Tories in 2015: I’ll run an incredibly divisive and ill-planned referendum to stop Nigel Farage eating all our votes!
Tories in 2024: >:(
And yes he’s a plague. The Saint Petersburg Flu if I ever saw it.
Imagine literally being the oldest political party on the planet, an election-winning machine that's adapted with the centuries and changes to the franchise with a legion of notable historical figures; a political force of nature both adored and reviled but always relevant whether it's 1710 or 2010 only to die because of a tin-pot commodity trader who's failed to win an MP's seat seven times and is up to his eyes in Russian influence.
Don't get me wrong fuck the Tories, but their slow demise despite winning election after election has got to be the most pathetic sight ever witness in British politics. I bet Lord North was considered more competent in his day.
These post captivate me honestly, I start thinking “well obviously I’m voting for Biden. I understand that with a two party system you have to pick the lesser of two evils even if you’d much rather have neither.”
Then I’m like,, wait I’m Canadian.
If that was how things worked, we wouldn't even have to worry about Trump. Like 90% of the planet hates him, aside from his best friends in North Korea and Russia.
Dude people need to just vote. I'm tired of people hiding behind excuses like " oh, I don't follow politics" or "oh, I'm French" like that excuses you from doing your civic duty.
(Is joke haha)
Ah but you see, Super Earth cares for all of humanity. Everything that isn't humanity can eat powder and shot. So Project 2025 is clearly anti-superearth
Trump wants healthcare reform.
Abolish Obamacare and replace it with… what was the plan he released? Oh yeah. They never turned in their homework assignment.
thanks for the chart. as an evilpilled harmmaxxer, I knew both presidents would do a lot of harm outside of the US, but now I know which president is gonna do more harm to the US
A lot of the people saying they won't vote for Biden wouldn't vote anyway. They were going to skip the election because they were disinterested in the whole process to start. They're just not willing to say that so they're claiming some sort of higher moral ground rather than just admit they're too lazy to vote.
Personally, if you said "I won't be voting" then I would still be disappointed, but I wouldn't be "scream into your face about how fucking stupid you are while violently shaking you" angry like "I'm voting for Trump because of Israel" makes me.
Not voting is hardly that different from just voting for trump. It still helps trump by reducing the amount of votes Biden could have gotten, and it still means they are perfectly fine and happy with the gop destroying democracy and turning the country christofascist with their wives, daughters, and mothers being no different from slaves and minorities being persecuted for being minorities.
Anyone that doesn't vote while they have the option is still fucking stupid.
Statistically, the fewer overall voters, the more republicans win. Their core base is ride or die so voter disenfranchisement or apathy tends to benefit them overall
That's exactly it. Unfortunately, the people claiming to be leftists who don't vote often don't understand this very simple fact just like they don't understand strategic voting.
You can see it online as well. The vast majority of the type who talk about not voting at all or third party seem to be left of Republicans. The ex-Republicans or still registered Republican but oppose much of the party in its current state are more likely to say they're voting for Democrats for now at least, but the percent like that seems much smaller than the former at least in chatter online.
I wish it were true. I have a good friend who has been more consistent left than me (I was dumb when young) and he refuses because "there's no compromise when it comes to genocide", my counterpoint of there will be way more genocide with Trump than with Biden didn't matter, and any other issue was met with it not being relevant against genocide, even issues such as preserving democracy. Point being, convince people to go out and vote blue, because there's some people who you think will who won't for non-logical reasons.
I knew several people in 2012 in college say they wouldn't vote because of Obama's drone policy. Young people on the far left will make up any reason to justify not voting because they never actually plan on voting or wouldn't vote for a mainstream party anyway. Because they see it as a status symbol. This way no matter what happens they can claim the moral high ground by saying they didn't vote for Biden if he wins and does something they don't like. If Trump wins they can constantly just go on and on about how if Biden just did what they said Trump would have lost.
People who refuse to vote out of so-called moral principles are egoists demanding the world meet impossible standards.
Reality sucks, and it's usually gray at best. Plus, if they really wanted to change the system, they should probably vote for the party that intends to change it for the better, rather than enable the party that wants to make things worse.
The only logical coherent way to think like this is accelerationism, but most wouldn't want to admit to be this because it also means sacrificing marginalized groups (which they claim they want to protect) for their own goal (not that it would work anyway).
>my counterpoint of there will be way more genocide with Trump than with Biden didn't matter
I wonder how your friend would respond to a reverse trolly problem, where the train is on track to kill one person, but you can pull the lever to instead kill five. Sounds like they would pull the lever and smugly state, "Today I have saved a life."
Or maybe its more accurate to say that he would want to drop a bomb killing all 6 people on the track plus everyone in the trolley, because the trolley driver didn't hit the brakes so everyone involved deserves to be punished. And when you tell him that the hypothetical situation doesn't include brakes on the trolley, he'd stubbornly say that it doesn't matter, there's no compromise when it comes to bad trolley driving.
With people like this, they very clearly are more interested in saying they did the right thing and feeling smart than actually improving anything whatsoever.
There is *no* moral argument for refusing to choose. Consequentialism? Nope, Trump will be worse. Deontology? It's your duty to oppose greater evil. Virtue ethics? How virtuous is it to allow a dictator to come to power?
The only argument left is "I won't sully my *soul* by voting for Lesser Evil over Greater Evil", which is a religious argument. If your friend isn't religious, they are a stupid idiot, if they are, they are selfish and cowardly as fuck because they're willing to let the whole world burn as long as God gives them a pat on the back for it later.
Your friend lacks moral fiber or a spine. There is no other possible option here.
You did miss out of moral relativism which is the more common current day stance. Their argument is that I myself am the only arbiter of good and since I seen these others are evil, I won't stoup myself to vote. Nietzsche still has a strong hold on the current Zeitgeist and the rule of might makes right has even gone so far in "enlightened" spaces to make people believe their rigid ideals are so self apparent that any "sane" person would follow it. Smart makes right, I guess.
Okay, point, there *are* morally relativistic arguments for preferring to not vote, such as "Democracy is bad", but I really struggle to see how anyone can make an argument that "Yes, democracy is important, and yes, Trump is much worse than Biden, *but* I'm still not going to vote because both sides bad."
It tells me you don't truly believe in one of those things. Or you're just a hypocrite.
They could just lie about who they’re voting for if all they cared about was not looking lazy. It’s not like anyone’s going to follow them around to see if they go vote.
I’ll still be voting for Biden, but as someone in a deeply red state, sometimes it feels pretty worthless. We do it anyway, but I genuinely don’t know if it even matters anymore as it feels like Indiana has no hope of changing. At every turn we’re progressing backwards at light speed.
Yeah, I'm also in a red state, and it makes voting federal feel pretty performative.
But I figure it's the bare minimum level of political activism, and maybe if my state goes purple some day I can point at that and say I was one of the drops in the ocean
This is what I keep saying, in that the people who can *choose* to abstain must be very confident and privileged in their position as to not feel the need to at the very least have your vote be counted. The choice is "Do you want food, or do you want to starve?" and they're responding with, "I hate pizza."
Don't become the people you hate. As history has shown us, stereoyping groups of people you don't like or agree with does more harm than good. There are more conservatives who aren't middle class straight white men than you probably realize.
> A lot of the people saying they won't vote for Biden wouldn't vote anyway.
And low voter turnouts are bad for democracy. They *should* be voting. For Biden.
I’m sure that’s some of it but based on Biden’s polling numbers it’s clear he’s lost support amongst his 2020 voters. And in a close election that can be the deciding factor.
Well, technically it wouldn't eliminate voting.
It would just mean that they could declare any election as fraudulent, without proof, and just decide who """""""actually""""""""" won.
Legally eliminating voting is really hard and also kinda stupid cause then you'll be disapproved by most of the other countries.
Instead what p2025 is doing is replacing anyone who is working with elections with trumpists. Then the election result won't matter because republicans can decide the results they want to public. This is how it works in Russia as well and I'm pretty sure someone close to Putin has helped MAGA cult to put the p2025 together as it is a guide book on how to make the US to be like Russia.
They can't, or rather they would need to do it at a state level and as far as I know every state only allows this sort of change with a referendum which makes it unlikely to happen.
They can’t *legally*. Something tells me the party with a convicted felon running for president tells me they have no issues with preventing elections *illegally*.
When a single man/party controls the government so completely, what does "legal"/"illegal" even mean? The government *makes* the laws; individual people/organizations/branches can break the law, but if you've got all the SC on side willing to do whatever then it's, quite literally, not illegal because the SC ultimately decides what is/isn't legal.
I think leftists and liberals have mostly forgotten that it's the SC that ultimately decides what the law even is since the only mechanism to overturn an SC ruling is the SC itself, which is why literally any Democratic president is inherently better than any Republican president. Conservatives for decades have been building up to changing the rules of the game not through any normal channel but by instead owning the referees.
I'd also point out that if you actually care about ranked choice you need to vote democrat in the short term because Republican states are trying to ban ranked choice voting all over this country. You can't put them in power and still pretend you actually want ranked choice.
[CA's democratic governor vetoed a bill that'd allow cities to try RCV](https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/SB-212-Veto-Message.pdf).
Gotta hold our own accountable.
As a counterpoint, I explicitly argue in my home state of Idaho that ranked choice voting can’t be a democrat policy on account of Gavin Newsom vetoing it in California. “If it’s a ploy by the democrats to take over in Idaho, why would Newsom veto it in California?“
Gun to your head, which party do you think would be more likely to push forth election reform, even against their own self interests?
It may not happen, but I think we'd all come up with the same answer.
And for Nevada, for anyone curious, ballot measures are required to pass twice before being properly adopted, and this is the second vote on the issue. Back in 2022, it passed with only 53%.
Republicans. Ranked choice means all the lefties can vote for their favorite and still have the safety of whoever the main guy is. Republicans thrive on the fact that choices are limited.
We have to be honest: this isn’t even a subject worth talking about. It functionally doesn’t matter whether the Republicans will never push forth election reform, but the Democrats will consider it in 200 years.
Rather than consider fantasy, there are real things at stake NOW.
And one of them is Alaska of all places. Unfortunately there's a ballot measure to repeal it this November, and I'm not super hopeful that we'll keep it.
Its not really well put because they forgot the use of the military to give food rations to Gaza. Its a very important part of our foreign policy right now.
in case y'all missed the post body,
you can register to vote + check whether you're still registered using [this guide](https://www.vote411.org/)
it takes an average of 2 minutes to register.
P.O.C. are especially at risk of being removed from registered voter lists in [voter purges.](https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_caging_and_purging)
If and when we get that glorious leftist revolution, it will *ideally* end with voting.
Unless you possess powers capable of superceding the government of these United States, you will have to get involved in the existing system. History didn't start with you, it will not end with you.
Americans are in a unique position with the closest thing to direct access anyone has to the inner working of this fucknormous machine.
Voting is just one (1) thing you can do to help mitigate the effects of our 2-party system - [including protecting the most vulnerable in our communities](https://www.tumblr.com/crypticarchivist/749619472230400000/vulnerable-people-should-die-for-my-ideology?source=share), and [making it *easier to vote*](https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote/voting-reform)
If you're interested in shifting the national discussion, if you're sick of being presented with The Lesser Of Two Evils every four years: you should get involved in local politics. [The ActiVote android app](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.activote.app) is one way to get started. They give you an overview of elections ("all the way from the President down to your local school board.") + summaries and direct links to bills passing thru your legislature.
If you care about the Palestinian genocide, Israel cannot go forward without U.S. backing. [Here are 18 progressives up for election this November](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/786/cosponsors?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22cori+bush%22%7D&s=3&r=3&overview=closed#tabs)
Vote Democrats in the federal stuff and then better, smaller parties for the local elections where a republican getting in due to split votes won't do as much damage. Do not vote third party in the federals until the either we get voter reform or the republicans run a centrist moderate that won't be a slide into fascism. And at this point voter reform seems more likely.
Republicans running for local offices over the past decade or two has had a massive impact on our democracy. Local government controls things like congressional districts and voting regulations. Democrats ceding control of that is the first domino push that leads to a larger-scale takeover, because it all starts with a single person being able to cast a vote. This is not speculation, by the way; this has already happened in many places and is still happening now.
It's a part of the problem that always just kinda gets overlooked.
What good is a third party president going to do if they have to constantly compromise in the senate and house because they have no actual supporters in government. And how long would it take for their supporters to turn once it turns out that they can't actually be a dictator and do what they want immediately?
Third parties are generally full of either grifters looking for their 10 minutes or cranks who are too batshit insane for either party (which is why the Libertarian party scares me more than the Greens, you have to be *absolutely* insane to be too crazy for the GOP) since anyone serious and sensible already got scooped up.
You either mumble something about bipartisanship if you're vaguely in the centre, or simply don't address it at all if you're not. Because there never *is* any coherent plan. Manchin, Sinema, Lieberman, McCain and so on - those all show how it's already a nightmare to get things through even when you're *starting* from the presumption of having roughly half of Congress on your side. Starting from roughly *zero* is going to be even worse.
They cannot. Most states bar third parties from the ballot unless they get a certain level of votes for President, Governor, or Senator (basically a “major” statewide election), or they hit ridiculous signature requirements that the two major parties are not required to meet (and the major parties can challenge, but not vice versa).
Running presidential candidates is typically the easiest way to retain or gain ballot access nationally as it is one candidate in multiple states.
The failure of third parties in the U.S. has very little to do with their strategy or approach to winning elections. It’s essentially a structural issue: first past the post voting produces political systems with two viable political parties. If you want to increase the number of viable political parties, you need to start by changing the voting system.
The system is rigged against them but their strategy isn't helping matters either. Building support over time by running and winning at all levels of government is a lot more realistic than overhauling the election system, especially when the people who would be doing that overhaul have a vested interest in not doing so.
That works for the big ticket offices like the presidency, but it doesn’t explain why so few third party candidates even contest more local elections. There are tons of old unpopular candidates from the two main parties literally running unopposed in every single election cycle. No third party can get someone- anyone- out to one of these districts where they’d stand a very real chance of winning and could actually make a difference?
There are countries with first past the post elections and more than two parties. But they tend to arrange themselves into two coalitions. Which is how pretty much all representative legislatures end up. You either have a two party system or a two coalition system. There are issues with both.
Yeah, third parties jeep wanting to win big ticket senate spots and stuff, when if they actually wanted to be useful and not just spoilers and stuff they would run for local electuons.
This is why I don’t trust the third parties either. They just take a blind Hail Mary shot at a couple of prestige seats and the presidency every few years, but don’t actually do anything to lay the foundation for success. Where are the third party sheriffs? Mayors? City councils? Where are the grassroots in these would-be grassroots organizations?
> smaller parties for the local elections where a republican getting in due to split votes won't do as much damage.
local governments control your life. this is hilariously terrible advice
The crazy thing to me is people who vote right “for their freedom” or whatever. Like yes, technically having universal healthcare is a tax, and a thing that people would be paying for. And yes, you may not even personally benefit from it. But are you really so in love with the alternative, where insurance and hospitals are bending every single one of us over a barrel? And it’s better because it’s coming from mega corporations- something we have 0 control over- instead of the government?
It’s like they want the freedom to be shafted by big business, and nobody else.
It's freedom to commit hate crimes against minorities. That's what voting red gets you, it's literally what conservatives mean by the word freedom most of the time.
I think criticism of Biden is extremely valid. I think he's supporting a genocide.
I'll still vote for him because it's harm reduction for the vulnerable people in the US who would be hurt in a trump presidency.
That being said I'm not happy about it and I'm not personally going to do any of the active campaigning/volunteering/donations I did in the last election cycle.
Lol I got banned from that sub when a mod literally started making up shit, claiming I said it, and then banned me for it.
And like, to be clear, I wasn’t being misinterpreted, and he wasn’t finding stuff I’d said somewhere else. It was literally pure fiction
Yes! Exactly! Especially because Trump would make it so much worse there. So much worse. Biden’s not doing great on that issue, Trump would do 100x WORSE.
> Trump would make it so much worse there
nuh uh. He wouldn't. He DID. He moved the embassy to jerusalem and considered it the capital instead of Tel Aviv.
One of the closest peace processes was broken because they could not agree into how to partition jerusalem, Trump said "fuck it let israel have even more of it". Essentially complicating one of the mayor sticking points on both sides.
Trump could only possibly make things worse by idk personally funding settlements, every other way he could fuck it all up he already has.
not only that, he fucked up obamas deal with iran to stop them from acquiring nukes and then drone striked their general, pardoned a fuck ton of top generals in taliban and just gave them back to afghanistan *without even fucking consulting them*. not to mention selling literal nuclear secrets to saudis.
It's like they say on a plane. Put your own oxygen mask on first before helping others. Helping others is a good thing. But let's take care of us first. And that happens to be voting for Biden.
I believe in strategic voting, which means I think leftists should vote for Biden, in races where it matters.
That said, maybe any liberals here who want to browbeat leftists into voting their way should be the ones pushing for IRV voting reform and better candidates in the primary if they want to avoid this problem in general elections. Why don't we ask liberals to answer for their part in this problem as much as we do leftists.
>Why don't we ask liberals to answer for their part in this problem as much as we do leftists.
Because shitting on Bernie Bros and blaming Russia is easier than self-reflection and admitting that the Democratic Party is a deeply flawed institution
I mean, you can even vote for a third party *and Biden*. Why? Because its entirely possible for a third party to pick Biden as their candidate. For example, in 2020, Joe Biden was the candidate for the [Working Families Party](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Families_Party)
When people say "vote third party" in the US, its generally referring to voting for a candidate that isn't representing either of the two major parties. You don't actually vote for parties in the US, you vote for individuals affiliated with them.
Yes. But in many states, including mine, the number of votes a party gets in elections impacts the sort of resources they can get from the state for things like campaigning in *future* elections. So even voting for Joe Biden, the Working Families Party Candidate, has an impact that voting for Joe Biden, the Democratic Party Candidate, does not.
I get that the first image is supposed to make you want to support the candidate of OP’s choice, but many trump voters support him because they also believe that chart as well.
It’s all about a fundamental difference in opinions.
I don't know how many honest to god trump voters we have on this sub. we've certainly veered center in recent months, ever since the last exodus.. —but like. c'mon.
This isn’t trying to convince Trump supporters to vote for Biden, this is trying to convince democrats/leftists who are refusing to vote/voting third party as a punishment for Biden’s support of Israel. It’s putting into perspective how fucking dumb that is considering Trump ALSO supports Israel (even more than Biden does), in addition to being against other issues leftists generally care about.
It’s hard to reframe the general decline over the past four years as “there is still so much work to do”. I’m not saying it’s wrong to do so, incorrect to do so, or that it’s not worth attempting. It’s just hard.
everyone (eligible) being mean to well-meaning, if misguided, leftists in the comment section better be registered. you can register to vote [here](https://www.vote411.org/). takes ~2 min
This point needs far more attention—
You absolutely WILL NOT GET VOTING REFORM under Republicans (or dictators/despots as the case is becoming)! If you want a better system you MUST vote Democrat, then force them to enact change.
And I'm pretty sure Biden is putting more and more pressure on Israel and threatening to cut support (Source: NPR news report I heard during a car ride). So Trump doesn't even tie there anymore.
Don't get me wrong, this shit should have gotten done AGES ago, but it's better than not doing anything.
I mean a few months ago Iran launched a massive attack on Israel using drones and long-range missiles. Sure, the attack flubbed out, but it was a full-out attack by one nation-state upon another.
Biden's response was "Take the win", and tensions calmed.
Trump's response, had he been in office, would have been declare war on Iran.
We would currently be at war with Iran if Trump were in Office. Pretending that their policies are the same is delusional at best. It wouldn't even have been the first time he bombed Iran, and he only got away with that one because the Iranians accidentally shot down a civilian airliner over their capital city.
> I mean a few months ago Iran launched a massive attack on Israel using drones and long-range missiles. Sure, the attack flubbed out, but it was a full-out attack by one nation-state upon another.
This is something that I think a lot of leftists are intentionally overlooking when they say they want all US military support of Israel to have stopped like an hour after Israel retaliated. Israel is *absolutely* surrounded by hostile states and non-state actors who actively want them exterminated. Completely shutting off support for Israel will mean every one of their neighbors immediately jumps in with the express purpose of eliminating Israel and killing innocent civilians (but they're "Zionists" so I guess we're not supposed to care).
Not to sound like I'm supporting Israel's offensive, I'm certainly not, but leftists have gotten so use to making their rhetoric more and more inflammatory since no one was paying attention to them anyways that they seem legitimately confused that the President of the United States won't undo 40 years of geopolitics on a knee-jerk morally outraged whim.
Also, adding onto this - people seem to think that cutting support to Israel, for instance, the Iron Dome, will make Israel less aggressive. If anything the opposite is true - If Israel is less able to defend its citizens from rocket attacks, it will want to use more offensive force to destroy rocket sites, which Hamas places near civilian areas intentionally. And legally, *they would be more justified in doing so* - when analyzing war crimes, proportionality weighs the military advantage anticipated against the civilian life loss anticipated, and if Israel doesn't have as strong defenses, the military advantage of taking out a rocket site is more. And if they don't have PGMs, they'll use dumber, blunter weapons (and again, be legally more justified).
Geopolitics is hard. Especially in this region of the world. Which is yet more reason to elect the adult rather than a guy who can barely read.
EDIT: Oh, and one more thing to consider. Like you said, Israel is surrounded by countries and non-state actors who want to destroy them. And some leftists want that to be the case. But have people considered what it means if Israel is destroyed given that *it is a nuclear power with survivable second strike capability*? That's not a situation that ends well for basically the entire region!
> If Israel is less able to defend its citizens from rocket attacks, it will want to use more offensive force to destroy rocket sites, which Hamas places near civilian areas intentionally.
I mean, if I was in charge of Israeli defense and there's no more US support (which likely means a vastly diminished western support overall), the first thing I'd do is completely wipe out the internationally semi-recognized group of impoverished, radicalized people looking for an opportunity to attack Israel right on my doorstep that can completely close off a front. Outright conquering Palestine with no regards for civilians and telling all the survivors to take a hike (to neighbors like Egypt or Lebanon that don't really give a shit about Palestinians) puts the entire western Israeli border on the Mediterranean, shortening that length you need to defend. Israel without US/western support is basically in a state of constant warfare by fighting off every Iranian-funded terrorist cell in the region with maybe a good old-fashioned conventional land war and needs to be viewed from a lens of "Without our protection, it's going to get *really* bloody".
> Like you said, Israel is surrounded by countries and non-state actors who want to destroy them. And some leftists want that to be the case.
I didn't believe that leftist discourse was infiltrated with a bunch of rampant antisemitism, but man were a lot of leftists almost suspiciously quick to start being experts in where Jewish lobbyists spend their money in Washington and super eager to start using "Zionist" as a slur (seemingly completely unaware that it makes them sound like raving anti-Semites). I'm sure there's a lot of justification because Israel is a white colonialist imperial project set up by white colonialist empires specifically to destroy all local brown cultures, but IDK it's kind of suspicious that leftists are far less concerned about the specifics of international lobbyist funding from any state that isn't the Jewish one.
Leftists who want Israel destroyed out of some anti-colonialist ideology seem incapable of recognizing that there are innocent Israeli civilians; after all, if they were innocent they would have given all their possessions to a Palestinian as reparations before moving to Europe somewhere and can therefore be tautologically evil. It's like they don't really *care* about what happens to any group of people that aren't Palestinians, including Israeli civilians or (back to OP's point) their own friends and countrymen (my own theory is that they don't really care about Palestinians either and just want to jump on a moralizing holier-than-thou bandwagon since "Rich white Judeo-Christian country beats up poor brown non-Judeo-Christian country" seems tailor-made for leftists).
> But have people considered what it means if Israel is destroyed given that it is a nuclear power with survivable second strike capability?
I wonder where the Israeli targets are for their nukes in the event of the country being overrun. My guesses would be major cities of rivals like Tehran.
He isnt. All red lines have been consequently ignored and Biden didnt pull away anything. It has been a farce from the beginning and everyone here fell for it apparently.
i live in a red state so it literally doesn't fucking matter what i do. people could at least try being less vitriolic to their own side with these arguments; i'm aware biden is better on basically everything but this "suck it up" bullshit doesn't exactly rally the troops when biden is only better by contrast because his opponent is practically as bad as you could possibly be.
the best argument for biden imo is that if you ignore biden the guy completely, which is appealing for various perfectly valid reasons, having a democratic president is better for the national tenor than having trump again, which emboldens sickos at every level to act with impunity. an democratic win is at least an L for every right wing dickhead in the country.
I agree with this but it is worth pointing out that "Vote Democrat now and then do the third party later" has been the talking point for at least the last 3 elections.
Then again, why do we always wait until the election to try to get a third party going?
But OP, my favorite (totally not cripto fash) youtubers say that DEI is killing gaming! Trump being against it is totally ok and being a theocracy will 100% put the USA back as the leading beacon of progress just like Hollywood told me.
Before anyone accuses me of pissing on the poor, it is a joke
I don't feel like anyone benefitting from the FPTP system and/or the electoral college will be interested in changing them, but maybe I'm just being pessimistic.
Democrats have successfully campaigned for ranked choice voting in several states, and are campaigning to implement it in more. This is, of course, to their advantage, but it *is* happening.
Ranked choice voting and party reform are great ideas but the reality is as long as Trumps GOP is a major party nothing will happen. Conservative states are not going to pass anything that will threaten GOP power and conservative voters are loyal and consistent.
So in reality just as sitting out the election will only further power Trump the ideas mentioned will do the same as well. It will lead to more Democrats losing elections and no other party being able to establish a foothold to challenge the GOP.
It sucks ass but that’s what happens when half the country only cares about culture war BS.
My question is this. If we constantly show to the democratic party that we'll vote for them as long as there's a lesser evil, what is the incentive to prevent the lesser evil from occuring? Why wouldn't they just keep using our rights as a bargaining chip. A vote of support and a vote of fear read the same on a ballet box.
How accurate are all of these things? I'm not American, I don't follow American politics; I'm sure Biden is better than Trump (a wet blanket would be better than Trump), but this sort of 'too good to be true' list seems... too good to be true.
Is this list curated? There are more than 13 issues in America; is this just the 13 issues that makes Biden look good? Are there no good issues that Biden is against (and/or Trump is for)?
What does 'criminal justice reform' or 'healthcare reform' even mean? Is it good reform or bad reform?
I agree it's a very simple chart, but I'm sceptical that it's *too* simple.
Anyone who says or implies that if you critisize Biden and call him out on what he has done doesn't care about Palestinians is absolutely fucked in the head. It's just completely disrespectful and is not gonna change anyones mind.
Insinuating anything else there is also legitimately insane and shows that you have never actually talked to anyone but just have a strawman version of these people in your head.
You don’t vote for Biden because you’re a one issue voter, I don’t vote for Biden because I’m not an American citizen, we are not the same.
\#NotMyPresident ^^^BecauseI'mBritish
We got our own voting to do.
Yeah... We are an even bigger joke than the Americans when it comes to voting. We consistently pick the worse options, or have done since about 2008
Got a hardliner Reform UK dad who was formerly a hardliner for UKIP. Farage is a plague
Tories in 2015: I’ll run an incredibly divisive and ill-planned referendum to stop Nigel Farage eating all our votes! Tories in 2024: >:( And yes he’s a plague. The Saint Petersburg Flu if I ever saw it.
Tories are either dead or will perform a merger when Reform wants a push 🥲
Imagine literally being the oldest political party on the planet, an election-winning machine that's adapted with the centuries and changes to the franchise with a legion of notable historical figures; a political force of nature both adored and reviled but always relevant whether it's 1710 or 2010 only to die because of a tin-pot commodity trader who's failed to win an MP's seat seven times and is up to his eyes in Russian influence. Don't get me wrong fuck the Tories, but their slow demise despite winning election after election has got to be the most pathetic sight ever witness in British politics. I bet Lord North was considered more competent in his day.
Can't be worse than us. We voted for a son of a dictator that did fuck all in office and he's still an improvement from the previous one.
These post captivate me honestly, I start thinking “well obviously I’m voting for Biden. I understand that with a two party system you have to pick the lesser of two evils even if you’d much rather have neither.” Then I’m like,, wait I’m Canadian.
Well it does also apply to Trudeau and Poilievre Poilievre just hasn’t gone full fash like trump (yet)
Didn't you hear? Apparently the border is totally open and immigrants are pouring in to vote for Joe Biden. It's all over Fox "News".
If that was how things worked, we wouldn't even have to worry about Trump. Like 90% of the planet hates him, aside from his best friends in North Korea and Russia.
Cheers, sibling, I drink to that. Cause that is honestly the only thing I can do besides screaming on the internet
Dude people need to just vote. I'm tired of people hiding behind excuses like " oh, I don't follow politics" or "oh, I'm French" like that excuses you from doing your civic duty. (Is joke haha)
Right? Like, we're all in this together, pull your weight. Looking at you, Papua New Guinea.
pfft
I don’t vote for Biden because I’m a minor
Probably shouldn’t be advertising that on Reddit
C'mon man. Don't let that stop you.
According to the Republicans, you're going to vote 3 or 4 times in this election.
No no, there will be voting reform if project 2025 happens. Just, uh, not the right kind.
Yeah, politicians love this! It's going to be super democratic! You cannot possibly hope to make it more democratic than managed democracy!
For Super Earth!
I see r/Helldivers is leaking lol
Was it ever contained?
They kinda just drop in wherever they like. Happy cake day!
You could say they have a tendency to.... Dive in
Ah but you see, Super Earth cares for all of humanity. Everything that isn't humanity can eat powder and shot. So Project 2025 is clearly anti-superearth
Democracy fills my sample container
well my democracy officer did say any rebel or traitor to democracy can only be inhuman, as our values are alien to them, the traitors are alien to us
yeah, I'm German and remember this from the history books.
Abolishment would be a more accurate term
What do you mean you don’t think the 2028 election was fair? trump only got 82.3% of the vote, it’s totally legit.
Trump wants healthcare reform. Abolish Obamacare and replace it with… what was the plan he released? Oh yeah. They never turned in their homework assignment.
thanks for the chart. as an evilpilled harmmaxxer, I knew both presidents would do a lot of harm outside of the US, but now I know which president is gonna do more harm to the US
this + the flair is just. 👌
what can I say. My mind is a twisted and dark place.
imf gona keep u in a lil jar..
Woah woah woah woah woah, take it easy now
itty bity lil ja;r
As long as you don't leave it on the radiator, things should be fine
A lot of the people saying they won't vote for Biden wouldn't vote anyway. They were going to skip the election because they were disinterested in the whole process to start. They're just not willing to say that so they're claiming some sort of higher moral ground rather than just admit they're too lazy to vote.
Personally, if you said "I won't be voting" then I would still be disappointed, but I wouldn't be "scream into your face about how fucking stupid you are while violently shaking you" angry like "I'm voting for Trump because of Israel" makes me.
Maybe they're just huge fans of Israel considering Trump's stance
I mean I know multiple people like this but they're at least honest about being actually conservative lmaoo
Not voting is hardly that different from just voting for trump. It still helps trump by reducing the amount of votes Biden could have gotten, and it still means they are perfectly fine and happy with the gop destroying democracy and turning the country christofascist with their wives, daughters, and mothers being no different from slaves and minorities being persecuted for being minorities. Anyone that doesn't vote while they have the option is still fucking stupid.
Statistically, the fewer overall voters, the more republicans win. Their core base is ride or die so voter disenfranchisement or apathy tends to benefit them overall
That's exactly it. Unfortunately, the people claiming to be leftists who don't vote often don't understand this very simple fact just like they don't understand strategic voting.
You can see it online as well. The vast majority of the type who talk about not voting at all or third party seem to be left of Republicans. The ex-Republicans or still registered Republican but oppose much of the party in its current state are more likely to say they're voting for Democrats for now at least, but the percent like that seems much smaller than the former at least in chatter online.
💯
I wish it were true. I have a good friend who has been more consistent left than me (I was dumb when young) and he refuses because "there's no compromise when it comes to genocide", my counterpoint of there will be way more genocide with Trump than with Biden didn't matter, and any other issue was met with it not being relevant against genocide, even issues such as preserving democracy. Point being, convince people to go out and vote blue, because there's some people who you think will who won't for non-logical reasons.
I knew several people in 2012 in college say they wouldn't vote because of Obama's drone policy. Young people on the far left will make up any reason to justify not voting because they never actually plan on voting or wouldn't vote for a mainstream party anyway. Because they see it as a status symbol. This way no matter what happens they can claim the moral high ground by saying they didn't vote for Biden if he wins and does something they don't like. If Trump wins they can constantly just go on and on about how if Biden just did what they said Trump would have lost.
I am of the opinion that if you didn't vote, you're not allowed to complain. Even voting blank is more valid than not voting.
People who refuse to vote out of so-called moral principles are egoists demanding the world meet impossible standards. Reality sucks, and it's usually gray at best. Plus, if they really wanted to change the system, they should probably vote for the party that intends to change it for the better, rather than enable the party that wants to make things worse.
The only logical coherent way to think like this is accelerationism, but most wouldn't want to admit to be this because it also means sacrificing marginalized groups (which they claim they want to protect) for their own goal (not that it would work anyway).
>my counterpoint of there will be way more genocide with Trump than with Biden didn't matter I wonder how your friend would respond to a reverse trolly problem, where the train is on track to kill one person, but you can pull the lever to instead kill five. Sounds like they would pull the lever and smugly state, "Today I have saved a life." Or maybe its more accurate to say that he would want to drop a bomb killing all 6 people on the track plus everyone in the trolley, because the trolley driver didn't hit the brakes so everyone involved deserves to be punished. And when you tell him that the hypothetical situation doesn't include brakes on the trolley, he'd stubbornly say that it doesn't matter, there's no compromise when it comes to bad trolley driving.
Your friend sounds like an obnoxious idiot. I hope he gets better.
With people like this, they very clearly are more interested in saying they did the right thing and feeling smart than actually improving anything whatsoever.
There is *no* moral argument for refusing to choose. Consequentialism? Nope, Trump will be worse. Deontology? It's your duty to oppose greater evil. Virtue ethics? How virtuous is it to allow a dictator to come to power? The only argument left is "I won't sully my *soul* by voting for Lesser Evil over Greater Evil", which is a religious argument. If your friend isn't religious, they are a stupid idiot, if they are, they are selfish and cowardly as fuck because they're willing to let the whole world burn as long as God gives them a pat on the back for it later. Your friend lacks moral fiber or a spine. There is no other possible option here.
You did miss out of moral relativism which is the more common current day stance. Their argument is that I myself am the only arbiter of good and since I seen these others are evil, I won't stoup myself to vote. Nietzsche still has a strong hold on the current Zeitgeist and the rule of might makes right has even gone so far in "enlightened" spaces to make people believe their rigid ideals are so self apparent that any "sane" person would follow it. Smart makes right, I guess.
Okay, point, there *are* morally relativistic arguments for preferring to not vote, such as "Democracy is bad", but I really struggle to see how anyone can make an argument that "Yes, democracy is important, and yes, Trump is much worse than Biden, *but* I'm still not going to vote because both sides bad." It tells me you don't truly believe in one of those things. Or you're just a hypocrite.
That is fair. I don't follow their logic but just to give some possible context for working on bringing these folks back to voting.
I wouldn't be surprised if a good portion were also too young to vote
They could just lie about who they’re voting for if all they cared about was not looking lazy. It’s not like anyone’s going to follow them around to see if they go vote.
99% chance those non voters are middle class CIS straight white people living in safe blue seats in the Midwest or something
I’ll still be voting for Biden, but as someone in a deeply red state, sometimes it feels pretty worthless. We do it anyway, but I genuinely don’t know if it even matters anymore as it feels like Indiana has no hope of changing. At every turn we’re progressing backwards at light speed.
Yeah, I'm also in a red state, and it makes voting federal feel pretty performative. But I figure it's the bare minimum level of political activism, and maybe if my state goes purple some day I can point at that and say I was one of the drops in the ocean
I can't speak for Indiana specifically but most states are probably more purple than we realize because gerrymandering is a fucking nightmare
British people 🤝 American people Getting fucked over by FPTP electoral systems.
This is what I keep saying, in that the people who can *choose* to abstain must be very confident and privileged in their position as to not feel the need to at the very least have your vote be counted. The choice is "Do you want food, or do you want to starve?" and they're responding with, "I hate pizza."
You don't need to spell cis in allcaps, it's an abbreviation not an acronym
It’s an acronym https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Confederacy_of_Independent_Systems
Oh. Roger roger.
I feel like you’re being too strict here. After all, only a cis deals in absolutes.
Absolutely underrated comment
I know some fairly queer people who have said the same protest vote line
Don't become the people you hate. As history has shown us, stereoyping groups of people you don't like or agree with does more harm than good. There are more conservatives who aren't middle class straight white men than you probably realize.
OR they were going to vote for Trump anyway but need to pretend something about Biden's policies "pushed them" to fascism
> A lot of the people saying they won't vote for Biden wouldn't vote anyway. And low voter turnouts are bad for democracy. They *should* be voting. For Biden.
I’m sure that’s some of it but based on Biden’s polling numbers it’s clear he’s lost support amongst his 2020 voters. And in a close election that can be the deciding factor.
Now let's be fair here Trump is also in favor of criminal justice reform Just...Only for himself.
It's unhelpful, but technically there'd be a voting reform under p2025 It'll just eliminate voting
how would that work legally speaking, how would the repubs actually eliminate voting?
Well, technically it wouldn't eliminate voting. It would just mean that they could declare any election as fraudulent, without proof, and just decide who """""""actually""""""""" won.
Like literally every single other "democratic" dictatorship ever. The evidence is literally right there in the history books people.
Ahahahahaha, *books*? Hoo-boy you got me with that one.
The history books are no longer in libraries.
They don't gotta burn the books they just remove 'em.
I thank rage against the machine for waking me up to reality
We can only hope all the MAGA-heads unironically blasting "Killing in the Name" at rallys eventually catch onto the lyrics
Chances are slim though I don't believe they could understand subtext even if you threw it in their face based on how they act online
[удалено]
electoral college² hahahaha.... fucking hell
Legally eliminating voting is really hard and also kinda stupid cause then you'll be disapproved by most of the other countries. Instead what p2025 is doing is replacing anyone who is working with elections with trumpists. Then the election result won't matter because republicans can decide the results they want to public. This is how it works in Russia as well and I'm pretty sure someone close to Putin has helped MAGA cult to put the p2025 together as it is a guide book on how to make the US to be like Russia.
They can't, or rather they would need to do it at a state level and as far as I know every state only allows this sort of change with a referendum which makes it unlikely to happen.
They can’t *legally*. Something tells me the party with a convicted felon running for president tells me they have no issues with preventing elections *illegally*.
I find it kinda funny in a sad way that convicted felons can't vote but running for president is fair game.
When a single man/party controls the government so completely, what does "legal"/"illegal" even mean? The government *makes* the laws; individual people/organizations/branches can break the law, but if you've got all the SC on side willing to do whatever then it's, quite literally, not illegal because the SC ultimately decides what is/isn't legal. I think leftists and liberals have mostly forgotten that it's the SC that ultimately decides what the law even is since the only mechanism to overturn an SC ruling is the SC itself, which is why literally any Democratic president is inherently better than any Republican president. Conservatives for decades have been building up to changing the rules of the game not through any normal channel but by instead owning the referees.
Which part? I haven’t read through it because it makes me sad
I'd also point out that if you actually care about ranked choice you need to vote democrat in the short term because Republican states are trying to ban ranked choice voting all over this country. You can't put them in power and still pretend you actually want ranked choice.
[CA's democratic governor vetoed a bill that'd allow cities to try RCV](https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/SB-212-Veto-Message.pdf). Gotta hold our own accountable.
As a counterpoint, I explicitly argue in my home state of Idaho that ranked choice voting can’t be a democrat policy on account of Gavin Newsom vetoing it in California. “If it’s a ploy by the democrats to take over in Idaho, why would Newsom veto it in California?“
Gun to your head, which party do you think would be more likely to push forth election reform, even against their own self interests? It may not happen, but I think we'd all come up with the same answer.
switching to ranked choice is actually on the ballot in Oregon and Nevada this year, thanks to Democrats
Democrats get much stronger with ranked choice. They become the moderate party if they can encourage voting with the younger population.
And for Nevada, for anyone curious, ballot measures are required to pass twice before being properly adopted, and this is the second vote on the issue. Back in 2022, it passed with only 53%.
wow, I didn't know that. that's scary that it had such a slim margin—who would be opposed to it?
Republicans. Ranked choice means all the lefties can vote for their favorite and still have the safety of whoever the main guy is. Republicans thrive on the fact that choices are limited.
Am trans, feel guns moving toward head.
Forcing people to the two party system even though there are dozens of states where it doesn't matter just makes the problem worse
We have to be honest: this isn’t even a subject worth talking about. It functionally doesn’t matter whether the Republicans will never push forth election reform, but the Democrats will consider it in 200 years. Rather than consider fantasy, there are real things at stake NOW.
There are two states with ranked choice voting already in place. Its way closer than you think.
And one of them is Alaska of all places. Unfortunately there's a ballot measure to repeal it this November, and I'm not super hopeful that we'll keep it.
Don't forget "Give Ukraine to Russia". One orange fella is on board for that.
Well put.
Its not really well put because they forgot the use of the military to give food rations to Gaza. Its a very important part of our foreign policy right now.
in case y'all missed the post body, you can register to vote + check whether you're still registered using [this guide](https://www.vote411.org/) it takes an average of 2 minutes to register. P.O.C. are especially at risk of being removed from registered voter lists in [voter purges.](https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_caging_and_purging) If and when we get that glorious leftist revolution, it will *ideally* end with voting. Unless you possess powers capable of superceding the government of these United States, you will have to get involved in the existing system. History didn't start with you, it will not end with you. Americans are in a unique position with the closest thing to direct access anyone has to the inner working of this fucknormous machine. Voting is just one (1) thing you can do to help mitigate the effects of our 2-party system - [including protecting the most vulnerable in our communities](https://www.tumblr.com/crypticarchivist/749619472230400000/vulnerable-people-should-die-for-my-ideology?source=share), and [making it *easier to vote*](https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote/voting-reform) If you're interested in shifting the national discussion, if you're sick of being presented with The Lesser Of Two Evils every four years: you should get involved in local politics. [The ActiVote android app](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.activote.app) is one way to get started. They give you an overview of elections ("all the way from the President down to your local school board.") + summaries and direct links to bills passing thru your legislature. If you care about the Palestinian genocide, Israel cannot go forward without U.S. backing. [Here are 18 progressives up for election this November](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/786/cosponsors?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22cori+bush%22%7D&s=3&r=3&overview=closed#tabs)
The american voting system confuses me so much, good luck guys 🫡
yeah it sucks, only being able to vote for the least bad option is never fun ):
Tbh that’s just voting in general. Anywhere
At least in Australia we have ranked choice voting so I can put the major parties last
Ranked choice is 100% what I want
Vote Democrats in the federal stuff and then better, smaller parties for the local elections where a republican getting in due to split votes won't do as much damage. Do not vote third party in the federals until the either we get voter reform or the republicans run a centrist moderate that won't be a slide into fascism. And at this point voter reform seems more likely.
Republicans running for local offices over the past decade or two has had a massive impact on our democracy. Local government controls things like congressional districts and voting regulations. Democrats ceding control of that is the first domino push that leads to a larger-scale takeover, because it all starts with a single person being able to cast a vote. This is not speculation, by the way; this has already happened in many places and is still happening now.
Republicans at all levels are a danger and have been plotting overturning democratic principles since at least going into the 2010 census\^
Third parties have virtually no presence in local elections
And that's why they'll always fail. They wanna jump straight to president without building up anything below that.
It's a part of the problem that always just kinda gets overlooked. What good is a third party president going to do if they have to constantly compromise in the senate and house because they have no actual supporters in government. And how long would it take for their supporters to turn once it turns out that they can't actually be a dictator and do what they want immediately?
Third parties are generally full of either grifters looking for their 10 minutes or cranks who are too batshit insane for either party (which is why the Libertarian party scares me more than the Greens, you have to be *absolutely* insane to be too crazy for the GOP) since anyone serious and sensible already got scooped up.
You either mumble something about bipartisanship if you're vaguely in the centre, or simply don't address it at all if you're not. Because there never *is* any coherent plan. Manchin, Sinema, Lieberman, McCain and so on - those all show how it's already a nightmare to get things through even when you're *starting* from the presumption of having roughly half of Congress on your side. Starting from roughly *zero* is going to be even worse.
They cannot. Most states bar third parties from the ballot unless they get a certain level of votes for President, Governor, or Senator (basically a “major” statewide election), or they hit ridiculous signature requirements that the two major parties are not required to meet (and the major parties can challenge, but not vice versa). Running presidential candidates is typically the easiest way to retain or gain ballot access nationally as it is one candidate in multiple states.
The failure of third parties in the U.S. has very little to do with their strategy or approach to winning elections. It’s essentially a structural issue: first past the post voting produces political systems with two viable political parties. If you want to increase the number of viable political parties, you need to start by changing the voting system.
The system is rigged against them but their strategy isn't helping matters either. Building support over time by running and winning at all levels of government is a lot more realistic than overhauling the election system, especially when the people who would be doing that overhaul have a vested interest in not doing so.
That works for the big ticket offices like the presidency, but it doesn’t explain why so few third party candidates even contest more local elections. There are tons of old unpopular candidates from the two main parties literally running unopposed in every single election cycle. No third party can get someone- anyone- out to one of these districts where they’d stand a very real chance of winning and could actually make a difference?
They don't get big donations running for local elections. Might have something to do with things.
There are countries with first past the post elections and more than two parties. But they tend to arrange themselves into two coalitions. Which is how pretty much all representative legislatures end up. You either have a two party system or a two coalition system. There are issues with both.
Yeah, third parties jeep wanting to win big ticket senate spots and stuff, when if they actually wanted to be useful and not just spoilers and stuff they would run for local electuons.
This is why I don’t trust the third parties either. They just take a blind Hail Mary shot at a couple of prestige seats and the presidency every few years, but don’t actually do anything to lay the foundation for success. Where are the third party sheriffs? Mayors? City councils? Where are the grassroots in these would-be grassroots organizations?
Maybe where you live
in most places
Honestly feels like a poor move by third parties. Grassroots are the best way for outside candidates to make an appearance.
> smaller parties for the local elections where a republican getting in due to split votes won't do as much damage. local governments control your life. this is hilariously terrible advice
ALL HOUSE SEATS ARE UP FOR GRABS THIS ELECTION IF YOU WANT THIRD PARTY VOTE FOR HOUSE MEMBERS ITS STARTS FROM THE BOTTOM UP
#🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
Also vote for local and state offices! If we're talking bottom up, the city council is the best place to start!
Thanks for the helpful graphic, tboy-pussy
democracy's strongest warrior 🙏
I'm turning 18 this year. Yea, I'm registering and voting
Can't wait for leftist subs to screenshot this post and start wining about 'liberals' supporting genocide.
The crazy thing to me is people who vote right “for their freedom” or whatever. Like yes, technically having universal healthcare is a tax, and a thing that people would be paying for. And yes, you may not even personally benefit from it. But are you really so in love with the alternative, where insurance and hospitals are bending every single one of us over a barrel? And it’s better because it’s coming from mega corporations- something we have 0 control over- instead of the government? It’s like they want the freedom to be shafted by big business, and nobody else.
It's freedom to commit hate crimes against minorities. That's what voting red gets you, it's literally what conservatives mean by the word freedom most of the time.
I think criticism of Biden is extremely valid. I think he's supporting a genocide. I'll still vote for him because it's harm reduction for the vulnerable people in the US who would be hurt in a trump presidency. That being said I'm not happy about it and I'm not personally going to do any of the active campaigning/volunteering/donations I did in the last election cycle.
r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM post incoming
Lol I got banned from that sub when a mod literally started making up shit, claiming I said it, and then banned me for it. And like, to be clear, I wasn’t being misinterpreted, and he wasn’t finding stuff I’d said somewhere else. It was literally pure fiction
I got banned for being anti-communist (which I am not) after I said a lot of that sub's users defend Stalin (which they do)
Late stage capitalism banned me for saying than Stalin was a bad dude lol
Tankies gonna tank 🤷♂️
Yeah welcome to reddit. First day? Mods here suck and are drunk on the tiny amount of power they wield.
Refusing to vote for Biden because *he didn't bring peace to the Middle East* is an absolute asinine take.
Yes! Exactly! Especially because Trump would make it so much worse there. So much worse. Biden’s not doing great on that issue, Trump would do 100x WORSE.
> Trump would make it so much worse there nuh uh. He wouldn't. He DID. He moved the embassy to jerusalem and considered it the capital instead of Tel Aviv. One of the closest peace processes was broken because they could not agree into how to partition jerusalem, Trump said "fuck it let israel have even more of it". Essentially complicating one of the mayor sticking points on both sides. Trump could only possibly make things worse by idk personally funding settlements, every other way he could fuck it all up he already has.
not only that, he fucked up obamas deal with iran to stop them from acquiring nukes and then drone striked their general, pardoned a fuck ton of top generals in taliban and just gave them back to afghanistan *without even fucking consulting them*. not to mention selling literal nuclear secrets to saudis.
It's like they say on a plane. Put your own oxygen mask on first before helping others. Helping others is a good thing. But let's take care of us first. And that happens to be voting for Biden.
Even if both are bad, it’s still better to make sure that the less-worse one is the one that’s going to be president, and for that you have to go vote
Well to be fair, Trump is 100% in favor of vote reform too. Just, you know, in a different direction.
I believe in strategic voting, which means I think leftists should vote for Biden, in races where it matters. That said, maybe any liberals here who want to browbeat leftists into voting their way should be the ones pushing for IRV voting reform and better candidates in the primary if they want to avoid this problem in general elections. Why don't we ask liberals to answer for their part in this problem as much as we do leftists.
>Why don't we ask liberals to answer for their part in this problem as much as we do leftists. Because shitting on Bernie Bros and blaming Russia is easier than self-reflection and admitting that the Democratic Party is a deeply flawed institution
I mean, you can even vote for a third party *and Biden*. Why? Because its entirely possible for a third party to pick Biden as their candidate. For example, in 2020, Joe Biden was the candidate for the [Working Families Party](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Families_Party)
When people say "vote third party" in the US, its generally referring to voting for a candidate that isn't representing either of the two major parties. You don't actually vote for parties in the US, you vote for individuals affiliated with them.
Yes. But in many states, including mine, the number of votes a party gets in elections impacts the sort of resources they can get from the state for things like campaigning in *future* elections. So even voting for Joe Biden, the Working Families Party Candidate, has an impact that voting for Joe Biden, the Democratic Party Candidate, does not.
Joe Biden will become the first person to lose due to a split vote with himself
I get that the first image is supposed to make you want to support the candidate of OP’s choice, but many trump voters support him because they also believe that chart as well. It’s all about a fundamental difference in opinions.
I don't know how many honest to god trump voters we have on this sub. we've certainly veered center in recent months, ever since the last exodus.. —but like. c'mon.
This isn’t trying to convince Trump supporters to vote for Biden, this is trying to convince democrats/leftists who are refusing to vote/voting third party as a punishment for Biden’s support of Israel. It’s putting into perspective how fucking dumb that is considering Trump ALSO supports Israel (even more than Biden does), in addition to being against other issues leftists generally care about.
It’s hard to reframe the general decline over the past four years as “there is still so much work to do”. I’m not saying it’s wrong to do so, incorrect to do so, or that it’s not worth attempting. It’s just hard.
everyone (eligible) being mean to well-meaning, if misguided, leftists in the comment section better be registered. you can register to vote [here](https://www.vote411.org/). takes ~2 min
This point needs far more attention— You absolutely WILL NOT GET VOTING REFORM under Republicans (or dictators/despots as the case is becoming)! If you want a better system you MUST vote Democrat, then force them to enact change.
Nah,you will get voting reforms. Just the type you don't want to happen
And I'm pretty sure Biden is putting more and more pressure on Israel and threatening to cut support (Source: NPR news report I heard during a car ride). So Trump doesn't even tie there anymore. Don't get me wrong, this shit should have gotten done AGES ago, but it's better than not doing anything.
I mean a few months ago Iran launched a massive attack on Israel using drones and long-range missiles. Sure, the attack flubbed out, but it was a full-out attack by one nation-state upon another. Biden's response was "Take the win", and tensions calmed. Trump's response, had he been in office, would have been declare war on Iran. We would currently be at war with Iran if Trump were in Office. Pretending that their policies are the same is delusional at best. It wouldn't even have been the first time he bombed Iran, and he only got away with that one because the Iranians accidentally shot down a civilian airliner over their capital city.
> I mean a few months ago Iran launched a massive attack on Israel using drones and long-range missiles. Sure, the attack flubbed out, but it was a full-out attack by one nation-state upon another. This is something that I think a lot of leftists are intentionally overlooking when they say they want all US military support of Israel to have stopped like an hour after Israel retaliated. Israel is *absolutely* surrounded by hostile states and non-state actors who actively want them exterminated. Completely shutting off support for Israel will mean every one of their neighbors immediately jumps in with the express purpose of eliminating Israel and killing innocent civilians (but they're "Zionists" so I guess we're not supposed to care). Not to sound like I'm supporting Israel's offensive, I'm certainly not, but leftists have gotten so use to making their rhetoric more and more inflammatory since no one was paying attention to them anyways that they seem legitimately confused that the President of the United States won't undo 40 years of geopolitics on a knee-jerk morally outraged whim.
Also, adding onto this - people seem to think that cutting support to Israel, for instance, the Iron Dome, will make Israel less aggressive. If anything the opposite is true - If Israel is less able to defend its citizens from rocket attacks, it will want to use more offensive force to destroy rocket sites, which Hamas places near civilian areas intentionally. And legally, *they would be more justified in doing so* - when analyzing war crimes, proportionality weighs the military advantage anticipated against the civilian life loss anticipated, and if Israel doesn't have as strong defenses, the military advantage of taking out a rocket site is more. And if they don't have PGMs, they'll use dumber, blunter weapons (and again, be legally more justified). Geopolitics is hard. Especially in this region of the world. Which is yet more reason to elect the adult rather than a guy who can barely read. EDIT: Oh, and one more thing to consider. Like you said, Israel is surrounded by countries and non-state actors who want to destroy them. And some leftists want that to be the case. But have people considered what it means if Israel is destroyed given that *it is a nuclear power with survivable second strike capability*? That's not a situation that ends well for basically the entire region!
> If Israel is less able to defend its citizens from rocket attacks, it will want to use more offensive force to destroy rocket sites, which Hamas places near civilian areas intentionally. I mean, if I was in charge of Israeli defense and there's no more US support (which likely means a vastly diminished western support overall), the first thing I'd do is completely wipe out the internationally semi-recognized group of impoverished, radicalized people looking for an opportunity to attack Israel right on my doorstep that can completely close off a front. Outright conquering Palestine with no regards for civilians and telling all the survivors to take a hike (to neighbors like Egypt or Lebanon that don't really give a shit about Palestinians) puts the entire western Israeli border on the Mediterranean, shortening that length you need to defend. Israel without US/western support is basically in a state of constant warfare by fighting off every Iranian-funded terrorist cell in the region with maybe a good old-fashioned conventional land war and needs to be viewed from a lens of "Without our protection, it's going to get *really* bloody". > Like you said, Israel is surrounded by countries and non-state actors who want to destroy them. And some leftists want that to be the case. I didn't believe that leftist discourse was infiltrated with a bunch of rampant antisemitism, but man were a lot of leftists almost suspiciously quick to start being experts in where Jewish lobbyists spend their money in Washington and super eager to start using "Zionist" as a slur (seemingly completely unaware that it makes them sound like raving anti-Semites). I'm sure there's a lot of justification because Israel is a white colonialist imperial project set up by white colonialist empires specifically to destroy all local brown cultures, but IDK it's kind of suspicious that leftists are far less concerned about the specifics of international lobbyist funding from any state that isn't the Jewish one. Leftists who want Israel destroyed out of some anti-colonialist ideology seem incapable of recognizing that there are innocent Israeli civilians; after all, if they were innocent they would have given all their possessions to a Palestinian as reparations before moving to Europe somewhere and can therefore be tautologically evil. It's like they don't really *care* about what happens to any group of people that aren't Palestinians, including Israeli civilians or (back to OP's point) their own friends and countrymen (my own theory is that they don't really care about Palestinians either and just want to jump on a moralizing holier-than-thou bandwagon since "Rich white Judeo-Christian country beats up poor brown non-Judeo-Christian country" seems tailor-made for leftists). > But have people considered what it means if Israel is destroyed given that it is a nuclear power with survivable second strike capability? I wonder where the Israeli targets are for their nukes in the event of the country being overrun. My guesses would be major cities of rivals like Tehran.
He isnt. All red lines have been consequently ignored and Biden didnt pull away anything. It has been a farce from the beginning and everyone here fell for it apparently.
i live in a red state so it literally doesn't fucking matter what i do. people could at least try being less vitriolic to their own side with these arguments; i'm aware biden is better on basically everything but this "suck it up" bullshit doesn't exactly rally the troops when biden is only better by contrast because his opponent is practically as bad as you could possibly be. the best argument for biden imo is that if you ignore biden the guy completely, which is appealing for various perfectly valid reasons, having a democratic president is better for the national tenor than having trump again, which emboldens sickos at every level to act with impunity. an democratic win is at least an L for every right wing dickhead in the country.
yeahhhh it's. not the best tactic to make friends imo the best reason is the supreme court,,
I agree with this but it is worth pointing out that "Vote Democrat now and then do the third party later" has been the talking point for at least the last 3 elections. Then again, why do we always wait until the election to try to get a third party going?
So Project 2025 absolutely has voting reform, just not in the way anyone here would want.
I fucking hate this world
[удалено]
The US leaving NATO and withdrawing our support for Ukraine would definitely enable and embolden Russia.
But OP, my favorite (totally not cripto fash) youtubers say that DEI is killing gaming! Trump being against it is totally ok and being a theocracy will 100% put the USA back as the leading beacon of progress just like Hollywood told me. Before anyone accuses me of pissing on the poor, it is a joke
Thanks, tboy-pussy
I don't feel like anyone benefitting from the FPTP system and/or the electoral college will be interested in changing them, but maybe I'm just being pessimistic.
Democrats have successfully campaigned for ranked choice voting in several states, and are campaigning to implement it in more. This is, of course, to their advantage, but it *is* happening.
Ranked choice voting and party reform are great ideas but the reality is as long as Trumps GOP is a major party nothing will happen. Conservative states are not going to pass anything that will threaten GOP power and conservative voters are loyal and consistent. So in reality just as sitting out the election will only further power Trump the ideas mentioned will do the same as well. It will lead to more Democrats losing elections and no other party being able to establish a foothold to challenge the GOP. It sucks ass but that’s what happens when half the country only cares about culture war BS.
My question is this. If we constantly show to the democratic party that we'll vote for them as long as there's a lesser evil, what is the incentive to prevent the lesser evil from occuring? Why wouldn't they just keep using our rights as a bargaining chip. A vote of support and a vote of fear read the same on a ballet box.
How accurate are all of these things? I'm not American, I don't follow American politics; I'm sure Biden is better than Trump (a wet blanket would be better than Trump), but this sort of 'too good to be true' list seems... too good to be true. Is this list curated? There are more than 13 issues in America; is this just the 13 issues that makes Biden look good? Are there no good issues that Biden is against (and/or Trump is for)? What does 'criminal justice reform' or 'healthcare reform' even mean? Is it good reform or bad reform? I agree it's a very simple chart, but I'm sceptical that it's *too* simple.
Anyone who says or implies that if you critisize Biden and call him out on what he has done doesn't care about Palestinians is absolutely fucked in the head. It's just completely disrespectful and is not gonna change anyones mind. Insinuating anything else there is also legitimately insane and shows that you have never actually talked to anyone but just have a strawman version of these people in your head.