Political Memes

As non-american I agree you guys should definitely vote Harris, despite Dems being terrible Trump would absolutely be worse on each topic Dems are bad. That being said, rethoric of this post is straight up facist. Using threats of personal consequences for "wrongly" exercising ones right to vote is wild.

I'll vote Dem, but I am ashamed beyond measure of the Dem party. Despite the public doing all they can to stop Trump, the actual candidates running against Trump are sitting on their asses and refusing to take serious action. This "Blue Wave" is not approval FOR Harris-Walz, but rather DISAPPROVAL for Trump. Dems are ultimately more responsible for fascism in the U.S. than their voters.

All in all, the entire United States Government is at fault. This is just one reason why I want an independent Cascadia.

Unrelated to the message - that's a bad use of the meme, doesn't fit at all.

Interesting how everyone blames the people and not the corporate party that doesn't represent the people. If Democrats are struggling to get leftist votes then I suggest they do things that will make leftists vote for them.

Dumbest hot takes on the Internet be like:

This is the most horrible way to convince people to vote with you. I, personally, would tell you to go fuck yourself if I weren't already voting for Harris. Please stop that. You need to convince people why they should vote for your candidate by showing them the difference, not this "or else" bullshit. and if they are not convinced, you let it go. People are free with their damn votes.

Abstaining or voting third party is an exercise of choice. If you want your candidate to win, vote for them, as we all should do.

Vote for the candidate you support. If you don't support any, you can choose not to vote.

I love how in the US getting Hitler elected would just be a matter of having a total of one worse person run for president. Then the Dems would be selling him as the saviour of the working class and minorities.

"What? Third party? You might as well be voting for Hitl... Wait"

If Kamala looses: All of the blame gets put on third party voters for not "voting hard enough" (especially if she wins the popular vote and looses in the electoral college). Absolutely none of the blame gets put on her supporting genocide, her vague positions, the fact that her campaign page contains very little about her views or policies, her support of fracking, her general support of oil and gas, her support of genocide, and her support for imperialism. Of course that could all be incorrect but Kamala refuses to dispute those claims.

If Kamala wins: She will do basically nothing, compromise with the Republicans, allow states to ban abortion, allow states to restrict womens rights, allow states to ban trans healthcare, generally allow the far-right to do whatever they want, and continue to fund genocide. When all of this happens third party voters will be blamed for "not voting hard enough" and Kamala will take no responsibility whatever.

Regardless of outcome the next election: The Democrat candidate will be even more right wing because leftists didn't "vote hard enough", they will be even more bipartisan and even less progressive. All of the Liberals will demand everyone vote for this candidate yet the candidate will make no attempt to implement any popular policy. Americas rapid decline into fascism will continue and nobody in power will do anything to stop it.

Once again I ask the question what harm is reduced by "harm reduction"? If anything a more accurate term would be slowing down fascism. But what Liberals refuse to answer is what practical purpose is there to slowing down fascism? Congratulations you get maybe a few extra decades from fascism but then what? Clearly Liberals are buying their time but what exactly are they buying their time for? What is the grand strategy? We've already seen the Democratic Candidate clearly use fascist rhetoric, how long is it until these compromise candidates compromise the rights of minorities? How long until they compromise on Fascism? I would vote "harm reduction" if I knew that at the end of it all theres a plan to eventually fight back but I dont think there is one. I think the Liberal plan is to keep doing "harm reduction" indefinitely, however even if you're a hardcore liberal you have to acknowledge thats a fundamentally unsustainable plan.

TLDR: The only people responsible for Democrats not getting elected are the Democrats themselves and their corporate sponsors who hold them back from instituting popular policy, I get its easy to pin the blame on some group but fundamentally thats little more then a logical fallacy.

The old "if you're not with us then you're against us" position. How about the dems adopt policies that inspire people to vote for them.

This is exactly why we need ranked choice voting.

Winner takes all essentially demoralizes and alienates voters and drives people who agree with each other to fight because they're trapped in a broken system.

So instead of fighting the system, it's easier to just blame other people and alienate more of them against your cause, shooting yourself in the foot with ignorance. It's kind of disgusting.

This is why the American system is weird af.

No, the blame lies squarely on the DNC for deliberately ignoring the loud and clear message from third party voters that genocide is a red line in the sand. The blame further lies with the liberals supporting a decaying Empire and never lifting a finger to help anyone, just showing up at the ballot box every 4 years while the US commits manmade horrors beyond comprehension.

Join an org, like the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) or Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), this mess can't be undone by supporting the Dems harder.

Abstaining or voting 3rd party to "make Dems listen" doesn't work. If anyone thinks they can play Mexican Standoff, you can't because the Dems have an out: the center voter. Every time they lose, they go to the center to find voters.

And remember they need all 3 of presidency, house of representatives, and senate to pass pretty much anything. If they don't have all 3 they will go to the center to find voters. Some people call this rachet effect, but really they're looking for voters. Want them to stop 'racheting'? Then give them consistent and overwhelming victories.

Not an American, but yikes does this have "Vote with us... Or else!" vibes.

That's not to say I support Trump, but I personally don't think this is the way to convince fence-sitters at all.

If you have a problem with this line of reasoning then your actual problem is first past the post voting.

Abolish first past the post voting and you can finally actually vote for things you like, rather than against things you hate, but we're stuck in first past the post voting, so, you must vote strategically.

we will have a long memory

Could there be a single more empty threat from a burger-munching American? The whole world will laugh at you for thousands of years until you recede into myths about a people so callous and stupid it beggars belief.

Smug liberals will be condescending regardless of who wins any election.

If you're voting for the lesser evil, you are still voting to reduce harm.

Remember that. You can't save everyone, but if you save NO ONE that's on you.

I get this, but playing it safe is going nowhere. Trump was elected not because he was a decent candidate, but because he was a gamble that paid off in spades.

I am a libertarian minarchist. Look it up before you form ideas.

I don't like Harris but I'd much rather have her over Trump. And that's how I'll vote.

I strongly recommend everyone should research your local elections and vote for candidates that best represent your views and mindsets on a local level. The FPtP system makes third parties mostly unviable in influencing national policy.