Nobody is saying that, they’re saying to set a minimum standard to vote democrat so that candidates like this get elected. This is where they gloat and say they were right.
inaction is, but voting third party allows strategy adjustment based on exit polling and what third parties got votes, which does actually shift things left.
In the US presidential election system, the Electoral College forces a maximum of 2 viable parties, and nothing else. It also favors Republicans as it gives them more value per received vote, meaning the Dems need to get more votes than Republicans to win each election, and even then it may not be enough like in 2016.
So when you vote for a 3rd party candidate, not only are you again supporting the GOP’s victory, you are also allowing them to move the Overton window further right, which is exactly what’s been happening.
The only thing that has successfully moved the Overton winfow left, in the US, is voting in Dem Socs in DNC primaries, and voting against the GOP candidate no matter what in general elections.
Even if your Dem politician is a neo-liberal, voting them in is a SIGNIFICANT slowdown of shifting the Overton window right than by letting the Republican win.
Not voting only tells candidates that you’re not a reliable voter, so they can ignore you. They don’t see your non-vote as a protest vote, because failing to vote means you don’t exist to them. If you want to exist to politicians you have to vote. Also, there are nearly always down ballot candidates that are progressive that get ignored because morons act like the top of the ticket is the only reason to leave their moms basement.
Think of it from the perspective of a candidate, they have endless data showing them that no matter how hard they try they won’t meet your moral purity test, so they court reliable voters with their messaging and resources.
Sure and work right past them by electing progressives and DSA members.
But for non voters i fear we can shame them, worship them, do everything they want and it still wont matter. They don’t vote because it makes them feel superior. Its not about politics, its about needing to feel justified in their belief that they are better. It’s just ego. Others are just myopic and act helpless. Until they start getting marched into camps, then they might start to see why voting always matters.
I’ve watched it over and over, a candidate will agree with someone on 99% of issues, finally a candidate these voters can get behind. Most of those non voters still stay home. They’ll find one issue they disagree with, or they’ll say it doesn’t matter anyway, that every candidate is controlled opposition. I’ve worked in politics, I’ve seen the data, I’ve courted those voters. Until non voters actually show up, mocking them is probably just as good a use of time as any (I’m maybe being flippant here).
Inaction is nearly as big an evil in society as bad action.
Inaction is nearly as big an evil in society as bad action.
You can’t be neutral on a moving train and all that. Also, Rush: “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”.
The non-voters that pay attention, but still stay home over some performative bullshit are the most exasperating.
It’s one thing to be low-info; it’s quite another to be a lazy/uncaring asshole that still has an awareness of politics, but because your pet issue didn’t get enough care, or the candidate did not properly court a certain group to then bow out, and then - this is the best part - to act like they are morally superior beings because of that inaction. Oh, chef’s kiss on that last part.
Whatever. As long as politicians keep promising to respect democracy and serving people then when they will they do the opposite many people will not vote. When some new politicians seems more trusty and bring something new like Mamdani the turnout get bigger . His election has highest voter turnout for an NYC mayoral race since 1969
I’m still trying to figure out what the first half of that is even trying to say, so I’m not sure how to respond to it.
As for running more candidates like Mamdani, you’ll get no argument from me there. I’m happy with his performance so far, and the performance of others like him. The time is ripe for a sea change. People are ready for it.
Even so, sometimes and in some districts, damage control / harm reduction is necessary, and sometimes a strategic vote means voting for the least bad option. Not everyone has a progressive on the ticket, although they should.
But I’d still vote for a milquetoast centrist if the only other option is a mask-off fascist, and it’s wild that some people still see things differently
How did they give us Donvict? Donvict was and is clearly a reaction - an all-too-predictable one, by they way - from reactionaries that had their brains utterly broken by having a black President for 8 years.
I don’t see how it makes any sense to go all Murc’s Law on Democratic candidates, but the voters, most especially Republican voters and non-voters, are blameless?
They have data showing people don’t vote for them if they aren’t properly aligned with them on issues like israel. They then the one that tries to appeal to those things gets elected. Based on what you’re saying there’s essentially no point at all to voting or appealing to you, because you’ll vote for them no matter what. There’s only a reason to appeal to people if what you do changes whether they vote for you.
You’re whole argument is a series of straw mans and doesn’t actually address what I said. You can literally go in and vote for no one or only one down ballot candidate you believe in and that would be far more productive than not voting. I could be the most left wing candidate that ever lived and courting non voters would still be a waste in most elections. How are you going to convince me that courting someone that has voted in last 4 elections is less important than courting someone who skipped the last 4? If you don’t vote, you’ve announced to the world you don’t care and the world responded as expected.
And exit polling doesn’t exist for non voters if they don’t vote… Who are these mythical people who never vote but we have mountains of data on. The primary way parties get data is through voter rolls and party affiliation that they cross reference with purchased metadata. If your not voting they have a choice between targeting reliable voters they know support them and complete mysteries that never vote, be real here.
Nobody is saying that, they’re saying to set a minimum standard to vote democrat so that candidates like this get elected. This is where they gloat and say they were right.
My dude, they are saying this shit and this is why we’re in the boat we are in.
Young people historically haven’t been showing up to primaries. They’re not putting in the effort to get a candidate worth voting for.
So you’re left with 2 options:
The system favors the new Nazi party, so yes, inaction and voting 3rd party is objectively supporting the new Nazi party.
inaction is, but voting third party allows strategy adjustment based on exit polling and what third parties got votes, which does actually shift things left.
Objectively wrong.
In the US presidential election system, the Electoral College forces a maximum of 2 viable parties, and nothing else. It also favors Republicans as it gives them more value per received vote, meaning the Dems need to get more votes than Republicans to win each election, and even then it may not be enough like in 2016.
So when you vote for a 3rd party candidate, not only are you again supporting the GOP’s victory, you are also allowing them to move the Overton window further right, which is exactly what’s been happening.
The only thing that has successfully moved the Overton winfow left, in the US, is voting in Dem Socs in DNC primaries, and voting against the GOP candidate no matter what in general elections.
Even if your Dem politician is a neo-liberal, voting them in is a SIGNIFICANT slowdown of shifting the Overton window right than by letting the Republican win.
Not voting only tells candidates that you’re not a reliable voter, so they can ignore you. They don’t see your non-vote as a protest vote, because failing to vote means you don’t exist to them. If you want to exist to politicians you have to vote. Also, there are nearly always down ballot candidates that are progressive that get ignored because morons act like the top of the ticket is the only reason to leave their moms basement.
Think of it from the perspective of a candidate, they have endless data showing them that no matter how hard they try they won’t meet your moral purity test, so they court reliable voters with their messaging and resources.
Most politicians are not reliable so people lose hope and stop voting yet people like you keep critisizing the voters and not the politicians
Oh I am far more angry at the Dem party. Not voting is still moronic.
Moronic or not, you make them vote by pressuring the politicians. Shaming them will not improve the chance of them starting voting again.
Sure and work right past them by electing progressives and DSA members.
But for non voters i fear we can shame them, worship them, do everything they want and it still wont matter. They don’t vote because it makes them feel superior. Its not about politics, its about needing to feel justified in their belief that they are better. It’s just ego. Others are just myopic and act helpless. Until they start getting marched into camps, then they might start to see why voting always matters.
I’ve watched it over and over, a candidate will agree with someone on 99% of issues, finally a candidate these voters can get behind. Most of those non voters still stay home. They’ll find one issue they disagree with, or they’ll say it doesn’t matter anyway, that every candidate is controlled opposition. I’ve worked in politics, I’ve seen the data, I’ve courted those voters. Until non voters actually show up, mocking them is probably just as good a use of time as any (I’m maybe being flippant here).
Inaction is nearly as big an evil in society as bad action.
You can’t be neutral on a moving train and all that. Also, Rush: “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”.
The non-voters that pay attention, but still stay home over some performative bullshit are the most exasperating.
It’s one thing to be low-info; it’s quite another to be a lazy/uncaring asshole that still has an awareness of politics, but because your pet issue didn’t get enough care, or the candidate did not properly court a certain group to then bow out, and then - this is the best part - to act like they are morally superior beings because of that inaction. Oh, chef’s kiss on that last part.
He’s criticizing the non-voters.
And i blame the system and politcians that allowed so much people to feel so desperate that they decide to not vote
A lot of things can be blameworthy.
If they were that desperate you’d think they would at least cast a vote, even against all hope. That’s what desperation means.
The word you were looking for is resigned. People felt so resigned that they decided not to vote.
Whatever. As long as politicians keep promising to respect democracy and serving people then when they will they do the opposite many people will not vote. When some new politicians seems more trusty and bring something new like Mamdani the turnout get bigger . His election has highest voter turnout for an NYC mayoral race since 1969
I’m still trying to figure out what the first half of that is even trying to say, so I’m not sure how to respond to it.
As for running more candidates like Mamdani, you’ll get no argument from me there. I’m happy with his performance so far, and the performance of others like him. The time is ripe for a sea change. People are ready for it.
Even so, sometimes and in some districts, damage control / harm reduction is necessary, and sometimes a strategic vote means voting for the least bad option. Not everyone has a progressive on the ticket, although they should.
But I’d still vote for a milquetoast centrist if the only other option is a mask-off fascist, and it’s wild that some people still see things differently
This is a democracy. Are you saying the voters deserve no criticism when we end up with Republicans?
Shitty establishememt democratic politicians gave you trump . Yes in democracies politicians are the one who should get critisized
How did they give us Donvict? Donvict was and is clearly a reaction - an all-too-predictable one, by they way - from reactionaries that had their brains utterly broken by having a black President for 8 years.
I don’t see how it makes any sense to go all Murc’s Law on Democratic candidates, but the voters, most especially Republican voters and non-voters, are blameless?
They have data showing people don’t vote for them if they aren’t properly aligned with them on issues like israel. They then the one that tries to appeal to those things gets elected. Based on what you’re saying there’s essentially no point at all to voting or appealing to you, because you’ll vote for them no matter what. There’s only a reason to appeal to people if what you do changes whether they vote for you.
You’re whole argument is a series of straw mans and doesn’t actually address what I said. You can literally go in and vote for no one or only one down ballot candidate you believe in and that would be far more productive than not voting. I could be the most left wing candidate that ever lived and courting non voters would still be a waste in most elections. How are you going to convince me that courting someone that has voted in last 4 elections is less important than courting someone who skipped the last 4? If you don’t vote, you’ve announced to the world you don’t care and the world responded as expected.
And exit polling doesn’t exist for non voters if they don’t vote… Who are these mythical people who never vote but we have mountains of data on. The primary way parties get data is through voter rolls and party affiliation that they cross reference with purchased metadata. If your not voting they have a choice between targeting reliable voters they know support them and complete mysteries that never vote, be real here.
You’re right. I forgot third parties were even an option. My bad.