get f*ked. George carlin applies.
But what if I don’t want a typical Democrat in office either?
Voting for someone in an election in the US is not an endorsement of that person. You have effectively two choices in many of the elections due to how the system is designed. You vote for the best choice of those two.
Not voting, or voting for a non viable candidate, is a signal that you Do Not Care who is in power.
Voting is a tool, and a civic duty. It’s one of the few ways US society allows direct input from citizens.
If you actually are against facism, don’t use misguided idealism to encourage people to throw away the little political power they have.
It’s one of the few ways US society allows direct input from citizens.
Okay here’s my input: I don’t vote for people who support genocides or block strikes.
If you want my vote work for it.
That’s your prerogative, just recognize that if both options support genocide and block strikes, so you chose to vote for a non viable candidate, or to not vote, you’re effectively disenfranchising yourself.
Your last point is very valid though. The DNC is very good at shooting themselves in the foot because they should know very well that people do get demotivated and just stop voting, yet continue to distance themselves from their voter base, resting on their laurels as “the only sane choice out of the two”.
Supporting local candidates, where your vote also is more heavily weighted, is one of the ways to shift policy - the US govt isnt just the president, it’s representatives and senators and state governments.
I love how the propagandists just keep beating the same drum after the Biden administration has constructed a ceasefire deal which has received unanimous UN Security Council support, and did appear to be moving forward until about 14 hours ago. (Edit: It might still, that’s not over yet.)
It’s almost like if the US just turns its back on Israel, we’d lose our leverage to press a negotiated agreement, which would surely not end with Israel digging in their heels even further. (/s) It’s almost like geopolitics are - wait for it - complicated.
Second Edit: Let’s also not forget that Israel is a nuclear power. What do you think happens when Israel’s back is against the wall, they’re running out of conventional weapons, and Iran and/or other groups decide to take advantage?
But hey, some rando with literally no national attention is polling at 3% in a couple of safely blue states, so definitely don’t vote for GeNoCiDe JoE! /s
Notice how they only ever criticize Biden, and never the Republican party, which fully supports Israeli bullshit?
Republicans don’t pretend to care they wear their bigotry on their shoulder, Democrats are covert in their bigotry and their racism that’s why they are often called out for it
I’ve noticed they will have a little tirade if you ask them what is the logical consistency that they support China despite being “against” Gaza genocide in a way that means they couldn’t possibly vote for harm reduction.
voting is not a harm reduction strategy.
It is if you think women losing access to healthcare or Ukrainians being massacred is harm.
voting isn’t a harm reduction strategy. a harm reduction strategy would be recognizing those bad things are going to happen and helping people mitigate the fallout.
Oh I’ve noticed. The way I see it, there are three options when it comes to the “both sides”/protest vote camp, every single one of them is one of the following:
- a bad faith actor cosplaying as a leftist
- an accelerationist
- a misguided idealist who legitimately believes a non-mainstream candidate could win and/or completely disregards the cold hard fact that FPTP means a third party/abstain vote simply endangers the lesser of two evils candidate while empowering the greater of two evils candidate
No matter what I will never stop throwing shade at that crowd hard and heavy. The first two on that list will never change. I do hope, however, that continued social pressure on that last type of person will make some of them realize that voting is just as much a responsibility as a right, and consider that maybe there’s a good reason their views are so unpopular.
Edited after a good point made by samus12345.
Also I noticed the single downvote on every one of my comments. I know who you are lol. Glad to see I’m still living in your head rent-free.
What about a more nuanced approach, such as both sides are shit. One side is clearly a bit less shit than the other, and so, I’ll vote for that side, out of duress. I don’t want to, I want to vote someone I actually believe in. I can’t say many good things about the party I’m voting for, but I can’t say ANYTHING good about their only viable opponent. And so, in an effort to keep the worst case scenario from happening, I’m going to vote for the only viable option.
This is the core of the “both sides” argument to me. We’re going to vote dem. But we cannot forget that neither of these parties are the ones we want. It’s important to make that known. We are not voting for you because we like you, we’re voting for you because we REALLY DON’T LIKE THE OTHER ONE. As long as we keep talking about that, as long as that very critical voice isn’t silenced, we can slowly move the needle, until eventually one election we’ll actually be able to elect the one we want.
As long as we keep talking about that, as long as that very critical voice isn’t silenced, we can slowly move the needle, until eventually one election we’ll actually be able to elect the one we want.
Which is why centrists are so keen on silence from their critics to the left. And only ever the left.
The neolib centrists need the right to guarantee their power. The left is the only group threatening that.
I think there are also misguided idealists who think it’s more important that they feel good about not voting for the “genocide” guy while absolving themselves of any blame should his opponent win. They know a third party candidate can’t win, but that’s not as important as them being “right”.
Yeah that’s a good point.
NO, These are all bad points! With the regularity of these posts, I am starting to suspect you are all bots.
If you want Biden to stop doing something, like supporting a genocide, you don’t just say “please stop, but I’ll support you no matter what”. You tell him, pollsters and everyone who asks that you definitely won’t be voting for someone who supports x. When it’s time to vote, it might be time to vote for the least evil choice.
I’ve been pointing that out all the time. They’re never on any posts critical of Trump. Only anything about Biden. It it’s critical, they’re there to agree- if it’s positive, they’re there to shit all over it.
Also notice how there’s never any talk about what they wish Biden was doing instead.
I wish Biden would stop sending weapons to Israel.
That is why every time someone brings up Genocide Joe, I bring up Turbo Genocide Donny
literally whataboutism
It’s not, though. Nice try.
saying something doesnt make it true.
I don’t really disagree with you, but I do unironically think we should have invaded Israel months ago.
It was unanimous because Russia abstained. Putin loves the refocus on Israel while he continues his genocidal war crimes in Ukraine under the US media radar.
For those who haven’t been keeping up, Russia has abducted 700,000 Ukrainian children to be raised as Russians in foster homes since the war began. It’s genocide on a scale 20 times larger than Palestine, and isn’t making national headlines in the US due to the focus on Israel.
The US formally declared this as genocide in the House of Representatives with a 390-9 vote in April by invoking the UN Genocide Convention, and the ICC has issued arrest warrants. Did you see any headlines about that?
Russia is also the largest investor in the sanctioned Iran economy that is directly funding Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.
I’m legit not trying to troll here, but I vaguely recall a news story last month where Biden said it’s not genocide. I forget if he was referring to Ukraine or Gaza, but either way I was kind of dumbfounded like wtf.
The intent of someone’s speech, or even its outcome, does not make it incorrect. A culture of hiding from reality thinking in doing so it will give us certain outcomes is what this practice will create.
Saying something that is technically correct is still wrong if it is done so in a way that causes people to be hurt unnecessarily.
Edit: Strawmaning me while talking about how truth is important is the biggest irony.
So we need to shut people up who’s information we percieve will give us outcomes we don’t like? I guess the nazis gave that ago and if it worked for them I guess we should do the same. But if we have decided to live in a post-truth world of our own creation, how are we going to make an honest assessment of what true information is actually harmful. We could just be lying to ourselves about that too.
Here is a good rule of thumb. Never lie to yourself. Never hide from information. Anything else is just developing anti-intellectual habits.
It kind of reminds me of a quote from And Justice For All from Metallica. “Seeking no truth. Winning is all. Fighting so grim so true so real.”
When both sides frame what is true or false by what will help them win that that’s how you end up with a post truth world. Of course that can be easily corrected by lying to ourselves again and claiming that only one side has blame. There is nothing a lie to ourselves can’t fix.
But both sides ARE bad. Still, go vote.
It’s ok to be critical of our politicians regardless of which “team” they’re on. We should all be holding their feet to the fire every day.
