898
I'd like to think they're all just Russian trolls but increasingly, I think some people are just selfish or dumb.
(lemmy.world)
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
898 points (90.8% liked)
Political Memes
5455 readers
2453 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To keep voting blue/red no matter is how you create the very situation we are in. Punishing politicians is how you get them to work for you and not for themselves and pacs.
Not voting is not "punishing" anyone, it's simply abdicating your own power. Political parties aren't businesses you can punish by boycotting their products.
Parties represent the views of those who support them by some combination of getting involved, organizing, donating, and most importantly voting in BOTH the primaries (for the one who best represents you) and the general for whoever won the primary even if it wasn't your primary choice. To wield power you have to win elections. To win you have to please those who will vote for you and if your base won't vote for you, you have to turn to the middle and right to get votes. If your base would show up for you, you could safely move left and still win (republicans always show up and vote for the R, so their party has moved more and more right).
Look what happened after Dobbs. Dem candidates used to be afraid to alienate moderates/conservatives by even mentioning abortion because they needed to get some of those voters to win, but when democrats got motivated by Dobbs and actually turned out for Dem candidates, they immediately stood up loudly for abortion rights and other rights as well, once they knew their base would show up for them. If the Dem base would continue to show up, the party would move more left on the issues, since they'd know they can win with their base and don't have to worry about alienating conservatives.
voting is enabling the current system and corruption to continue which is really abdicating your own power, you have it all wrong
I didn't say anything about not voting. I think people should vote in a strategic way however. And that means at times you need to vote on the other side or back a different politician.
I do agree that voting in primaries is important. I think there are also things that we can do to help move away from this corrupt system. For example, having ranked choice voting.
I do think that a big problem is that people aren't willing to sacrifice some comfort in the short term for long term gain. If voting temporarily for red because blue isn't listening to you or being corrupt then when they lose they'll learn to listen to you next time. If not them, then someone else. People don't do this and will vote red or blue no matter what which results in shit politicians.
Young voters not voting in primaries is how we got into this situation.
You want politicians who represent you? Gotta vote in primaries! But the elderly, who are a smaller slice of the population, absolutely shit kick the youth in terms of voting in primaries.
Want change? Gotta vote even when it's not trending on social media.
I do, I vote in primaries and my local elections.
That's great! Keep it up! Encourage others!
The problem with democracy is even when you and I do the right stuff, it's all about encouraging those millions of others. And too many millions of younger voters don't have your decency/notion of the body politic/whatever your reasons for voting are.
Party leadership has control over primaries and don't have any legal responsibility to have them be fair or even have them at all.
Whew! Good thing you've got an excuse for everything, otherwise you might actually have to do something other than play-act at being a radical on social media.
But whining is so much easier! You don't even have to leave the toilet! /s
The primaries being controlled by party leadership is not an "excuse" to not participate in them, it's just clarifying that that isn't a sufficient approach.
🙄
🤪
If you don't vote in them it doesn't matter.
If the most vocal young voters had actually shown up for Sanders, who as far as I can tell, offered pretty much everything progressives could realistically ask for, well, we'd be in a very different position.
But, elderly people outvoted the youth ans went centrist Clinton.
Edit: a word
Plenty of older people voted (caucused in my state) for Sanders, including me. And in the general I voted for Clinton anyway. Those who didn't are why we got trump.
Oh absolutely, no voting block is a monolith! (And thanks for caucusing for the good guys!) It's just, on average, the older voters stood by Clinton in the primaries and as they show up in the greatest numbers, she won.
If you do vote in them it may not matter.
The party pulled plenty of shenanigans to stop Sanders from getting the nomination. The US has overthrown governments for less. They aren't accountable processes.
And at the end of the day, young progressive voters didn't show up.
Before whining that everything is rigged, maybe show up in the numbers required to win?
Do you acknowledge that the primary processes are not legally required to be fair? Yes or no.
Sure, there's no legal requirement.
Can you acknowledge that this hypothetical problem has never come up as progressive candidates have never won the majority of votes? (Because, yup, the progressive youth vote doesn't show up.)
Yes or no.
No. What meaning is there in talking about votes in an election with no guarantee of fairness?
I just held an election where I got 100% of the votes (just one vote, me). If you don't like it, it's your fault for not showing up to it.
This is an impressively dumb argument.
"We shouldn't vote because I can imagine a scenario in which they don't count the votes!"
"Has that happened?"
"Well, no, but it could!"
I doubt you're old enough to have seen Billy Maddison but you remind me of the bus driver:
Bus Driver : That Veronica Vaughn is one piece of ass, I know from experience dude. If you know what I mean.
Billy Madison : No, you don't.
Bus Driver : Well, not me personally but a guy I know. Him and her got it on. Wooo-eee!
Billy Madison : No, they didn't.
Bus Driver : No, but you can imagine what it'd be like!
Cool.
Do you apply that standard consistently? If Kim Jong Un announces his party got 100% of the vote, are you going to say that's on his opponents for not showing up?
Also, I never said "we shouldn't vote." What I said is that the process isn't legitimate. As I mentioned, there were plenty of shenanigans that the democratic establishment used to ensure that Sanders wouldn't get the nomination, so this isn't just a hypothetical about what I can imagine or what might happen.
"Do you apply this logic cosistently?"
Proceeds to give a wholly incompatible and incosistent example of North Korea.
How anyone could not take you seriously is beyond me.
What makes it incompatible? You're dismissing questions of legitimacy and looking only at the results. The results of the 2016 democratic primaries were that Hillary won, and you say regardless of how legitimate or illegitimate the process may be, that happened because not enough Bernie supporters showed up. How is that different from looking at the North Korean elections and putting aside any questions of legitimacy or fairness and just looking at the results and saying the same thing? It's the exact same logic.
You don't see the difference between your imaginary DNC scenario and North Korea's elections which have been decried as sham elections?
When international observers start showing that the votes in the Democratic primaries don't count, then you'd have a case.
Until then, this is the stupidest argument I've read or hears in weeks and not worth anymore of my time.
If you're arguing in good faith, God help us all. I much prefer to think you're trolling as it breaks my heart to think someone this dumb has the same number of votes that I do. (Well, fewer as you're too dumb to vote in primaries but still...)
Oh, so it does matter whether or not elections are legitimate? So then why do you automatically dismiss all questions of legitimacy regarding the Democratic primaries?
Again, did not say that one shouldn't vote in primaries, only that the primaries are not a sufficient answer to how to enact left-wing polices.
Like I said, this isn't worth my time.
Reread what's been written, it has the answers.
Maybe it'll make sense when you grow up?
And I've answered all your points.
I'm in my 30's and the older I get the further left I go, so don't hold your breath on that.
Like I keep saying - time doesn't ipso facto make you wise. Wisdom is something you earn with hard work and dedication to intellectual honesty. It does not simply come with time and you are yet another great example of this.
Pretending like elections in North Korea and the USA are comparable is either very ignorant or wholly disingenuous.
I never pretended that. My point is that if you categorically dismiss questions of legitimacy in an election, then it leads to absurd conclusions.
Oooof, you're in your 30s and these are the sorts of arguments you're making? I mean, when I was in grade school, maybe...
Right now though, your argument is like saying it's dangerous to go outside because no one can prove that Michael Meyers isn't out there ready to chop you to bits. Sure, it's possible a psychopath is out there lurking but it's very unlikely. Similarly, sure, it's possible the DNC could rig the primaries and not count the votes but it's comically unlikely. Since the primary system began, the candidate with the most votes has won the nomination. Should that not happen, then there'll be outrage and chaos but until then, it seems kind of insane to not actually try to make things better because you can pretend a scenario in which your vote doesn't matter.
Which why we need a voting system that can end the duopoly without enormous sacrifice. Ranked Choice Voting can do that. If really hate the duopoly, you have no excuse not to join us and get RCV implemented everywhere. Check out FairVote for more info and to locate movements near you.
I agree