3 years ago by Potatos_are_not_friends to c/politicalmemes
You said there’s nuance but then went on to explain that there isn’t nuance and the only reasonable vote is for Biden. And you’re not wrong. There are a lot of folks pretending to be on the left acting like there’s a whole lot of nuance here, and that voting for someone other than Biden, or not voting at all, is an acceptable option.
None of this precludes advocating for your positions or doing other praxis, but when it comes to voting the answer is clear
That is true, but not voting or casting a protest vote right now ensures fascism, under which there will be literally no choice at all.
At least under a democracy there are chances to improve things, like replacing FPTP with a better voting system that will actually allow the left a seat at the table. That’s already happening in some places and there’s a movement (supported by democrats and vehemently opposed by republicans) to enact alternative voting methods.
Unfortunately there’s been so much apathy for decades that the fascists have got their foot solidly in the door. There was nuance years ago, but we squandered it. There’s little point debating left vs liberal when fascism has taken hold. That must be stopped first.
There’s no such thing as moral neutrality in this environment, and as much as it sucks, not voting against fascism is the same as voting for fascism.
Hence my original point, leftists must vote for liberals, even if it isn't ever going to improve the system, and must work themselves to build up leftist structures without hoping for help from liberals. If they don't vote, then fascists take power, and leftists lose the chance to build leftist structures at all.
I do think you're too hopeful that a 2 party Capitalist state designed to change as little as possible would meaningfully improve from within, rather than under pressure from without, but it would be great if you were right about that.
That’s already happening in some places and there’s a movement (supported by democrats and vehemently opposed by republicans) to enact alternative voting methods.
Where? And who in the DNC supports this?
Unfortunately there’s been so much apathy for decades that the fascists have got their foot solidly in the door.
That apathy has been earned.
So is the illusion of being able to shift the Overton window in any way more important than saving your supporters from genocide?
Reread the original comment. It's absolutely important to vote as loss prevention, but you're never going to get meaningful systemic change towards the left via voting.
Vote to protect, actually make grassroots movements like unionizing and organizing to move to the left.
I suppose it might look that way if you aren't a minority or a woman or gay. If nothing meaningful has changed in the last 100 years, then we could go back to the policies of the 1900s-1920s without any difference. And I very much doubt anyone wants to do that, because there are very big differences.
The things that did change did not start with voting. Especially because women couldn't vote to get the right to vote.
I just don't know why the Onus is never on Joe Biden himself. Why is it that we feel like he doesn't have to earn any votes at all?
"Am I so out of touch? No, it's the voters who are wrong."
"Am I so out of touch? No, it's the voters who are wrong."
No, it's more like "LOL you have to vote for me, or the fascist will win". Democrats love opponents like Trump, because he helps them fundraise like crazy.
It also means they don't have to do shit but be second worst to a literal fascist. And it's disgusting how comfortable they are in such a position.
The onus isn’t on him because voting for him is for our benefit
It's to our lesser detriment. There's a difference.
Voting for someone other than Biden or not voting is an absolutely acceptable option, and I’m not pretending to be a leftist when I do so. I have Ranked Choice Voting in my state, but even if I didn’t, I would vote for who I most want in office because I have no faith in either democrats or republicans to fix the most important issues currently plaguing 99% of the people. Vilifying people for voting third party — when third parties are currently the only viable presidential and congressional solution apart from a violent revolution — is misguided.
Democrats are not your friends; you deserve better.
Leftist 3rd parties split votes between leftists and the more conservative liberals (who are the vast majority), increasing the chance of a Republican victory. I fully support right-wing people voting Libertarian though :)
With the politics of the U.S. population, and violent revolution would likely be fascist.
Just a random note: Most proper libertarians (not those weird tea party fucks) make Democrats look positively authoritarian on social issues. Economics, no, but social? Absolutely.
This is very well written and well said. If we want change that doesn't come from working within the Democrats, we have to build our own robust party across all 50 states, drawing on strong local support. No one outside of the two parties is currently trying to do this, which speaks volumes about the Green and Libertarian Parties.
Leftists really have no choice other than to vote Democrat. We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans. We fundamentally go against left wing values if we don't. I cannot call myself liberal or leftist or wherever in-between if I sit out an election where innocent people will suffer if one of the candidates wins.
I like how you've phrased this -- voting for Biden isn't because you necessarily like his policies or viewpoints, but because you want to protect people from Trump and the Republicans. I'd love if we didn't have to worry about fascists, but we don't have that luxury. As long as they're a hair's breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.
Exactly. There's one terminally online radlib here that I blocked because they were just shit-slinging for daring to suggest both voting Biden and unionizing, organizing, protesting, etc. As a leftist, we must work from without the Democratic party.
Speaking purely from a leftist perspective, I'm actually of the opinion that Anarchist principles of building up parallel structures actually may be more applicable to the American political climate, even if you're more of a Council Communist, Libertarian Socialist, Marxist-Leninist, etc. The US is seeing rising Unionization, and dramatic impacts from it, so I think Syndicalism actually has some revolutionary potential, unlike waiting for a Vanguard Party a la MLism.
Just my 2 cents.
It's funny, I thought that unions had passed their usefulness, and we needed a new structure to effectively push CEOs. And then the UAW and SAG proved me completely wrong, and I'm glad for it.
I think either way, you have the perfect viewpoint on this. Voting won't work to create change, but that doesn't mean you just ignore voting. You use it to protect what we have from fascists while initiating change from a new organization built from the ground up.
I'm extremely anticapitalist, and Unions are currently the best way for Workers to protect their own interests within current structures, and have the potential to replace current Capitalist ownership. A full replacement of Capitalist structures will be necessary eventually, but Unionization can be an arm to muscle that change through.
Thanks for sharing!
We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans.
How's that going? Republicans are enacting all manner of bigoted policy. What are the Democrats doing to reverse their hateful shit at the federal level?
I’d love if we didn’t have to worry about fascists, but we don’t have that luxury. As long as they’re a hair’s breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.
We don't have that option. We have Democrats, who will always care more about decorum and procedural bullshit than they ever will about protecting anyone.
They don't have the numbers in Congress necessary to take federal action. It's a vicious circle -- people don't think they're doing enough, so they don't vote for them. As a result, they don't have the numbers necessary to actually affect change. And then people don't think they're doing enough, and so forth. The justice department is suing states at least, but I agree that's nowhere near enough.
If you have a way to get 60 Senate votes to protect minorities (or 50-51 who also are willing to overturn the filibuster) and the House majority, I'm all for it, and you have my support. In the absence of that, any action we take will be inadequate, no matter who is in office.
And Democrats may not be perfect, but a vote that doesn't go to fascists is a win in my book. I also think we should try to maintain norms and decorum for as long as possible -- if we can beat back fascism without compromising on our institutions, we emerge as a much stronger democracy than if we have to break the rules. If that's what it takes to stop fascists though, then so be it. I just worry that you end up in a French Revolution type situation where there's no stable governance because everyone's given up on the rules.
We're not going to get rid of the two party system without switching to a proportional representation system. I have my preference for America (5 seat districts with proportional approval voting) but any reasonable proportional system will do.
Great comment. 100%
Be the millionaire Democrat socialist/ liberal representative you want to be!
True, which is why you run as a Democrat then just be a socialist lol.
while fascists gleefully vote republican.
If I was a fascist, I'd vote Dem - fascism just gets more traction with liberals in the Waffle House, and Dems are utterly ineffective at actually doing anything to stop fascism anyway. It was Trump whipping the fascists into a froth while a lib was in the Waffle House that brought antifa into the streets - not Trump actually humiliating himself on a daily basis in the Offal Office.
Fascists just gets more from a Dem regime - the Dems are doing a fine job strengthening fascist institutions. If Pig City was being constructed under Trump, the resistance to it would be ten times stronger.
None of this means you are wrong, of course (you're not) - but if voting can stop fascists it simply means the political institutions aren't ready to hand power over to them just yet. They are working on it, though.
but there legitimately are fascists in the republican party.
Doesn't matter. The actual fascists doesn't matter. The thing to be concerned about isn't the fascists themselves - what matters is the liberals that will hand power to the fascists if their precious status quo is threatened enough.
The thing about fascists that nobody except leftists seem to understand is that fascists serve a very distinct purpose in the classical liberal nation-state - they don't exist in a vacuum as some kind of "aberration". Fascism cannot exist without threatened capitalists funding them. Fascism cannot exist without liberals handing power to them to maintain their precious "Law & Order."
There is no such thing as "grass-roots fascism" - it's all coming from above.
It makes sense, but I think the downvotes are from people feeling like this is victim blaming as opposed to recognizing what you're actually saying.
It's not Johnny Democrat going to the polls that's allowing fascists to take power, it's Joe Manchin protecting his own wealth by "allowing" a "friendly fascist" to take power, or pass a bill, if it means stopping a Bernie Sanders from taking office or stopping a popular bill that would cost him potential profit. Unless I'm the one who's misunderstanding lol
Yes it does matter; millions of people will die if Trump wins a second term. Don't lie to our face by claiming it doesn't matter.
"the actual fascists don't matter" .......There's no way you just typed that in good faith.
If Pig City was being constructed under Trump, the resistance to it would be ten times stronger.
I think I once would have believed this but I do not anymore, and I wouldn't be willing to bet the lives of all people who aren't white, heterosexual cis-men on a resistance suddenly appearing. If anything, it seems like people are more willing to normalize, or at least look away from, atrocities than I would have ever imagined in the past.
Feels like for months all we heard about was kids in cages and how terrible it was (under Trump). Now nobody says a gd thing (under Biden). Seems like it's only acceptable to fight against fascism when it's "the other team."
and I wouldn’t be willing to bet the lives of all people who aren’t white, heterosexual cis-men on a resistance suddenly appearing
You won't get the chance to bet on it - it is simply the direction in which the US political establishment is careening. By all means, vote your conscience - hell, I'll vote with you - but don't be surprised when that doesn't alter the course much... or even at all.
If anything, it seems like people are more willing to normalize, or at least look away from, atrocities than I would have ever imagined in the past.
Certainly - but then, again... a lot of us always have. That's how we ended up here in the first place, isn't it?
If you were intelligent and you're not, you would already be voting Democratic. That you can't tell who are the bad from the good guys in this scenario just speaks to how illiterate and unintelligent you right wingers truly are.
No democrat has ever helped "strengthen" a fascist institution. It's possible you're just idiotic and haven't had any education. In fact, I'd say you just proved it beyond all question.
And frankly I'd rather have democratic fascists anyway. Whatever that looks like - I'll take it over a repuglican one anyday.
No democrat has ever helped “strengthen” a fascist institution.
"Fund the police" - Joe Biden.
A great example of what I mean. Fund the police, not the facists. Which is a police I totally agree with. Only the dimmest of dimwits would want to see the police go unfunded.
No democrat has ever helped “strengthen” a fascist institution.
Biden literally had a pig for a running mate, genius - what did you think the police really is?
I bet you can't tell me what the first police department in the world was called or why they were created, eh?
Like all "enlightened centrists," you don't even know - and don't want to know - the history of the institutions you are so desperate to normalize. Like all "enlightened centrists," you don't want to see the brutal violence that upholds your precious status quo. It's only when it shows up on your doorstep that you start ineffectively whining about it.
It's true what the leftists say - fascism is just colonialism coming home to roost. And it's only the "coming home" part that you have a problem with.
And frankly I’d rather have democratic fascists anyway
Oh, I know what those look like - I grew up in Apartheid-era South Africa. They were pretty "democratic" - and their "democracy" would be quite compatible with your batshit liberal conception of it.
The US is about as "democratic" as the USSR was "socialist" - ie, they never were and never will be. You couldn't handle actual democracy, Clyde - your understanding of politics is too constrained to even recognize it when it happens and instead you feel threatened by it.
So go... vote "harder." But when (not if) the faux "democrats" you put your faith in delivers you onto the fascists do remember - somebody tried to explain to you why.
Your views are so inept and wrong I can't bring myself to read them, but I'm sure they're just as idiotic as ever. Have a nice life, loser.
Look I get it, I also wanted someone different than Biden in 2020. But I truly don't think it's sane political strategy to run a different democratic candidate when you already have a sitting democratic president who's able to run for another term. The loss of the incumbent advantage is way higher than any benefit a new candidate would bring (from a voter turnout perspective, not a policy one). People would be rightly furious if the Democrats ran a new guy only to lose to trump based on name recognition alone.
Of the two major parties, the GOP is far closer to what you’re describing. If it wasn’t for fear mongering, the GOP wouldn’t have anything at all to go off of. Bad things will happen like, immigrants flooding the borders, socialism raising your taxes, your kids being taught to be gay, etc. “Vote for us or bad things will happen” might as well be the official slogan of the GOP. Either that or “White Christians good, everyone else, bad”. Take your pick.
Ok, great, thanks for pointing out the obvious. Unfortunately, complaining about it doesn't make it any less true. This is a triage situation; we have to save our democracy first, and only then can we worry about fixing it.
Yeah exactly. It's so shitty we will most likely have 2 terrible terrible choices.
A shitty platform is born out of a shitty system rotten to the core.
It really depends on what fields you're comparing. For example, in terms of climate change, both parties, policies will result in the destruction of the planet. Period.
When people say that, they're saying we need radical change to stop the problems right in front of us, and neither party is doing that.
Ok so you DEFINITELY don't know what you're talking about then. Climate change is one of the issues that they're furthest apart on. One has repeatedly made efforts to work with the international community to expand green energy and reduce emissions, and the other believes it's a lie and wants to double down on fossil fuel production and consumption. Just because it's not the immediate, drastic, quasi-legal action that you'd like to see, doesn't mean it isn't happening.
That the thing. We are out of time. Period.
It does not matter unless it is immediate and now.
5 day account calling people bots. Sus.
Or maybe people plugging their ears and pretending everything is some giant misinformation campaign against their home team because they think they deserve the win without trying are being shocked to find they don't have the support they think is owed to them for simply not being fascists.
If everything you hear is just some fake person with no real problems you miss the people actually complaining about their legitimate ones and feel forgotten about and at best don't vote and at worst vote for the side that agrees that it would be fun to pick on the people perceived as above them.
Biden should at least run debates or else people are just going to be in exactly their own bubble of awareness and have his results of his presidency to work with and hopes and dreams of the other and people suck at objective looks at reality and are much more willing to believe in fairy tales than you think.
And I know my statement makes everyone foam at theouth cause "How dare I say this!" But it is what it is. You must look reality in the face of you want to have any hope controlling it.
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions. If you want change, find local elections with candidates you agree with. Their campaigns typically pay well, in my experience, or you can volunteer if the pay doesn’t matter to you. It’s more fruitful than throwing your hands in the air and shouting about disenfranchisement.
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions
Yeah the blame for them never codifying Roe into law, their carcass in the supreme court refusing to retire, them running a terrible candidate against the will of their own voters and that candidate running an awful campaign is the fault of... people arguing on the internet
Hillary Clinton was a poor candidate. Why is it that the neo liberals never want to give her any amount of credit for her loss?
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions.
What the heck? What's the logic on that? People pointing out bad candidates is why they lost? Like seriously how on earth do you blame the weather man for the rain?
Seriously though I point out that blindly refusing to interact with conversation that makes people uncomfortable means not being prepared and the response was that this caused large standing issues with the governmental bodies that have been plaguing this country for longer than a single election?
2016 wasn't the sole deciding factor and everyone is being very emotional and really fucking stupid in here. The push to volunteer is a really good one but doesn't just make up for the idea that people talking are the issue. The share of ideas and push for betterment is necessary and sticking fingers I your ears and blindly blaming anyone that tries to point it out makes you just as fucking blind and ignorant as the people you call lesser.
It's really fucking pathetic. It's like being mad at a doctor who tells you to stop eating sugar cause you are diabetic.
Right, people who are “Biden is genocide!!” while republicans would be worse about Palestine and trump is calling for genocide against Central Americans.
If Biden wants those groups to stop being detractors, there is a very easy solution - simply hold a primary for DNC president, and let them cast their “other” vote there. Then Dems can galvanize support for the winning candidate in ‘24.
Unfortunately they know this won’t work due to how massively unpopular Biden is, and so they refuse. So, the problem is that DNC doesn’t want a democratically elected president, they want to try to force a genocidal dinosaur down our throats and somehow at the same time claim that the end of democracy is voting for the other guy. It’s a lose-lose for America - thanks, Biden.
Yeah, Biden doesn't have to support genocide. He can do the right thing. He just chooses not to.
Precisely. The claims of at least trying to protect civilian lives might be believable if the US wasn’t blocking every single effort at the UN to send in peacekeepers to stop the genocide. Or, you know, not approving $14Bn more taxpayer dollars to go towards sending them even more bombs to drop.
Biden’s lies to provide cover for Israel’s war crimes are boldfaced, undeniable, and disgustingly cowardly.
Biden has to earn my vote, just like every other candidate. If you want me to vote for Biden, convince me. What do you like about his platform? Can you convince me to vote for Biden without bringing up Trump?
That doesn't make any sense. You're basically saying that you refuse to look at a suite of potential consequences of your vote. That's not responsible at all.
And yet you need his vote.
Can you convince me to vote for Biden without bringing up Trump?
What would be the point in that when Trump is the only other candidate who has a chance of winning? The rational thing to do is to compare and contrast them.
If you're not going to vote for either of them, you might as well not vote at all. You're not going to have an effect. Decades of people voting third party have not gotten any third party anywhere. Not even when Ross Perot tried it and he actually had a decent chance.
Where am I being shot? Maybe it's someplace kinda safe like the ass. I would take a bullet to the ass over being punched in the face.
This is not trump support, was a joke about how neither is a good experience. But whatever y'all
Just to name a few:
Continued support and funding to Israel with only the most tepid condemnation as people became more aware of their genocide against Palestinians.
busting the railway union which arguably, if their demand had been met, may not have had the disaster in Ohio. A move rivaled only by Regan
Despite being told that we had to fight for “kids in cages” nothing has actually come to fruition on that front
Woah woah. Biden is definitely the getting punched in the face candidate less we remember that Trump will happily send innocent people to jail for calling him names.
He tear gassed a protest to get a photo of him as supreme leader with his upside down borrowed ǝlqı𐐒.
He will happily roll back any regulations and protections and enrich anyone and any country that makes his erection harder.
Trump is absolutely the getting shot option and it's in the leg and you think it may have nicked an artery.
On Israel, you're spot on.
The rail union thing...that was a hard one, but ultimately, 3/4 of the unions involved had already approved the deal the government forced. A strike could have cost 750k jobs across the entire economy, and we'd be in full-on recession mode right now.
On immigration... We stopped forcibly removing kids from their families and have been working to reunite the families Trump separated. They're currently working on reestablishing judicial discretion (which the Trump admin removed) and fired a bunch of the Trump-appointed immigration judges. The system still really sucks, but that's a legislative issue, not an executive one. At this point, the alternative is talking about immigrants poisoning the blood of our country.
Joe ain't left-wing, that's for sure, but he's the best candidate in the batch at this point (that can win the presidency while we're locked into a 2 party system).
3/4 of the unions involved had already approved the deal the government forced
Nowhere near 3/4 of the union MEMBERS, though. The ones that had already caved were a lot of smaller unions with much less bargaining power than the bigger ones who were able to hold on until Biden pulled the rug from under them.
A strike could have cost 750k jobs across the entire economy
Not without corporations doing the actual firing. Like Biden, you're acting like mass layoffs are just a natural consequence of workers demanding fair pay and decent conditions.
It isn't. It's the result of giant corporations CHOOSING to destroy lives to save their equivalent of pocket change that they could easily spare.
Joe ain't left-wing, that's for sure
True.
he's the best by far least awful candidate in the batch at this point (that can win the presidency while we're locked into a 2 party system).
Fixed that for you.
Biden made the best of a bad situation with the railway union issue. He worked pretty hard and without any need for adulation behind the scenes to continue resolving the strikers needs.
Allowing the railways to collapse would have been financially devastating.
If the economy can be destroyed by a private business going under, then it needs to be nationalized.
Kinda. By Lauren McFerran of the NLRB and other unsung pro-labor heroes cleaning up the mess Biden made to get much worse deals than they would have been able to if the president hadn't strongarmed Congress into taking their rights away.
The only positive things Biden has done for unions and workers in general is appoint people who are more pro-labor than he is to relevant positions. Usually on the advice of yet other people who are also much more pro-labor than The Senator from MBNA.
And no, that doesn't mean that I'd advise anyone to not vote for him next year.
Being punched in the face is still almost infinitely better than being shot in the genitals and left to die in agony from the resulting blood loss.
Just once, though, it would be LOVELY to have a helping hand to vote for rather than a fist or a bullet.
I’m here for the dark humor. We fucked.
I don't want Trump to get another term. And Biden putting on his big boy pants and doing popular things is our best chance to preventing a second Trump term. It's retail politics, not rocket science.
There are tons of popular things he's not doing. For one, he could just straight up order the decriminalization of marijuana at the federal level. And by that, I mean, banning enforcement of the law.
Biden literally instructed the DEA to reschedule cannabis already. This kind of rulemaking requires actual policy studies, as the courts have repeatedly stated that it can't be done capriciously.
It's crazy how people know every fucking awful thing the government does but never the stuff they ostensibly support. I'll say it again - the biggest problem with progressive US politics is the cynicism and engagement gap
Biden literally instructed the DEA to reschedule cannabis already.
He directed them to look into it. That's not the same thing as telling them to reschedule it.
"Along with the pardons, Biden directed the HHS secretary and the attorney general to review how marijuana is scheduled"
You're just straight up lying. He hasn't done that at all. He's getting them to start thinking about it.
I get that the FDA could reclassify marijuana, but the real issue i think is that Congress needs to get on the ball and deal with legalizing it . There are laws on the books that have to be dealt with regarding sale and distribution and banking issues.
A lot of decriminalization has started with justice department changes. But honestly don't we want something that will stick and not be taken away as soon as a different party is in charge?
The president is in charge of the executive branch, he can decide to decriminalize it overnight and fire any prosecutor that challenges him. Who is going to stop him, conservative judges ruling by decree in Texas? Hahaha.
I mean yeah. That's how it has been working for the last few years. Some conservative lower judge decides to kill an executive order and it works its way to the SCOTUS and they kill it.
The marijuana thing is a no brainer. It's political malpractice they haven't done anything on that front.
Everyone just needs to do the right thing and vote 3rd Party.
My brother in Christ, that is not the right thing.
ensue another 30 years of 2 party rule
Which candidate should we vote for that will guarantee there will not be another 30 years of 2-party rule and how are they polling right now?
I disagree, to each their own.
A second Trump term is everything you hate about Biden plus more shit. Biden still the lesser of two evils, you should vote for him.
But I will say Biden is a fucking moron for doing so many unpopular things late in his term. I guess some of these geriatric Dems would rather punch down on the left than secure democracy against it's biggest threat in decades. I get the frustration.
Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil.
It's voting for less evil. And staying home is an extra vote for more evil.
But I promise, get the frustration. We live in a fucked up system that filters out good candidates.
Voting to express yourself is pure vanity. Vote in a way that will actually influence the outcome in a positive way. If, that is, you want to do something other than feel good about how morally superior you are.
Who is running third party for folks to rally behind? Moreover, who is running that would somehow overcome both major parties' candidates by drawing enough away from them to win or in some way effect a change in process?
The thing is most people are Third party without knowing it. They've just been brainwashed into thinking there are only two options and are solely focused on being on the "winning" side, heavily persuaded into "fear" voting.
I would agree with you if we didn't have a two party majority and FPtT voting. You would also have to have a strong third party candidate that most people are excited about and is not trying to be a spoiler. You also will need to start persuading those you have mentioned who "are third party without knowing it" way before the election. Also getting a majority for a third party in the electoral college.
I want to be wrong and am willing to be convinced. I am curious how you see third party as an option with or without voting reform and how to persuade people to consider it.
August Nimtz wrote a book about this, it’s called “voting fetishism.”
Let me know when there's a third party candidate worth my time. Jill Stein has done nothing to earn my vote, and unless she addresses her anti science remarks, she'll never get it.
Understood, because the Red or Blue candidate are worth it.
Because you don't understand how the American electoral system presently works.
So, yes, they are. Fuck you people are stupid and ignorant in one.
Everybody needs to vote for who they honestly think the best candidate is. If that's Biden, vote Biden. If that's Jill Stein or Cornel West or whoever the Libertarians are running, then vote for them.
Vote your hopes, not your fears. Or, as Jill Stein said, "Don't vote for the lesser evil. Vote for the greater good."
That's some "When they go low, we go high" bullshit.
Politics isn't about falling in love with the perfect candidate. That's never going to happen -- and if it seems like someone is that perfect candidate, it's a giant red flag.
Vote for what's realistic. Vote like an adult. Vote with your head, not your heart.
Ah, that would be the Jill Stein who has never tried to run for mayor or congress or governor, the Jill Stein who thinks it's the presidency or nothing. She has no interest in changing anything. There is no reason to listen to her.
Vote Democrat, but remember they are chosen because they are marginally better, not because they are great.
Do everything in your power to end the rule of a stupid two-party system, for one party going full fascist allows the other to stop fighting for your rights the way it should.
Vote Democrat
Do everything in your power to end the rule of a stupid two-party system
These things contradict each other
How you vote isn't going to impact the two party system, because there's still only two realistic outcomes. Democrats win or Republicans win. Withhold a vote from one party and you empower the other party.
Not to mention, our third parties actually maintain the two party system. They don't oppose it. They criticize mainstream politicians for corruptions and then go rub shoulders with Russian oligarchs. They have no intent to actually win, it's just a grift. If they were serious about becoming a player, they would have invested in a 50 state strategy to build up a local presence everywhere. And then from a solid base, gradually win elections and climb up the ladder. Instead, they waste all their money on the presidential election and hope you don't realize that if they do win, they have no representatives in Congress.
Realistically, ending the two party system as a new party within that system is unlikely. You'd need to massively build up local. Instead, we're better off co-opting the parties. Do what the Tea Party did and hijack the party to go where you want.
Change comes from within
If the DNC wanted to, it could pass ballot & electoral reform. It doesn’t, because FPTP/winner takes all benefits them doubly - either they lose and can fundraise off “red team bad” messaging, or they win power and get their turn at the levers of power.
If you’re politically homeless on the right, anything even slightly to the right of median is preferential to ‘conserve’ the world you’re clutching to. Slowing or preventing change is your mantra politically, because you like the status quo today/previously
If you’re politically homeless on the left, you’re bullied in liberal unity under big-tent centrism, even though it’ll never effectively serve your core interests like right wing unity would. There may be some overlap, but good luck with actual legislative movement on LGBTQ+, unionization, campaign finance reform, alternative policing, etc
Under a different system we’d actually have coalitions and better representation on issues- especially topics with entrenched left-right collusion like foreign policy.
The DNC could have passed ballot and electoral reform under Obama when they had good majorities in both the house an senate, but they will not be able to in the foreseeable future (because they likely will not have strong majorities in both chambers for a very long time). I do agree that they probably wouldn't, even if they could, unless the party changes drastically.
I do have (a tiny amount of) hope that "progressives" can gradually change the party. The Republican party has changed quite a bit over the last few decades; neocon under Bush, Tea Party under Obama, and now MAGA. So, it's definitely possible to change a party.
They didn't have those majorities for a long time. Runoff elections and deaths gave them a two month window or so. They passed Obamacare with that, and had to remove a single payer option to get the last necessary votes.
But also, the Democrat party was a lot less left in those days. There were a lot of Manchin types of conservative Democrats. We've never had the votes for electoral and ballot reform. We needed to build on our majority in 2010 to do it, and we instead we lost the majority entirely.
I’d say the RNC has had a hostile takeover that’s going to lead to a schism, versus an evolution. Post/Reaganism was an evolution that the RNC did very successfully co-opt. Trump’s populist rhetoric has been damaging to the status quo for vested interest, both political and corporate. The tea party movement fizzled out because Obama was popular and had majorities, so their impotent rage didn’t have a strong figurehead until Donnie in 2016.
I don’t see the progressives changing the party - see: Talib’s censure, Bernie being sidelined until late, or how intra-party caucuses like the squad or the black caucus falls in line. On the right where gridlock is a feature, the house freedom caucus can force an embarrassing number of speakership votes until their ultimatums are met, and be lauded as heroes. Progressives and their voter bloc want a progress, and so have to play ball with the DNC.
Remember that DoMA went away from a court case, not primary legislation. The ‘gay vote’ was seen as reliable by the DNC, because it’s not like the right is opening its arms to those voters, so there wasn’t any political capital spent on that issue. Just lip service all through the Obama majority years
DNC was sued over the Bernie Sanders 2016 politicial era. DNC is considered a corporation.
Justice Democrats were the "progressives" elected to change the Democrates, if you follow how they vote and talking points changed over the years, the party changed them not the other way around.
Sabby Sabs had the lawyers of the DNC Fraud Lawsuit.
DNC Fraud Lawsuit Lawyers Speak Out! Why Marianne & RFK Jr. Can't Win (Interview Clip) [55:31 | May 15 2023 | Sabby Sabs]
Why Marianne & RFK Jr. Can’t Win
Because the former still won't apologize for saying diseases were all in your head during the AIDS epidemic, and the latter compared COVID safety measures with Nazi Germany? RFK Jr is a certified antivaxxer as well.
Tell me, do these two need to earn votes as well, or does that only apply to Biden?
The video is much more than these two, the lawyers themselves even explain why they don't like or would vote for any of them.
Any politician needs to earn the vote, and should be highly criticized instead of defended.
Many of us ex-Bernie supporters learn that the hard way, even if we have to learn it multiple times over until we fully understand US politics.
Could they?
AFAIK, most details of elections are set by the states, right? I think at the federal level, it might require an amendment to require that states use ranked choice, STAR. 3-2-1 or whatever.
They’re one of the two 800lb gorillas in the room, you think they can’t move public opinion or make policy? Yes the states run their own elections parallel to the feds, but that just means they pass 51ish laws instead of 1.
If you told the American electorate, who is chronically pissed off with the Congress and vacillating on the President, that under STV they could pick their actual favorite AND a safe/tactical vote? I think even Republicans would take that with both hands.
A perennial gripe of rural America is that state and/or federal government don’t prioritize them, the urban vote gets preference. Minorities, gun owners, migrants, small business, etc all can spin the same story with different players. Why wouldn’t they want to pick someone closer to their values or needs than a candidate who appeals to a different voter bloc instead?
The president can move public opinion, sure.
Yes the states run their own elections parallel to the feds, but that just means they pass 51ish laws instead of 1.
The federal government doesn't run any elections.
States run their own elections for federal offices. The only election run by the federal government is when the electoral college meets to elect a president, and that's usually just a formality.
The president can endorse a system and can probably tie federal funding to implementing it, but AFAIK can't force states to use it.
And I think you underestimate the amount that politics in the US is knee-jerk "we have to take the other side of this issue". There's a lot of everyday Republicans who oppose STV due to assorted FUD from right wing media.
that under STV they could pick their actual favorite AND a safe/tactical vote?
As an aside, STV doesn't let you do that. STV satisfies later-no-harm so it has to fail favorite betrayal. In other words, it guarantees that picking a second tactical vote can't harm your actual favorite, not that voting for your actual favorite is safe.
How? Look at the recent Alaskan special election for the House. If the final round were Begich vs Palin or Begich vs Peltola, Begich would win. However, Begich was eliminated first, so the final round was Palin vs Peltola, and Peltola won.
Palin voters would have been better off voting for Begich; voting for Palin first wasn't safe. Actually, they could have elected Begich if the exact right number of Palin voters stayed home (STV doesn't guarantee voting can't hurt you), or even voting Peltola (STV has odd corner cases where you can defeat someone by voting for them)
Here's what I don't get about this. If you vote for Trump this time, you know what you're getting. He was already president, so you know what you're in for. Is there really anybody on the fence here? I mean, I understand hating both candidates and declining to vote for either one, but if you vote for Trump, then you agree with Trump.
Yeah it's a real moral conundrum. Do you vote for the fascists who want to destroy the country of America, or the other party who wants to bring people together and have some good social programs going. It's really a very tough and confusing choice.
The side the listener is on believes this to be true regardless of whichever perspective you're speaking from.
The left thinks the right are fascists without exception. The right thinks the left are fascists without exception.
How did those fringe minority opinions suddenly become mainstream as if you can paint a whole population with such a generalization.
I'm not saying both are the same, as one inherently requires the suffering of many to have their desires met. However, both sides will use this "team sport, win at all costs" mentality so long as it resonates with the population they try to reach.
The difference being Republicans have been saying that for... 60 years now?
Democrats have only started seriously saying that since Trump.
You can argue slightly for Bush and retaliation for 9/11. But nobody was thinking the state of American democracy was at stake lol.
Plenty of Democrats allowed nuance for misguided Republicans right up until they voted for Trump a second time. Or saying the quiet part out loud, or preferred convicted pedophiles over the other team.
It ripped the rose tinted glasses off. Most people who lean even slightly left know better now. What your average republican voters says means nothing if you continue voting in fascists lol.
Not sure why the downvotes. Republicans truly believe that Democrats will destroy the country if they win the next election.
The downvotes are because one side has attempted an insurrection, constantly attempts to subvert the outcome of elections, and is saying out loud they plan on weaponizing police against their opposition, while the other is the fucking Democrats. Saying "both sides think that" doesn't neutralize people's genuine concerns that a not insignificant amount of politicians in one fucking party are willing to completely throw out any election that doesn't suit them, which means they are already attempting to take over. Both sides may think that, but one side thinks it credibly while the other thinks it based on absolutely nothing.
My intention wasnt to say both sides think the same, it's exactly the opposite. It's that neither side thinks the way the other is painted.
While both extreme fringes are being sold as mainstream now, the majority of people are simply more complicated than that. People on the right need to recognize that their party has been taken over, and put aside the greed of short term wins to consider if they really back this ideology. You're instantly branded a RINO and tossed aside if you do, and fear arising from cultlike mob mentality is used to keep people at the fringes.
I understand all of that. The OP was just saying that both sides feel the same about each other. He was not saying that one side is better than the other, or that both sides are the same, they are clearly not the same.
The media demonizes everything it can about the other side while downplaying or denying everything their side has done wrong. Everyone sticks to their 'feed' or 'channel' and so only understands their weaponized story of events. There are teams of professionals spinning each of these stories to the best of their ability. There are extremely complex algorithms pulling people further and further over their side of the boat to maintain enngagement and sell ads.
If they only ever watch 'Fox News' then they'll only hear about the good stuff their party doing and fear mongering over the other party. If they happen to see a counter argument on 'CNN' or something they'll see it as fake/misleading/out of context/false. They'll go into their similar minded social media communities and discuss and rant with a group that they see as everybody, validating their concerns.
This is a media bubble, a worsening bipolar extermist movement driven my massive market forces. We have to acknowledge we are subject to the same media bubble effects as they are, the same market forces are being applied to us. Swap the positions of 'Fox News' and 'CNN' in the above paragraph and reread it.
Until people acknowledge this and learn to engage with their opposition in a productive manner, the political climate in this country will continue to worsen. The politicians and media will never engaged the opposition productively as it is against their interests to do so. This bipolar extremism works too well for improving votes, user engagement, donations, and merch sales. Yet in the end, it is us who they are competing over. De-escalation is the best path forward from this. While that effort is against the flow of the system, we are the only ones who can do it.
Projection, as always.
But who operates the machine :O :O :O
The machine is set up in such a way that this does not matter. It only turns to the right.
It does. Biden is able to get away with being toothless and doing things like continuing to build the border wall. It feels like his only redemption is he's not Trump. I will vote my mind during the primaries but if it's Biden, I'm gonna hate that I have to vote for him simply because the alternative is worse.
Really good npr podcast on the medias failing by trying to stay nonpartisan and treat both candidates like they are equal.
Made a point to say there were more articles about bidens dog biting someone than trump saying he wants to execute a general.
Bonkers
Jeff needs to leave Xitter already
100% how I saw it day 1 and very fitting
I feel like that's the intent, so yes.
Is it all he has? Salty liberal poster is basically his entire identity.
You say he needs to leave Twitter because you don’t want to see his comments there.
I say he needs to leave Twitter because I don’t want to see his comments at all.
We are not the same.
that's easy to say. but finding an alternative is pretty difficult. mastodon is an option, but it's to twitter what lemmy is to reddit. tiny userbase, and no discovery algorithm to push his opinions.
Mastodon is on a much, much larger scale and userbase than lemmy. I think its ready for primetime. Im just mad it federated with Threads
You are absolutely correct. Thank you for the correction.
yes, and jeff and other big people might make the first steps to bring the (normie) masses over.
I've been following George Takei for awhile now, he's been pretty active.
Mastodon is on a much, much larger scale and userbase than lemmy. I think its ready for primetime. Im just mad it federated with Threads
...Which one? /s
I tease, but honestly it is important to remember that Mastodon isn't one site/instance/platform. You can find Mastodon/Misskey~Firefish~Akkoma/other ActivityPub microblogging instances that aren't federating with Threads.
Profiles like Tiedrich need that huge user base, they basically just post inane lowest common denominator diarrhea for people to say "this" to.
There are good videos explaining this point, Adam did a good one, valid point but as long as people cling to that site there will never be an alternative.
Has anyone attempted to add a discovery algorithm in a fork of Mastodon or one of the mastodon alternatives? I keep seeing that listed as a downside but I wonder if there's any work that has gone into giving people that option. Haven't really thought it through, tbh.
"Both parties are the same" is an obviously silly statement.
At the same time, "Vote for the man who says he can't avoid building Trump's wall, but can use executive power to sell weapons specifically to be used for genocide... Because the other guy is worse." is not a great way to raise voter turnout.
Some of the people criticizing others in this thread have been organizing against genocide. Have been calling their representatives, protesting in the street, etc.
If that's you; Great! My beef is not with you.
If not, and especially if you were telling people to vote for Biden in 2020 because we could "push him to the left"; Maybe work on getting Biden to stop funding genocide and generally push an agenda that will make people want to vote for him.
With current levels of partisanship, turnout is what makes the difference in elections.
Criticizing the very people you're trying to get to vote is at best counter-productive.
Like it or not, if you're campaigning for Biden then you're an embassador for the Democratic party. People notice what you spend your energy on, and what you don't. If you spend more time calling people on the left "stupid" than you do campaigning to end genocide? People will notice, and they will associate Biden supporters with hypocrites that don't actually care about them or people like them.
Being a dick is easier than actually organizing; But it won't achieve your stated goals.
I feel like his posts are usually just lukewarm takes on topics that many other people have already articulated (obviously with fewer f bombs). I rarely see him post anything that actually adds anything to the discourse. People have pointed out the ridiculousness of the "bOtH sIdEs" mindset plenty of times for a long time.
If this tweet had been in response to something specific it would be fine, but with no meaningful context it's just Jeff Tiedrich once again shouting "holy fucking shit [insert extremely common left wing opinion here] fuckity fuck" to his echo chamber of a follower list.
Ideally, Biden steps aside for a better Democrat. That would make me happy.
So what we should be worried about is who they choose as VP given that neither candidate will live past another term in office.
Who should run instead? Who is popular enough now to have any chance?
Usually, thats the point if a primary. Nobody knew who Obama was in 2006
Who is popular enough to win and also overcome the hit to the dnc taken from biden stepping down
No, but they sure as shit did by December '07
It's just sad that you can't vote for the party you agree with because then your vote loses any value. Americans probably can't imagine the amount of parties in other countries,
Image Transcription: Twitter Post
Jeff Tiedrich, @itsJeffTiedrich
gee, who do I vote for, the guy who I sometimes don't agree with, or the fascist dictator-wannabe who warns about immigrants "poisioning the blood" of white people. what a fucking conundrum
How come this genius is still in twitter?
Obama-Trump voters break Tiedrich's brain.
I don't understand why people are saying this right now. The primary season's not even over, literally anyone could run against Joe Biden.
Its simply not binary yet.
Either you're misunderstanding what I wrote or what he wrote.
With this behaviour and this thinking you'll be voting against "The Bigger Evil" for the rest of your life. Your kids will be bullied into voting for "The Lesser Evil" their whole life, your grandchildren will be reminded by their friendly AI legal expert to vote for anyone just not for "Evil Jeff".
Your whole political conscience revolves around a struggle that doesn't exist. You do no good voting for any of these manipulative racists, liars and/or genocidal clowns by listening to paid twitter jesters or hollywood stars. The eChoEs of these shouting matches are so loud now, normal spoken words don't have any weight.
If you put just a fraction of the energy, money or your thoughts into changing your fascist system instead of this useless reality show you call politics every four years (and the years in between), you might be able to die with a knowledge that your children and grandchildren could live in a (more) normal world.
But where's the fun in normality? right?
Both men enable genocide. Trump is just worst. There is no winner here plus Dems constantly let themselves get punked out by GOP cultists. We have reached the end result of vote blue no matter who.
Just don't vote for the one currently supporting a genocide.
Most fucked up part is that that Turd is the reflection of republicans. ;/ Which means that half of the USA went crazy, not just one politician ;/ If electorates were decent human beings, republican party would be forced to offer a decent human being for presidency ;/ and not this anti-science Turd..
Just vote 3rd party. It takes enough people throwing their votes away to break this duopoly. Build new political parties and stop giving money to either republicans or dems. These people are only as powerful as we make them with our money.
Noooo we don't actually want reform
If you tally the effects of lifetime policies enacted by Trump vs Biden...
"Don't compare me to the Almighty; compare me to the alternative."
Biden is practically saying, "What are you going to do? Vote for the other guy?"
For fuck's sake, this is how you lose. Time's tickin', people.
Edit: Biden will not lose the popular vote, but he can easily lose the Electoral College. Demand more of him while there is still time.
I really think they need to run a primary against him just so that people can feel like he is at least the right decision to make even if it feels weak cause this aggressive "It's someone else's fault and I won't do anything about it unless I get exactly what I want!" Attitude is absolutely gonna make him lose the vote even if it pisses everyone off to hear.
Jeff Tiedrich is so fucking annoying. I thought I got away from seeing screenshots of his dumbass Twitter posts when I left reddit.
Tiedrich's useless perpetual crying on xitter is iconic of this political era. What he can't see is that he does the Democrats damage.
Fascist dictator? where do I sign up?
The guy bombing Palesinian babies and being a Zionazi is not a fascist btw .
Democrat mental gymnastics wow.
Wow Democrats are eating each other alive at the realization that they may not win. I'm a bleeding heart leftist that would really love if we don't backslide into a fascist Cristo nationalist state but seriously this screaming anger that people aren't agreeing with the milquetoast forced pick is definitely not gonna help.
Everyone said that the Republican party would split but no. Democrats will lose again by being angry and not supporting people once again.
A party that looks willing to change to better support the requests of their people is a lot more attractive than one that just wants to push the tower back together and keep playing the same games. And when competing against someone who is able to pretend the rubble is is a castle if you just whip hard enough then you are gonna be against a wall that doesn't budge.
This look of spiteful anger isn't going to get people to back the old man and that's the hard truth that needs to be accepted.
Nobody will ever make me feel bad that Trump is going to win because I'm not going to vote for Biden. Just more blaming everyone but themselves.
One I saw how willing democrats are to sabotage candidates to push ahead "the safe pick" I just gave up. The Republicans went full steam behind their radical, won, committed hundreds of crimes, and are going to win again.
But Bernie sanders and Universal Healthcare? No fucking chance. We can deal with a little insurrection, just throw em in jail. But if everybody got Healthcare, stopped fighting each other, and were healthy enough to fight against the rich people? Can't stop that.
In fairness, Joe Biden barely scraped through electorally. We're talking a handful of thousands of votes in key states.
He destroyed on the popular vote, but sadly that's not how our system works.
Well it's a year out and we are all just being reactionary to polling numbers but the more the sentiment sticks the more we shape the future. So I guess we just have to see when an election year actually starts instead of doing nothing and fighting about it.
Also can I just add: doing nothing and expecting the same outcome is insanity
The reason people are worried about the poll numbers right now is that now is the only chance we have to put up a different Democratic nominee. I'm not really sure we have a window of time to correct anything if we've already put them up as our nominee.
The window doesn't exist. No one wants to hear what makes them uncomfortable anymore. They are tired of the same but scared of anything different. And so down we will grind. Biden can win and delay this more but we will see and it won't be just because he is there like last election.
No, I'm not saying he's not in trouble or that they don't need to get hold of the message or change policies in key areas or whatever.
I'm saying that the argument that "shaming leftists for wanting to stay at home won't work" or that "spiteful anger is not going to get people to back" Biden doesn't track. We all spent a year in aggresively spiteful anger at a bunch of performative Berniebros all over social media who argued that they would never vote for Biden under the circumstances. Turns out either they showed up, they hadn't shown up before either or weren't that many. Because, again, Biden won.
This whole "why don't Democrats court us specifically" dejection is infuriating, especially because it tends to be a pre-electoral thing only. The way I see it, with the US's electoral system a leftist is at their most powerless around major elections. They get no choice. It's liberal centrists or active fascism.
The right time to apply political pressure to Biden or any other centrist democrat in power is during the term, when they need leftist votes to get past narrow majorities and there is a reasonable opportunity to trade reform for commonplace legislation and normal operation. But pressing before elections? All that gets you is the only one of the two factions you can influence in any way losing all power, and as a result you losing all power.
Vote for democrats and then apply pressure between terms or go start the revolution. But whining about Dems not caring about you just before an election is not it.
It's not just about the fucking Berniebros. It's about the silent majority of Americans who never say shit and just vote or don't. It's about the people that really matter and I'm trying to speak for them. The idiots who will eat up whatever confirms their current ideas of how everything is going that you get from being down on their level and talking to them.
Christ you pick your boogymen and stick to it and direct all your anger and energy at the people being vocal and not notice the everything else.
It's about giving those people an idea of a choice, it's why I have called for Biden to do some debates or make an effort to campaign a little and toot his own horn. Fuck I would love him to be rallied by a leftist and show that he gets more of the middle by being a slow and careful old curmudgeon but you stick to one stupidly flawed argument that it's about the people being vocal.
Whatever. The easy target is the one that puts it's head up to talk. This entire chat is full of people that are scared and simply screaming at the people that try to offer a conversation to point out ideas that they aren't thinking of. But stay with blinders on. Shut up the people that try to say anything and just be shocked and remember our names as the problem if it all goes sideways because someone has the audacity to say something you didn't want to hear.
Ah yes, the spoiler effect.
Vote splitting is an electoral effect in which the distribution of votes among multiple similar candidates reduces the chance of winning for any of the similar candidates, and increases the chance of winning for a dissimilar candidate. This is commonly known as the spoiler effect, which can discourage minor party candidacies.
You can't break the 2 party system that way, that's why they want you to vote 3rd party. That's also why they often fund the 3rd party in the first place.
There are plenty of systems that allow more parties to join without creating this effect. Your idea of 3rd party is not wrong, just wait until the policy is there to support it, or else you are just hurting your chances of being as aligned as can be with the person in office.
The first video in the playlist explains this effect
Beats voting for my opponent directly (which is what 3rd party does in FPTP).
And also people don't make changing the voting system a priority, too busy arguing about abortions and healthcare. That's how you make a change if there is going to be one, not by throwing away your vote.
This might as well say Trump 2024 because that's what you'll get when you toss your vote away going 3rd party.
Eliminating the two party dynamic won't ever happen from the top down, it's going to have to happen with local elections and move it's way up.
I'm certainly not voting for Joe "I'm a Zionist" Biden.
Though to be fair, I'm in Florida so my vote means fuck all anyway. Maybe if I lived in a state he had an ass chance of winning I'd consider that "least harm" BS.
No, you shouldn't vote Democrat - both parties tend to have unimaginably negative foreign policy that perpetuates the American empire across the globe. This is the greatest source of evil in the world - not regressive immigration policy.
This is even why you should consider voting for Trump, regardless of what you think about him: he actually seems to endorse isolationism to some degree. I think they are probably the same concerning Israel, but it is not illogical to say that Trump would've done something else concerning the Ukraine, or that he would have be engaging with China very differently.
How about the candidate who will hold Isreal accountable. Which one is that?
Putin's friend Stein
That’s not an option in US politics, unfortunately. But one candidate would probably say “nuke Palestine!” and want to send troops, or maybe not depending on what Putin tells him to do.
i naively believed the other lemming's statement but Cornel West's running. if Jill Stein wins her party's primary, that'll be two candidates with a history of condemning Israel's war on palestinians, both having described that state's actions as genocidal
And a vote for either is a vote for Trump. But if you want to bury your head in the sand and condemn the country to oblivion on principle, well hey, it's a free country for the next 12 months.
nope, a vote for some candidate is a vote for that candidate. i'm not burying my head in the sand because i'm not an american voter. i'm a foreigner that's been a victim of lying imperialist presidents from the bullshit land of the free fairyland for a long freaking time
you claim the US to be a free country for at least the next 12 months, and i think you have your head in the sand. just because i think Trump is way worse than Biden doesn't mean i don't know for a fact that he's really bad
i came here because @dojan@lemmy.world falsely claimed that no one else is on the table
Considering you have no skin in the game, do you think it's proper to try and influence the political process of another country?
I didn't like it when Cambridge Analytica did it in my country.
nope, a vote for some candidate is a vote for that candidate.
Duverger's Law says you don't know what you're talking about.
Okay so technically others are on the table, but realistically you only have two options. My country uses a representative parliament, your party needs to hold a certain amount of votes to enter parliament because each (literal) seat in parliament corresponds to a certain amount of votes. You obviously can't divide a person in two, so you need to clear the bar.
The U.S. has a singular winner. Unless for some reason a very large portion of voters decide to vote for a third party (and the same third party at that), you're unlikely to ever see a third party candidate actually win.
Still not voting. The problem hasn't been fixed. That problem is how we vote.
The metaphorical Joker snaps the pool stick in half every 4 years, and ya'll scramble for part of the stick to outdo the other person.
I'm sure not voting will fix the problem
No though
One of the wings is hopelessly broken and gangrenously putrid.
Which means the bird is going to fall to the ground and be eaten.
Sounds about right.
Yep. In fact I would even say the bird has already died on the ground and is incapable of being resurrected. As someone above said, it's time to hitch our balls to a new bird and start over.
Ok so maybe we attach our coconuts to a new bird then since this one is not well
I'm for that. My coconuts are aching for a bird to be attached to. (?).
Hmmm... Have you tried a swallow? Heard it can be a good way to take care of those kinds of loads.
A giant douche or a turd sandwich, who will you choose?
edit: it's a south park reference people, chill. It's just recognizing that both candidates are shitty. Obviously in this case one is far worse than the other, and it doesn't mean you shouldn't vote... fucking vote
I always hated that episode. A giant douche is functional and useful. A turd sandwich will literally make you sick.
But that's my point, it's not relevant. It's a bOtH SiDeS sAmE enlightened centrist platitude that's just meant to ride the fence to avoid pissing anyone off. "Haha, both the candidates suck, I don't want to vote for either." That's neither insightful nor entertaining. There are real differences between the candidates, the parties, and the various sides of an issue, and pretending it doesn't matter is part of why the world is a fucking mess.
Honestly, for me it's just a reflection of the fact that there are always going to be 2 shitty candidates. It's not some centrist manifesto, obviously Biden is still the clear choice compared to a fucking fascist psychopath.
As someone who is neither centrist nor enamored of either party, it isn't ever "both sides are the same." It's "these two groups actively work together to prevent others from sharing the platform' and 'of all of the possible candidates, these are their best?'
Biden is better than Trump, point blank. Regardless, if Biden is polling poorly, then the Democrats should set aside their pride and pick a candidate that appeals to independents and proper progressives. The Democratic base will vote for whoever the DNC fields, so the real challenge is convincing those swing voters.
Attempting to shame people into voting for a problematic candidate is what got us Trump in the first place. Perhaps its time to listen to those seeking actual change.
You say that like it matters what a Democrat's position is. It doesn't. Not even when they have a supermajority in Congress and control the Supreme Court. They will not get things done.
Vote abstinence in situations where you dont like any candidate is a valid option and part of your civic duty in a democracy. Not voting for Biden isn't a vote for Trump, no matter how many times you people try to gaslight yourselves into believing otherwise.
But the republicans vote Trump no matter what, and now you’ve nullified your vote in protest
And the Democrats vote for the Democratic candidate no matter what. That they have a better candidate is obvious, but pretending that the core would deviate from voting as they're told is not supported by their past behavior.
Not voting for Biden isn’t a vote for Trump
It's also essentially you declaring that you don't really mind if Trump gets in. If you were opposed to Trump, you'd actively try to stop him gaining power again. If you're not voting in a way where you try to prevent him gaining power, sure, you're not actively supporting him, but you're still willing to sit by while fascism rears its head. That is what people are judging you for.
To pick an extreme analogy: if there's a child drowning and you're in a position where you could easily save them but choose not to because you saw that child being mean to someone once, no-one's going to call you a child murderer but people are going to judge the hell out of you for being "the guy who doesn't save drowning children".
So yes, vote abstinence is an option. But I'd argue what's more a part of your "civic duty" is to prevent fascists rising to power when you personally have a say in preventing that.
Fine, I'll play.
Democrats and the DNC hold all of the power when it comes to who they field for the election. If their current chosen is polling poorly, if he's not energizing the people that the DNC needs to win, then they have the power to nominate someone who does. If they're willing to risk Trump getting in by fielding the candidate anyway, then they're indicating their willingness to put stubborn pride and the need for control over doing what they know needs to be done.
The Democrats hold all of the cards when it comes to who to run. If Trump gets in because they cling to stubborn pride, then they have only have themselves to blame.
"Maybe if the Republicans get elected on a platform of christofascist dictatorship and enact massive disenfranchisement and roll back civil rights, things will get more representative and we'll see more left leaning candidates in future elections somehow, rather than the people who have promised to ratfuck every election for eternity ratfucking every subsequent election." This is your ridiculous logic.
Actually, no.
My logic: Democrats hold all of the cards. They are not required to run Biden and they have plenty of time to find a candidate that appeals to progressives outside of their core. If they choose to push forward with a mediocre candidate who is currently polling poorly and the worst possible person gets elected, they are responsible for the loss.
People aren't that smart and don't think like that. They think that they are hurting and don't like feeling forced and will look for who is "on their side and punishing up" or even just become apathetic. You are able to see the long picture and be rightfully scared of it but then it's up to us to point that out to the people who have power and ability to do something about it. And raise awareness where possible.
He, nor I, have any logical statement on how it will get better for it being worse just that reality is what is. It would be likely a lot worse should Republicans get everything they want, but the Democrats need to see they won't get votes just for whipping like the Republicans.
You are having an emotional response cause you are scared and shooting the messenger.
then they have only have themselves to blame.
I don't mean to be blunt but...are you Russian?
You know that as an american citizen, whoever gets voted in is someone you would have to deal with, right?
Domestically, that would be saying you are no further than "wag finger on a soapbox" towards allowing the voting in of someone who has attempted treason and has said he would go dictator if voted in, while doing speeches that can literally be pulled from Adolf Hitler.
If you are an american citizen, speak like this is your FUCKING PROBLEM
People really stretching to ignore Pride as one of the cardinal sins against a proper perception on reality.
People's inability to change or pivot is truly one of our greatest downfalls even if the stubbornness is one of our greatest tools to survival.
Duverger's Law makes it very clear that you don't know anything regarding what you're talking about.
Vote abstinence means what exactly?
Because not voting for Biden is absolutely not the same as voting for Trump. That I agree with. Not voting at all though is voting for either. Only by showing up and literally voting for neither is the only way to vote for neither of them.
"I made up this Manichean worldview, therefore I'm correct and you're worse than Hitler"
Trump is literally saying that immigrants are polluting the blood of the country. He's calling his political opponents vermin and saying he wants to be dictator (don't worry, just one day!) How much clearer could the stakes be?
I bet you can't name 23 times when Trump was racist! I'll wait!
Okay maybe you can. But how about only in 2023?
Oh shit, you can do that too?
Fine then, at least he didn't say anything racist yesterday.
Oh shit he fucking did?
I sure hope not. In my opinion, the right is splintering off into a fascism regime and more people who once were undecided are voting democratic (per USA Today) than in any prior year.
I’d say there was at least ninety-one differences between Trump and Biden.
@lemmy.world
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
go to feed...
There's nuance. Obviously, vote for the liberal over the fascist, it's not even close. However, the fascists are absolutely represented in government, while there's no leftist candidates to speak of. Leftists have to plug their nose and vote liberal, while fascists gleefully vote republican.
Voting is entirely for loss prevention, because ultimately it absolutely impacts minority groups and people who stand to lose a great deal by a republican victory. However, leftists will not be able to move America to the left by voting.
That's why grassroots movements and building up of parallel structures are so important for leftism, it cannot work within the confines of a 2 party Capitalist state, and must be built from the bottom up.
save