count our votes. We would seem folks herded into death camps which nukes would insure nobody would liberate.

Our military would be firmly on the side of compliance with the law which they voted for 2 to 1 and we would lose.

You can vote so you can vote for local people. You can even sometimes vote between 2 Republicans to try to get the less shitty one and also vote to send a message

Voting third parties don’t put any butts in seats and therefore do nothing. For example green has literally NEVER put someone in a federal office iin their 40 year existence.

In the recycling example its a sham because the net effect of all individual parties recycling is bubkis whereas with voting the net effect of another 1% getting to the polls turns the entire thing around.

We are absolutely at fault for not understanding the meaning of our choices…

They aren’t here for regime change they are here for PR points and to distract from domestic problems.

A) They aren’t going to ever tell you it’s time because your needs never meant anything to them

B) There will be no weapons air dropped to you because your revolution is a non-goal for them.

C) The remaining military is still going to be mostly alive and capable of machine gunning you down again

D) The new leader will be as bad as the old in fact it will probably be one of his deputies who have already been largely running the show

We can’t do that

The candidates job isn’t to teach you that allowing Hitler to come to power is a worst case scenario nor is it their fault if you fail to realize that. The candidate got one vote just like you

We aren’t going to get to have any elections that count because of protest votes. Meanwhile the number of current and upcoming dead kids from loss of usaid alone is well into 6 figures. We killed both children and democracy in America because we are stupid.

Why would you vote for a party which has never and will never hold federal office?

He would be 65 in 2029 when he actually took office. Can we get someone who is about 20 years younger?

I don’t think any credible analyst believes that Russia could take NATO.

None of what you listed was because of “public pressure” all of it was changed by a tiny minority with most of the money. Almost all substantial changes of any variety are going to require a constitutional amendment which in the US requires 2/3 of states to agree to propose it and 3/4 of them. Red states and the agenda they want enacted would be impaired by almost any positive change as would be the money spigot funding literally everyone in power now. We could have 37 states representing 90% of the population on board and be held back by weirdos in Idaho who want an American Nazi party.

We are basically in the same position we were prior to the American revolutionary war which notably could not be fixed without conflict either just like the nazis trying to pwn the world couldn’t be fixed without conflict. We are already building and filling concentration camps and have stopped paying for medical care at what will become death camps as of last October.

If you can’t see the difference between Oboma and Trump I can’t help you

Your government is fundamentally different than ours. Given 2 large entrenched parties which are nearly equal in a system which is winner take all at every stage of the game any third party which gets any substantial portion of the vote splits the vote with whatever party it is most like ensuring its opposition wins.

EG imagine you wanted to grow say the green party in given district which is 51% Dem 49% Republican. If it were to wildly successful it would need to grow from 1% to a plurality organically probably over several or even many election seasons. It is unlikely to get many Republican votes because Republicans have solidarity and its positions are substantially different so by the time the green party has grown to 3% of the vote its throwing every election to the Republicans. This continues to be true at 30% because 90% of its votes come from the left. At some point you would reach changeover and become the defacto left wing party but by that time you will have found the state has gerrymandered your district to the point where you can’t win and all the money essentially millions of dollars in legal bribes is still flowing to the now minority party.

This is literally impossible to fix at the ballot box by people voting for third parties. This is why for example the green party has existed for 40 years and in all that time has never elected anyone to federal office and has in only a handful of cases held a state office wherein they run and stay green.

The US system is designed to make this impractical and it has only become more so with intensely parties making getting votes from both sides increasingly ridiculous. Anyone you would want to elect is going to have to take a stand against essentially the American nazi party in power now.

We have 2 entrenched parties. The Republicans have about half the vote. If we fracture the vote on the left even a little bit then we lose. EG for example suppose we WOULD win with 51% of the vote suppose we convince 90% of the would be democrats to vote green.

The vote is now 45.9 Green 5.1 Dem 49% Republican aaaaand we now lose for the next 100 years. This is actually the optimistic case. Even if you get a green candidate who satisfies literally everyone on the left some will KNOW this can’t fuckin work and yell at the defectors and some will dislike anything left of the dems and refuse to move so you probably get closer to 26% one and 25% the other. If carried out broadly enough you would hand an unstoppable super majority to the other side which they will use to fix it so your vote is suppressed forever.

You can’t just vote third party you have to first reform the system. The most basic plausible move is instant runoff or something similar at the state level.

So we can have Obama or Biden rather than Adolf Hitler with dementia?

The logic behind not using them is either they can’t or they can’t. They didn’t kill a million russians and junk a fair chunk of their existing hardware for nothing. The reasonable perception is that they couldn’t take Ukraine and fight NATO at all whereas without NATO assistance historical or current Ukraine would have actually fallen in 3 days. Their ability to take Ukraine is therefore 100% a function of how well they can keep NATO out of it and nuking Ukraine blows that objective.

Tactical nukes are relatively new

Like new if you time traveled from the 50s We literally conceived of a bazooka launched personal nuke. Generally speaking not much was actually made by anyone and is unlikely to have been maintained as they would have been deemed basically useless for decades as is very expensive to maintain.

It’s dubious that they have useful nukes available to just drop in an shell to start with. For practical purposes their nukes are fairly large and there are other considerations. Poorly maintained shit may malfunction creating additional doubt as to their military might and it might trigger additional aid by the rest of the world. They can’t actually fight NATO so actions have to be carefully calibrated so as not to bring the rest of the world or even just more of their aid into the fray lest it become even more expensive or even impossible to win.

Not using nukes isn’t holding back its not inviting armageddon.