Skip Navigation
Show Context
272 comments

  • As I said in another thread elsewhere on the same subject a while back:

    The Protest Vote Paradox™

    As we’ve all read time after time in the months leading up to the election, the Protest Vote™ simply states states that:

    “We refuse to vote against a Tyrant-Felon in order to send a clear and concise message that we will not stand for [roll D20 for random popular single issue], and alongside our refusal to vote against the Tyrant-Felon, is a collective hope that the aforementioned clear and concise message- if ignored, is received under unmitigated duress!”

    -Cut to Tyrant-Felon’s win, and the aftermath:

    Whether observed or not, the behavior of the Protest Voter will attempt to achieve the following:
    \ • Obnoxiously tell everyone: “We told you all what would happen!”
    \ • Onnoxiously claim there is: “No way protest voting could cause trump to win.”

    As both of these options cannot simultaneously be true in the same reality without breaking important time-space things that we would probably prefer not be broken- we are left with only a few logical conclusions:

    1. Protest voters have no idea what they’re talking about.
    2. Protest voters don’t understand the concept of hypocrisy.
    3. Protest voters have somehow learned to defy reality and become exempt from the concept of paradoxes, thus creating an entirely new study of theoretical science, known as Bulletproof Symbiotic Hypocrisy Theory, or BLsHt.

    Something, something, something Ted Talk.

    • This is just a long-winded, inverted version of the aphorism about liberals' paradoxical view of progressives; they're a small, niche group, and the Democrats shouldn't try to appease them because they'll just alienate mainstream voters by courting this insignificant block of voters. However, progressives are somehow also a large, powerful cabal that can be blamed for every major Democratic loss.

      • Name one moment in history where abstaining from the bare mimimim to avoid catastrophic consequences results in a net gain.

        I ask this because you’re trying to make this party thing where I’d title paring attention and reading for context- you’ll see clearly that It’s an ACTION thing.

        Interesting that you went to progressives so quickly though. Especially since I never even mentioned the word.

        That says a LOT.

        • Name one moment in history where abstaining from the bare mimimim to avoid catastrophic consequences results in a net gain.

          Name a point where I said abstaining from voting was good. My point wasn't that protest voting was good. It was that you could make the exact opposite point (with a lot fewer words) using your exact logic. Which means it's not a good point.

          I ask this because you’re trying to make this party thing where I’d title paring [you mean "try paying," maybe?] attention and reading for context- you’ll see clearly that It’s an ACTION thing.

          Again, fine, let's make it an action thing. If the protest voters were so necessary to Harris' election, why didn't she take any actions to win them over? That was incredibly irresponsible of her.

          Are you beginning to see how all your arguments can be flipped just as easily to place the blame on the candidate instead of the voters? Do you think maybe that's because, even though you've convinced yourself that what your saying is cold, hard logic, your actually just screaming your opinions at people?

          For the record, I voted for Harris out of harm reduction, and I wish she'd won. However, I believe that it is a candidates job to win an election, not the voters job to get them elected. If there was a significant contingent of voters withholding their vote, I think that candidate must have been doing a shitty job.

          Interesting that you went to progressives so quickly though. Especially since I never even mentioned the word.

          That says a LOT.

          Yeah, it says I saw more than 2 minutes of political coverage in 2024, so I knew that Harris wasn't getting criticism for being too progressive. Grow up.

            • Wow. So witty and insightful. And it only took you 24 hours to come up with it. Amazing.

                  • Isn’t there some other comment out there that also has nothing at all to do with you that you can beat to death? Or is it too much effort for you to keep getting on and off of that high horse of yours??

                    • LOL, you waited a full 24 hours to reply, "Yawn." If you weren't so thirsty for getting the last word in, we wouldn't be talking right now.

                      • He has no arguments and is currently aruging with me that replying to me, saying "you" to me, isn't directed at me.

                      • Contrary to the world that trolls live in, other people outside of their little bubble have lives.

                        This means that unlike them, I’m too busy doing shit to be wasting the time it takes to impatiently wait for someone to respond to me so that I can seethe some nonsense in their direction in order to feel validated.

      • The enemy is both weak and strong. The progressives are too small to pay attention to their requests, but cost millions of votes.

        • Yup, it was not lost on me that this was essentially Eco's 8th feature of fascism. Not that the Democrats are fascists; they don't match most of the other features, especially 6 (I don't think it'd ever occurred to them to appeal to anyone's frustrations), but it seems liberals have at least borrowed this rhetorical attack to punch left.

          • I mean when you consider how much they benefit from Trump and his economic polices, it makes sense why they do. Not to meantion how many are some of the most bigoted people until its profitable enough. Scatch a liberal...

            • I mean, I tend to believe that they're actually just a truly incompetent, cowardly bunch that are too afraid to fight and too stupid to realize that a party can't simultaneously serve a working-class base and billionaire donors. That being said, I've been much more open to the controlled opposition theory since Schumer caved on the budget for no conceivable reason.

        • Oh progressives are definitely weak. But numerous. A simple bare minimum vote would have stopped ALL of this from happening.

          But you couldn’t even do that. So yeah.. weak as fuck if you ask me.

          • But you couldn’t even do that. So yeah… weak as fuck if you ask me.

            • Then you’re clearly not who I’m talking about. I guess it’s either that simple reading comprehension is an issue for you, or you have a white knight complex.

              One of the two- but my point remains untouched regardless.

              • But you couldn’t even do that.

                Then you’re clearly not who I’m talking about.

                You used you directed at me, replying to me, twice. That's not confusing, that's you deflecting because you have no argument.

                • I used “you” directed at you prior to knowing you voted. Did you not take this into consideration, or do you just have a problem with placing things in chronological order? Or is it that you did this intentionally?

                  Because- it does come off as you white knighting yourself into a discussion that wasn’t even directed at you with the intent to trap me into some little “gotcha” moment.

                  I’ve seen you pull this shit before. It doesn’t work like you think it does.

                  • Because it doesn’t come off as you white knighting yourself into a discussion that wasn’t even directed at you with the intent to trap me into some little “gotcha” moment.

                    You literally replied to me saying that.

                    It's a public fourm, anyone who comments is being added to the conversation. Jesus Christ.

                    I’ve seen you pull this shit before. It doesn’t work like you think it does.

                    So is this you at me or a nebulous other meaning "you" that only Rheori has in your personal dictionary?

                    • LOL!

                      Wow. You aren’t good at this. Check where in the discussion you decided to reveal that you voted. Was it before, or after that?

                      • "You don't vote."

                        "Here's proof I voted and that I'm registered to vote for the least bad option."

                        "Why would you reply that in a public conversation to me? Clearly everyone should ignore the words have meaning and public forums have people able to comment on them."

      • Progressives could be the largest voting block and most still wouldn't come out to vote. Why bother trying to gain the vote of a group that has historically low voting. There's a reason Bernie didn't win the primary despite massive grass roots movements.

272 comments