this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
1558 points (96.8% liked)
Political Memes
5509 readers
2564 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The only people who dont vote for the least bad option are the people who have the luxary not to.
We gotta get us some Approval Voting so people can vote for their true favorite without worrying if it'll accidentally give them a worse election result.
I agree, until that happens though, all of us are required to choose the least bad option.
Not trying to win elections? They are in office right now, having won an election.
What are you even talking about?
Claiming that the democrats are throwing the election to the fascists seems more like an excuse to justify your doing the same thing.
That's a much better point to make than the conspiracism you started with. Why didn't you start with that?
To your response, do you not have local elections that affect your life? Do you think not voting will improve your home?
well if you don't vote now, you no longer have to worry about that, as chances are there will be no more elections that the democrats could even try to win.
What else are they going to do? Just run anyway with no support and torpedo the chances anyone beats the Cheeto king?
Have you considered... Pragmatism?
Yes it 100% fucking is.
Given the choice between ruin the country and the planet in that order and "this candidate is uninspired" or "wow not very good", you have to be a giant entitled sack of shit to make everyone go down the road of ruined country and planet. We would ALL like it to be a better choice, but for christs sake don't be an obstinate fuckstick: it's not getting you a better candidate, it's literally just punishing everyone if you stay home.
Choose between: "you might get to choose a good option again", and "you almost definitely won't". That's what's on the table. You HAVE a preference, but it's not an inspired choice. When it's orange Hitler vs green Hitler, by all means, make your stand. If you are making a stand between orange Hitler and "meh" you deserve a brow beating every hour of every day until November.
For sure, for sure.
Is this ever gonna happen, though? I see it like guaranteed under every single social media post that complains about how we don't have a functional system and while I agree that fptp as a system is bad and horrible, it almost feels like a red herring at this point because it has such a low chance of ever being changed as each party in power, and any party that theoretically ever able to take power, would not stand to benefit from alternative voting. It's like prison reform or free healthcare or making weed legal or any number of other things that has high levels of voter approval but conveniently never happen because it's not in the best interest of the party, except this one is possibly more niche and easier to spread misinformation about.
Like I dunno, what's the M.O. on getting this done? Get it approved in a couple local elections and then just hope it bubbles up from there? I know in oregon there's supposed to be some referendum on it, but I kind of doubt it's going to pass even though I'm gonna vote for it. I seriously don't see it happening, at least on a federal level, without some extremely serious reform that basically completely reworks how the government currently functions.
Ranked choice voting has already been adopted for state elections in multiple states.
You're thinking of a different voting method, but the answer is that you have to be an organizing member of the change you want to see. When Fargo switched to approval it was because a single person decided "fuck it, I'm gonna make this happen." They built a team of volunteers and forced through a referendum, and ran a campaign to advertise and support it.
We're advocating to take away power from those who have it. They will never allow it voluntarily, you have to make it happen.
And are selfish fucks
Edit: blaming others for not showing up to your uninterested non beneficial vote when no one is a hedgemony least of all voters. And refusing to try different tactics cause what if effort has to be applied and it feels pointless or you lose despite trying.
What a nice excuse for losing.
How is that an excuse?
Blaming people for not wanting to pick a lesser bad option. Blaming it on the people who aren't paying as much attention and don't see it as a "good" option to take the time to go fight against a system that doesn't want people to vote at all.
That excuse where you pass the buck to other people despite there being action that can be done on the party side to inspire voters instead of just blame them for shortcomings.
If you play chess but only move a piece every 3rd turn and refuse to accept the opponent is now playing boxing chess instead of playing back or pushing back on the rules you are just making excuses.
I'm not blaming them for not voting, I am pointing out the only people who don't are the ones who have the luxary to not, the ones who believe whatever outcome won't actually affect them.
If you feel my statement applies to you, than perhaps it does, but if complaining that you get called a fair-weathered believer in democracy is your biggest issue, it kind of proves my point, does it not?
You aren't like us.
Yeah people have other reasons to not vote. You are coming from a really ~~different~~ entitled place if you think that's the only reason people don't vote.
You are making broad sweeping assumptions that put blame on others only. That's fucked up. It's not about me or you but everyone in the room.
Give me a reason somebody would choose to not vote against fascism not rooted in luxary.
Ok I do have to ask you know it's luxury right? No judgement but English your first language?
And people the average person that has never left their state and can't afford anything nice other than to sleep. Does not see it that way.
They can be literally working to stay alive. Trying to keep up with costs of existence, and election is not a holiday it's a working day and most employees aren't allowing you off to vote. Yes, there are workarounds and such but they are not easy to circumnavigate and in some states straight up not exist.
You are asking people who see no better existence that will work either way but probably suffer more to battle upstream against lack of polling places, options and even a good choice to go out or you will blame them for not doing enough work.
That is privilege of not knowing a life other than your own.
Its interesting that I talked about people choosing to not vote, and you decided to respond instead with giving examples of people who are being deprived of that ability to vote.
What do you think is the cause of the disconnect between what you and I are talking about?
If your want people to vote for you give them someone they can stomach. Clinton is a piece of shit and Biden is a zionist with dementia.
If somebody prefers the same genocide under Trump over Biden, there is nothing anybody can to say to them that will change their mind.
If somebody prefers a genocide against trans people in America, and the imprisonment and forced labor of poor people in America, over Biden, that is between them and their God.
But please, keep pretending you are fighting for Palestine when you aren't even fighting for your own home.
It's "luxury"
You still understood the point being made, that's incredible!
It is kind of incredible, I normally don't take people seriously who can't spell.
And I don't take people seriously if they are incapable of disagreeing with a point made.
I'm not addressing your point, just your typo. What an odd thing to say.
You joined a conversation to bring nothing of value then? I was right to not take you seriously.
You'll be slightly more effective at sounding persuasive the next time you post something if that post doesn't include obvious spelling errors. The choice to get offended at a simple correction and have this whole exchange was yours.
I'm not offended by somebody bringing nothing to the conversation.
Call it being offended or call it reading into things too much, you seemed pretty determined to interpret my feedback as some kind of disagreement with you when I made no comment of the sort.
Do you want to talk about the topic at hand?