963
The "Don't vote" crowd seems to have an agenda
(slrpnk.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
963 points (95.6% liked)
Just Post
639 readers
246 users here now
Just post something 💛
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
“Yeah may as well go vote Trump then”? Is that the response you want?
Nope.
I'm voting Green. I like my candidates to be able to form coherent sentences.
So you’re throwing away your vote got it. Jfc the Green Party? You need to do some research man.
Totally.
Did you watch the debate, by chance?
Oh ffs please drop the faux polite pretentious bullshit.
Then you are voting for whoever wins.
So you're voting for the end of America and in full support of destroying democracy, all just because you're an ignorantly proud and stubborn dumb fuck.
Nice.
There's something pure about a Green candidate. The fact that they stand no chance of winning is kinda Zen, they'll never stop being a candidate.
It's absolutely ghoulish to throw your vote away on Green when so many stand to suffer when the left splits their votes, but it is pretty Zen if you care more about abstract principles than human suffering.
The reason yall are in this mess is cause you quit caring about abstract principles a long time ago.
You're exactly 100% wrong. The reason we're in this mess is because we let perfect be the enemy of better, and prioritized unactionable abstract principles over tangible policy.
Every third party vote is an admission that the voter prefers pristine, incorruptible (because it will never suffer the test of implementation) fantasy over ugly but effective pragmatism.
No. It's because yall gave the democratic party near ties instead of complete blowouts that would force strategy change. Just one 80-20 election would have changed everything. Republican voters are voting for what they want while you sad pseudo intellectuals support what you don't.
Uhh… you know, usually if someone loses that hard in popular consensus, it’s a pretty widely accepted strategy to get their policies closer to the ones who won.
Like how after three consecutive Republican terms, the left propped up Clinton.
Not how it works long term. You make your party very different than the winner, give an actual choice to be made. When things go to shit under the incumbents, provided your party members can give compelling reasons their ideas and policy will succeed. Or they're just sick of the incumbent and want a change. Within a year there's gonna be a complete blow out of the Liberal party in Canada and replacement by a quite different conservative party. There was a time the Liberal and PC parties leaders and policies were nearly identical, watching those debates was surreal, them angrily saying the same thing back n forth at each other in different words. The PC party no longer exists, has been replaced by an actual conservative party that does quite well, already has had a ten year prime minister despite only being a party since 1990.
80-20 blowout for who?
This sort of thing happens in other countries. The Conservative party in Canada (federally) is not the same party as the previous Conservative party. After Brian Mulroney, the party got blown out so bad it lost official party status, theyd been around since 1850. The current conservative party is the renamed Reform party, founded 1988 or so. Went from a new party to governance in roughly 14 years. Ever now and then, the media still tries to call them "Tories" but they're not, that party died, federally. Still exists in some provinces on a "state" level, Doug Ford is one, premier of Ontario, but works fairly closely with Federal Liberals more than Federal Conservatives.
Of the Democrats. What I'm saying that if just once in the last thirty years, there had been one definitive blow out of that party, all these silly debates of "lesser evil" and "you have to vote" would be moot, as they'd not be running literal garbage anymore.
No argument from me, I think leftists should caucus with neo-libs and stop virtue signaling through non voting or going third party. If we focused on practical actions, Democrats would get that 80-20 blowout and stop ignoring the left. It's the idealistic non-voters preventing that blowout, doing look at me.
No, it's the people voting for the lesser evil for 30 years preventing it. Yall shouldve just all voted republican en masse in 2000, or 2008. One decisive loss. Too late now. Trump is back with a narrow win come November. I don't think Americans understand what a protest vote really is,
That's crackpipe logic. How exactly does that help anyone? That just pushes Dems further towards the Overton-blasted center to try to scoop moderates. This train of thought makes zero sense, and betrays a profound ignorance of the American political landscape.
It's not. These very close races is what did that.
Homie I'm not gonna "Nuh-uh" "Yuh-huh" your unfounded hypotheticals. Your assertions need more substantial justification than your personal vibes, which you have not even begun to provide.
looks at what has happened over decades dude give your head a shake and think. Parties don't change strategy till it quits working. Democrats have never run hard left candidates because yall kept voting for center right candidates.
Read a book, look at some other countries parties, expand your horizons, or just wallow in your own ignorance.
I have, which is why I have based my perspectives on that evidence. You're proposing pure unsubstantiated conjecture. Take your own advice.
Stfu, this is politics not physics, and you obviously haven't considering what you've been saying.
Ah, so you’re a Russian shill then. Voting 3rd party is as effective S not voting. You’re pulling for Trump.
Yeah, that's what the Trumpists say when I tell them I'm voting Green.
You all are the same.
Because you are voting for whoever wins not the green candidate.
You are incorrect.
If the Green candidate wins one single electoral vote I will donate $50 to the charity of your choice. Surely you wouldn’t throw your vote away on a guaranteed loss so what have you got to lose?
Surely this year they’ll actually run in all 50 states.
I think you need to reevaluate what winning means.
How badly do the Dems have to betray you before you're willing to do anything different? Was it not enough to see them shrug their shoulders and the doubling and tripling of the cost of living? What about when Roe was repealed and all they did with their majority was fundraise? Or how about that time when you needed aid to live, or someone you know did, and instead they sent your tax money to fund the genocide of children?
When is it enough?
There is nothing you’re going to say that will convince me I need to hand the keys back to Trump. You’re out of your fucking mind of you think I won’t vote for Biden despite my many issues with him. There is no other choice to be made. I will not consign many of my friends and family to a fate under that administration just because I am a privileged white dude who won’t be touched by it and want to claim faux moral highground.
I voted Green in 2012 by the way so maybe stop and think for a second before you paint me with broad strokes.
So you say.
I voted Biden in 2020. I knew he'd do nothing to help the poor, and he didn't, but I did think he'd do something to stop the rise of fascism.
He failed there too. It should be impossible for Trump to run now, but we elected an impotent piece of shit who was only concerned about getting wealthier and keeping his scumbag son out of prison.
You've seen Biden fail at stopping fascism for four years now. Now Biden can't even form a coherent thought, and needs handlers to make sure he doesn't wander off.
How you manage to convince yourself that a vote for Biden matters in the slightest I do not understand.
It’s incredibly easy because I’m not a selfish piece of shit