this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
18 points (71.4% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7211 readers
201 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I need to tell you something: perfect is the mortal enemy of better. Both options are bad. One is objectively worse, if you don't recognize that I assume you're just part of Putin's Geopolitik poisoning of the left, whether you know it or not.
Smugly refusing to participate doesn't make the options better, it just makes it easier for the worse one to win.
People who can't make a realistic choice are far worse. When you represent an itty bitty fraction of the populace, you don't have the right to dictate that policy be far-left. If you choose to not participate or to vote third party under FPTP, you are only hurting yourself by giving up what little influence you had. That's just how democracy works.
No one is ever wholly responsible if the right wins, obviously. Wins are always based on a broad spectrum coalition, whereas losses are based on a coalition just barely failing. Modern US presidential elections are always close. Still, that doesn't mean a potential coalition member gets to dictate coalition policy, especially when they're on the extremes.
Barring the demise of FPTP, you will never get what you want. Instead, politicians just learn you will never vote for them and they should look to more conservative constituencies. That, of course, means policies you don't like.
It's called compromise, and yes it is how a functioning democracy works.
Huh. That's odd. Democrats have been trending to the left.
As it stands, I think US government badly needs some changes. FPTP is terrible, too many officials (SCOTUS, Congress, president) serve until they're at death's door, the electoral college never worked as intended, and money has too much influence. But this is all fixable, even if it's hard. Those will change things, not staying home and pretending that a politician gives a rat's ass about you if you refuse to turn out every time you don't get your way.
Stop acting like a state propagandist then. Stop suggesting that neo-libs and fascists are identical just because they're both bad. -10 > -100, even though both are negative.
Lack of nuance is evidence of idiocy or ulterior motives. I was being generous by assuming you had ulterior motives.
Ironic.
Voting for your interests isn't "refusing to participate". It's the bare minimum in a democracy. It sounds like you've chosen to participate in a way which is counter to your own interests, and you're calling out others for not following your flawed logic.
Look, I know that many of the candidates I vote for are long-shot candidates. It's highly unlikely that they will win. But if I don't vote for them, then I'm part of the problem. I'm helping to make it even less likely that they win.
Being part of the winning team feels good, but politics isn't like football or hockey. This is an important civic responsibility.
Sure, if you live in a state where the result is obvious, then yes vote third party. But you know that they're not going to win, and the only thing that accomplishes is visibility and possibly funding. You know that at the end of the day, the office will be won by one of the big two.
My opposition is to broadly advocating that for everyone. Too many people do live in swing states to be flippantly both-sidesing an election where Project 2025 is on the table.
Do you live in a swing state?
I do