this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
103 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10180 readers
91 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're missing a whole lot of people who don't approve but are not served by the alternatives enough to get out there. You may disagree and say they should just vote for the lesser evil, but we see time and time again that just presenting people lesser evils is not effective. They need to have a positive reason to go vote FOR someone, not just negative ones to vote AGAINST someone.
This is just an extended rationalization for apathy. I'm sorry to say, but government is boring. Politicians are boring. An exciting politician is probably trying to sell you a line of unrealistic, unachievable bullshit, and in the system the US has, by the time it gets down to the general election, your choices are Donkey, Elephant, and several flavors of Don't Care. You can have more excitement and a greater sense of choice in the primaries, but voting twice in a year is too much work for even many 'political' people.
If positive messaging got people to the polls, I guarantee you would see positive campaigning: even 10% of the non-voters would be enough to swing any competitive race.
That's absurd. Political apathy doesn't just come out of nowhere. Nearly everyone who doesn't vote will tell you it's because both of their realistic options are out to fuck them, and in most locales they're right. Give them something to hang onto, have a candidate that offers them literally anything other than not being the other guy or not actively making things worse, and a whole lot more will bite. You might think they're wrong for having that apathy, but to be completely honest what you think about them doesn't matter. What matters is getting people moving.
The reason they don't campaign like that is obvious: the things the people want are not what the ruling class will allow. It's foolish to think that politicians are simply optimizing for what gives them the best chance of winning. Those sorts of considerations only happen within the bounds of what their backers allow.