It helps if your two choices for president aren’t Father Time and the Orange Rage Demon.
Father Time and the Orange Rage Demon sounds like a great B-movie, though 😄
Start casting. Troma films will have a script by this afternoon.
You dropped your p
My father eloquently described it as a battle between “a zombie who doesn’t know what room he’s in and the reincarnation of Zhirinovsky”.
Don’t believe the hype, FUCKING VOTE!!! Volunteer to give rides for those that can’t make it to vote otherwise.
Believe this hype; You can make a difference.
I lived in Florida in 2000. If I had recruited a couple friends, and I knew people who would have been down, and we drove vans back and forth to the polls all day…
Awesome job!
This is what I did for the 2018 midterms. Some of my friends didn’t really get why I was so adamant, but I dropped their assess at the church and let them vote. It do work.
make it a landslide
That’s the only way that democracy is not in imminent danger.
If fascism is only beaten by the same tight margin that more sane and humane (but still neurotic and cruel) conservatism was for the second presidential election in a row, that means that the second largest party in the richest and most powerful country in the world being a fascist party has become the norm rather than just an unusually persistent aberration.
Man I hope so. I remember thinking the Republican party was dead and would have to move towards the center back in 2008 when Obama was elected and had a super majority in the Senate. But rather than pivot, the GOP dug their heels in, obstructed as much as possible, and went even further to the right.
It became the norm in Vietnam and was confirmed under Reagan. The rest was just waiting for the WW2 survivors who remembered the dogwhistles to die.
This is a problem, but another problem is that today’s politicians have learned to do fascist stuff without a fascist party. Accountability and transparency.
I hope she picks a good VP and not wet blanket like democratic establishment would want.
It appears she’s looking at people who could swing a purple state, so that probably won’t excite anyone hoping for a progressive ticket.
Almost as if you need to win before you can do anything at all.
Like it or not, the reality of the electoral college.
You can win in multiple different ways, not simply picking a purple state moderate. The whole reason there’s a story about “more youth voters like Harris” is because more youth voters could help her win. And the youths notably live in every swing state.
The youth are not historically known for showing up to vote.
That’s what the media says, but kids these days are showing up more than their parents were at their age.
I just hope it’s enough.
There’s an increasing trend, though. The last couple elections have been pivotal. Sucks we didn’t turn out in 2016, but we’re learning. Young women telling young men you ain’t getting laid while abortion is illegal. LGBT+ saying you won’t take our healthcare. New parents saying we need universal childcare, college students saying debt forgiveness is essential.
I don’t know if it’ll be enough, but I know I’ll never miss an election again, at least
“The youth are notorious for low turnout. That’s why Kamala Harris (and possibly her VP) increasing their turnout isn’t important.”
More like being popular with a demographic who doesn’t show up to vote hasn’t historically been a good way to win elections.
If they actually show up this time, awesome.
Biden literally won in 2020 with strong youth turnout while Clinton lost in 2016 with a weak one. Historically, youth turnout is extremely important for Democrats, and people continually dismissing their value will only harm that effort.
https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/half-youth-voted-2020-11-point-increase-2016
Smoke and mirrors. Right now we need the clearest path to victory, not a path. The Right has their strengths and one of them is throwing wrenches into things. Can’t throw a stick into my spokes if my bike doesn’t have any.
And youths are also notorious for not turning out too.
Tim waltz seems like a good pick. Seems to have a bit of the Bernie, no-bullshit, authenticity that plays well with independents.
My preference is as follows:
-
Mark Kelly - Pros: Astronaut/Navy Combat Pilot; will pull veterans and people voting for novelty. He generally has moderate policies and won a national race in a battleground state. His Senate seat is safe because Gov. Hobbs (D) can appoint another Dem to fill it.
-
Pete Buttigieg - Also a veteran, oxford/rhodes scholar; one of the best debaters in D.C. Coming from a Cabinet position so does not risk any loss.
-
Whitmer - Contrary to some, I like the idea of doubling-down on women in this post-Roe, MeToo era. She brings a lot to the table, but she’s no longer in the running as she (a) both publicly and privately declined, and (b) she like Shapiro would be better off carrying their respective battleground states without either state feeling like they’ve been abandoned.
-
Jon Stewart - He won’t do it, but hear me out: Viral excitement; strong debater; cross-over appeal to veterans & first-responders thanks to his decades of helping them. The Zelenskyy of our nation. Counter lies and half-truths with satire and mockery.
I DON’T think Harris should pick Cooper, Beshear, Walz, or especially Newsom.
Mark Kelly was one of the people giving standing ovations and clapping away at Bibi’s speech to Congress. That really made my stomach churn.
… Ah yeah, that is kind of a bummer.
I like your list. I think Mark Kelly is the obvious best choice and I hope she lands on him. Novelty factor is strong, it would be foolish to underestimate the astronaut card. He balances the ticket well and might also help win Arizona.
Jon Stewart would be absolutely hilarious, though. If nothing else than for a potential VP debate with alleged couch fornicator Vance.
Damn I really want Jon Stewart to get into actual political office. He’s probably the most trusted voice out of anyone for my generation.
Bernie Stewart 2028! Or Stewart Colbert 2028?
AOC Stewart 2028
John Stewart would be history’s ultimate press secretary.
Mark Kelly looks good on paper, but his pro genocide and lukewarm stance towards unions is a wet blanket. Do people find him genuine?
People, no. Democratic bots, yes.
lol I love that I have both these accounts tagged as suss tankies.
Lol, I’m an anarchist.
Love when y’all tell on yourselves though.
Ah yes, how reassuring. Thanks, I’ll update my tag.
Thank you for not including Shapiro and not risking a swing state getting a Republican governor
That guy has such an unfortunate name. I hear Shapiro and I immediately think of the right-wing pseudo-intellectual professional troll Ben Shapiro and wonder why the fuck would anybody want him on a ticket. I’m learning to not have such a visceral reaction to the name, but association is a bitch to overcome.
Mark Kelly is a great choice. Kamala needs someone who can win over the vets. Apparently Captain Bone Spurs still holds some sway with them.
Especially when he’s like the exact opposite of Benny boy. Maybe it would work in the opposite direction, though: People think it’s actually Ben Shapiro and vote for Harris because they think there’s some conspiracy to take over the presidency.
Honestly, I’d change my name.
Veterans are now a critical voting block for the Democrats? Not “young people” or “Hispanic voters”? Veterans?
I wouldn’t call them critical, no, but every vote matters. Especially in a demographic like former armed services. They represent a collective of voters across all 50 states and their voting trends are pretty unified in solidarity for candidates that recognize them and cater to their issues and interests. Sure, some are party hardliners and will vote D or R no matter what, that’s true of any homogeneous group of people.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/118684/military-veterans-ages-tend-republican.aspx
Every vote matters, but every voting bloc isn’t equally valuable to pursue. Whenever I’ve been on a military base with a TV running, there’s a 90%+ chance it’s playing Fox News. Trump called John McCain a loser for being captured and they voted for him anyway. If a veteran VP was going to turn the tides, there are already dynamics that would have a much greater impact.
Yeah I like all the battleground state governors, but I think for that reason, and for letting them continue to successfully run these states helps carry them. You also don’t want state residents to feel abandoned or used with them leaving for VP. They’re instrumental right where they are.
Mark Kelly is my favorite option too. If nothing else he is cool as hell and has that “great to have a beer with” quality. He’s also very white. None of these things should matter but he’s a great balancing choice for her presidency.
This is a good list.
-
Walz is a great governor. I don’t want to lose him as one, but I do think he’d be a great pick
We get Peggy Flanagan as a replacement. She rocks. Bonus points for getting a native American female governor as well
I think Tim Waltz would be a great pick. Full authenticity. A no nonsense and non flashy Midwestern white democrat from a rural district who lead a surprisingly progressive agenda. Count me in
Timmy has been a great governor for our state.
So great
That’s actually why I don’t want her to pick him. He’s been a great governor and I want him to stay here.
Good.
Oh, some good news. Finally!
Kinda. In the two-party first-past-the-post system, they were still not convinced they should vote which could actively make their futures worse. Knowing why that alone wasn’t a motivating factor (unless this is all people who want to vote AGAINST Harris (which I highly doubt)) is definitely worth exploring.
That’s true, but it doesn’t stop this from being good news
She should just pick Clooney as VP so we can be done with it already.
Keanu Reeves
ACT 1, The GOP kills his puppy…
It would be hard to attack Keanu without looking like a douche
That would just be unfair to the Republicans, so definitely the best choice
Amal Clooney, preferably. That lady is a major badass.
Though I think putting two women on the ticket would be a death knell unfortunately.
Mostly joking, I don’t think she’s an American citizen.
Though I think putting two women on the ticket would be a death knell unfortunately.
doubtful; harris/whitmer would be great; but whitmer has already ruled it out
Shocker, few can relate to an octogenarian running for office.
deleted by creator
They can “meh” all they want, no vote—no voice.
It’s that smug attitude that got us Biden. Democrats win or lose by convincing the meh people that it’s worth their time to go vote. If they don’t go vote trump wins so they literally can’t go meh all they want if Democrats wants to win.
Pretty sure I just said they need to vote.
Would you like to break down your comment and point to the part where you said that?
No vote, no voice.
If you want to have your voice heard—which they do—you have to vote. Even if the options aren’t amazing, you have to help guide it in the right direction. They right wing loves it when their competition is “meh”
In case you missed it, the “You will take what we give you and pretend to like it” approach failed.
Well, Biden got elected so I’ll say it didn’t fail. What we need is a better voting system, and until that happens we have to understand that’s the world we live in, and work with what we’ve got.
This election cycle has been like “no, you’re not getting a real primary, vote as your told and like it.”
Until it became so clear that it was a losing strategy that even Democrats abandoned it.
“No vote no voice” implies that voters have a voice. Until Biden stepped down, they functionally didn’t.
You may have liked him, but I’m glad we have someone who stands a chance of winning instead of the guy party leadership wants.
Did anyone else credible run in this primary or submit their names to the convention for nomination? Why do you think no one submitted their names?
And yet, we were on track to losing until the party listened to people who were upset at the shit choice we had before us.
I’m glad your shit candidate stepped down and we got a better one.
They need to be more invested in their primary, mid-term, and local elections. That is the time for people to decide for better than “meh” choices. Too many people sit out of such a large part of the process. That said, I am also for throwing out first past the post too.
People of all ages have a lot to do and very little extra time to devote to things like understanding political issues or learning about candidates. What America needs is “democracy day off.”
I think every Monday should be a demoncracy day: like the Sabbath, we keep it holy and do no work that makes a person or company money. Instead, everyone is required to pick one of a few available activities: meeting with local councils to discuss issues and vote, reading up on laws and candidates and issues (hopefully to report to a council about it), or civic improvements like park cleanup or elder care. This isn’t comprehensive, just trying to give the flavor of it.
Maybe if Americans finally learned how to do actual freedom we could let people choose their democracy day to spread it out through the week. The core idea is simply that we need to mandate and regulate that so many hours per person per month will be devoted exclusively to the project of maintaining our society.
Hell, once a month alone would be super helpful too. Curious about how many people would take advantage though. I get that many people have busy lives, but if we could even get the people who only vote every 4 years to vote in every election possible, that would be a huge uptick in participation.
I could compromise and start with 1 day a month. And yeah, obviously election days are extra democracy days that everyone gets paid time off from work to vote.
What kind of unserious country would force people to work slave’s hours to make ends meet and would then hold elections during the work week at times where millions of poor laborers would be unable to vote? That sounds like a fake democracy.
You’re not going to win by saying “the actual election is your obligation”, if you had policies you were interested in you should have tried to get a different person in the primary. The whole reason candidates change after the primary (often diving to the center) is to get votes from people that didn’t vote for them. That applies to primary voters for other candidates and people who don’t make politics a priority in their lives.
The meh people are the ones doing this.
I wonder if I can find the same kind of article about younger voters and conservative politicians on Twitter or Facebook
Yes you can
In other news: 1 + 1 still equals 2.
Removed by mod
Removed, civility.
If you felt “meh” about doing the utmost to avoid Trump, you might just be an idiot,
Who could’ve told
If they want to have a future, a lot more of them should get to feeling zero “meh” about voting for not donnie.
They just showed the party what to do in order to get them excited to vote.
The party listened to their concerns, and they fell in line instantly. All the party has to do to get voter enthusiasm is to listen to the voters.
You don’t get enthusiasm by ignoring people’s concerns. That’s how you get apathy and resentment.
I mean, political donors pulling support of Biden after the debate did grease the wheels for that transition.
Does a word that is recognized in the dictionary need quotes?
Maybe it indicates that that is what those people would have said about voting previously
Does a question about whether or not a word recognized by the dictionary needs quotes need to be asked?
