Voting is changing the Oil to keep the engine running
Voting is changing the Oil to keep the engine running
While Education and Organizing is building the parts for a new engine the rest of the year.
您正在查看单个对话串。
509 评论
-
Our "lesser evil" option keeps moving further and further to the right each cycle.
-
Because America isnt voting for change. They're just moving towards fascism, either slow or fast.
If you tell anyone to change course and vote third party they get really mad at you here on Lemmy.
-
And Mutton Chops down in Argentina has the audacity to cry at the WEF in Davos saying that socialism is threatening the West.....
But yes. If you want Trump to win, by all means, vote 3rd party.
-
-
Well I don't care about that.
Hey everyone stop voting for conservatives. No matter what party they align with they are beholden to the same ruling class, not the working class. Vote third party. Vote for Claudia & Karina 2024.
-
-
Hence educating and organizing the other 364 days of the year.
-
I think a better strategy is to run for office rather than vote. Because voting doesn't do much if the available candidates are turncoats or shills. It should be educate, organize, and run. Otherwise we get more Scinemas running for raising minimum wage and not at all voting for it when it counts most.
-
Ah a slogan. Truly helpful.
-
Slogans are helpful yes.
-
Thoughts and prayers to you then.
-
More of an action and policy removed
-
-
-
-
-
I'd say the people who voted third party are the ones who fucked around in 2016, and ALL of us found out because of it.
-
Dictatorship it is then. 3rd parties don't stand a snowballs chance in hell right now.
Canvassing and outreach happen first, then you can vote for that party. Right now you're literally handing Republicans the win if you vote 3rd party this election.
-
3rd parties don’t stand a snowballs chance in hell right now.
Which is a problem that needs to be addressed.
This voting the lesser of two evils won't stop the republicans from getting further to the right, and the democrats to do the same to try and capture more moderate right wing votes.
How many elections will be "don't vote 3rd party vote us or else the other guys will win"? How many problems will be addressed that way? How bad are you going to let these systemic issues plague the US before realizing that "hey maybe this is damaging our democracy and leading down a path towards autocracy"?
Cause the main way for autocrats to rule is for people to stop engaging in politics as they don't feel represented, and that's something you're seeing happening in the US due, also, to a lack of 3rd parties. This creates apathy which autocrats thrive on. And you'll be whining about people not voting your lesser evil all the way to fascism because you were too shortsighted in winning X election to see the issue at large.
-
3rd parties don't stand a snowballs chance in hell
Because of you and other useful idiots spreading RNC/DNC propaganda.
-
-
Duverger's law is RNC/DNC propaganda?
-
No. Duverger's law describes the outcome of you accepting and spreading DNC/RNC propaganda
-
-
-
On today's episode of "leftists are simultaneously both stupid babies who exist solely for us to mock AND single handedly responsible for every Republican win."
If democrats ran Bernie who won the primary, instead of telling him to eat a dick then going to court to tell their voters to eat a dick - THEN all those things in op.
2016 we watched that, in 2024 we're watching Biden sidestep congress to fund genocide. Democrats aren't any less fascist, they just put a little rainbow pin on their cap and you call them the good guys.
-
-
-
Dems deciding to fuck around and find out…
Yeah! Sending minorities to concentration camps will really show those Dems!
-
Punch up not down. Democrat leadership decides on policy, Democrat leadership decides on election strategy.
"I won't vote for leader that heinous thing x" is a reasonable position to have. "I will vote for leader that doesn't heinous thing y" is also a reasonable position to have.
The compromise isn't to get people to vote for x, it's for the leader to stop x. Particularly, if the opponent would do x but worse. That only shows, to the Democrat leader, y is a resonable cost for x.
-
"I won't vote for leader that does heinous long-standing thing that most of the electorate agrees with even though the only other viable candidate wants to pursue an even worse policy on the issue!" is just "I support heinous long-standing thing getting worse!" with extra steps.
-
Except those that don't vote to support the thing can't be said to support the thing at all. "Those that didn't support the thing are the same as those that wanted it more" is self-serving at best and intellectually dishonest at worst. By the same token I wouldn't suggest anyone that votes Democrat supports anything the Democrats do because that would also be self serving at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.
I get you've had these arguments before, I've certainly read them, and I'm not trying to rehash them.
The point that I'm tying, and failing I suppose, to make is the frustration/anger is misplaced.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
509 评论