There's nuance. Obviously, vote for the liberal over the fascist, it's not even close. However, the fascists are absolutely represented in government, while there's no leftist candidates to speak of. Leftists have to plug their nose and vote liberal, while fascists gleefully vote republican.
Voting is entirely for loss prevention, because ultimately it absolutely impacts minority groups and people who stand to lose a great deal by a republican victory. However, leftists will not be able to move America to the left by voting.
That's why grassroots movements and building up of parallel structures are so important for leftism, it cannot work within the confines of a 2 party Capitalist state, and must be built from the bottom up.
•
You said there’s nuance but then went on to explain that there isn’t nuance and the only reasonable vote is for Biden. And you’re not wrong. There are a lot of folks pretending to be on the left acting like there’s a whole lot of nuance here, and that voting for someone other than Biden, or not voting at all, is an acceptable option.
None of this precludes advocating for your positions or doing other praxis, but when it comes to voting the answer is clear
There's nuance, because leftists saying voting isn't going to change anything meaningfully as far as moving towards the left is still true.
That is true, but not voting or casting a protest vote right now ensures fascism, under which there will be literally no choice at all.
At least under a democracy there are chances to improve things, like replacing FPTP with a better voting system that will actually allow the left a seat at the table. That’s already happening in some places and there’s a movement (supported by democrats and vehemently opposed by republicans) to enact alternative voting methods.
Unfortunately there’s been so much apathy for decades that the fascists have got their foot solidly in the door. There was nuance years ago, but we squandered it. There’s little point debating left vs liberal when fascism has taken hold. That must be stopped first.
There’s no such thing as moral neutrality in this environment, and as much as it sucks, not voting against fascism is the same as voting for fascism.
Hence my original point, leftists must vote for liberals, even if it isn't ever going to improve the system, and must work themselves to build up leftist structures without hoping for help from liberals. If they don't vote, then fascists take power, and leftists lose the chance to build leftist structures at all.
I do think you're too hopeful that a 2 party Capitalist state designed to change as little as possible would meaningfully improve from within, rather than under pressure from without, but it would be great if you were right about that.
I’m not that hopeful that the left can change the system from within, to be honest, I’m just certain it’s too late to think about that because under fascist rule, not only will things not improve, but many of us will face genocide.
The time for leftist change was 20 years ago, or with any luck, 8 or so years from now after the fascist threat has been quashed. Right now we have to think about unifying like it’s 1932.
Only thing I disagree with is the idea that leftist change was more possible 20 years ago, Capitalism's instability and inherent structural flaws only make themselves more apparent and severe as time goes on, and with that comes potential for change. The left is larger than ever before, and is constantly growing.
That’s already happening in some places and there’s a movement (supported by democrats and vehemently opposed by republicans) to enact alternative voting methods.
Where? And who in the DNC supports this?
And here’s one resource to support it. There are many others, both local and national.
eta: I’m on mobile so searching and linking is hard, but you can find people running for office who support these efforts by googling the office (senator, mayor, or whatever) and ‘free vote initiative’ or some synonyms. There are some (mostly local) republicans, substantially more democrats, and a huge majority of 3rd party candidates for obvious reasons).
I strongly recommend bringing it up with your representatives. 3rd party and democrats have been teaming up for this, and republicans have been fighting it because FPTP greatly benefits them and they know it.
Unfortunately there’s been so much apathy for decades that the fascists have got their foot solidly in the door.
That apathy has been earned.
So is the illusion of being able to shift the Overton window in any way more important than saving your supporters from genocide?
Reread the original comment. It's absolutely important to vote as loss prevention, but you're never going to get meaningful systemic change towards the left via voting.
Vote to protect, actually make grassroots movements like unionizing and organizing to move to the left.
Answer my question. Which is more important, shifting the Overton window or preventing genocide? You only get to pick one
Reread the original comment. It's absolutely important to vote as loss prevention, but you're never going to get meaningful systemic change towards the left via voting.
Vote to protect, actually make grassroots movements like unionizing and organizing to move to the left.
Answer my question. Which is more important, shifting the Overton window or preventing genocide? You only get to pick one.
I suppose it might look that way if you aren't a minority or a woman or gay. If nothing meaningful has changed in the last 100 years, then we could go back to the policies of the 1900s-1920s without any difference. And I very much doubt anyone wants to do that, because there are very big differences.
The things that did change did not start with voting. Especially because women couldn't vote to get the right to vote.
So they started with the liberal framework of free expression and ended with voting? Good point I guess.
I just don't know why the Onus is never on Joe Biden himself. Why is it that we feel like he doesn't have to earn any votes at all?
"Am I so out of touch? No, it's the voters who are wrong."
"Am I so out of touch? No, it's the voters who are wrong."
No, it's more like "LOL you have to vote for me, or the fascist will win". Democrats love opponents like Trump, because he helps them fundraise like crazy.
It also means they don't have to do shit but be second worst to a literal fascist. And it's disgusting how comfortable they are in such a position.
The onus isn’t on him because voting for him is for our benefit
It's to our lesser detriment. There's a difference.
Voting for someone other than Biden or not voting is an absolutely acceptable option, and I’m not pretending to be a leftist when I do so. I have Ranked Choice Voting in my state, but even if I didn’t, I would vote for who I most want in office because I have no faith in either democrats or republicans to fix the most important issues currently plaguing 99% of the people. Vilifying people for voting third party — when third parties are currently the only viable presidential and congressional solution apart from a violent revolution — is misguided.
Democrats are not your friends; you deserve better.
Non voters vote too. They vote for 'I'll have what she's having.' then they complain when she chooses shit.
Leftist 3rd parties split votes between leftists and the more conservative liberals (who are the vast majority), increasing the chance of a Republican victory. I fully support right-wing people voting Libertarian though :)
With the politics of the U.S. population, and violent revolution would likely be fascist.
Just a random note: Most proper libertarians (not those weird tea party fucks) make Democrats look positively authoritarian on social issues. Economics, no, but social? Absolutely.
True. I considered myself a libertarian when I was in high school (mostly for cannabis legalization and guns, lol). Then, some of my first job experiences were pretty bad (persistent wage theft on multiple jobs, an owner coercing sex from minors, etc), and started becoming more of a leftist.
I get that. Libertarians have a bad habit of downplaying economic hardship by saying that markets will solve themselves. Maybe there's a world in which that might work, but it isn't this one.
I do think that some progressive influencers know that the DNC is much closer to the GOP on social issues. Attacking libertarians is, in my opinion, a calculated lie designed to distract from that fact.
Tell me you don't understand math & game theory without telling me you don't understand math & game theory.
This is very well written and well said. If we want change that doesn't come from working within the Democrats, we have to build our own robust party across all 50 states, drawing on strong local support. No one outside of the two parties is currently trying to do this, which speaks volumes about the Green and Libertarian Parties.
Leftists really have no choice other than to vote Democrat. We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans. We fundamentally go against left wing values if we don't. I cannot call myself liberal or leftist or wherever in-between if I sit out an election where innocent people will suffer if one of the candidates wins.
I like how you've phrased this -- voting for Biden isn't because you necessarily like his policies or viewpoints, but because you want to protect people from Trump and the Republicans. I'd love if we didn't have to worry about fascists, but we don't have that luxury. As long as they're a hair's breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.
Exactly. There's one terminally online radlib here that I blocked because they were just shit-slinging for daring to suggest both voting Biden and unionizing, organizing, protesting, etc. As a leftist, we must work from without the Democratic party.
Speaking purely from a leftist perspective, I'm actually of the opinion that Anarchist principles of building up parallel structures actually may be more applicable to the American political climate, even if you're more of a Council Communist, Libertarian Socialist, Marxist-Leninist, etc. The US is seeing rising Unionization, and dramatic impacts from it, so I think Syndicalism actually has some revolutionary potential, unlike waiting for a Vanguard Party a la MLism.
Just my 2 cents.
It's funny, I thought that unions had passed their usefulness, and we needed a new structure to effectively push CEOs. And then the UAW and SAG proved me completely wrong, and I'm glad for it.
I think either way, you have the perfect viewpoint on this. Voting won't work to create change, but that doesn't mean you just ignore voting. You use it to protect what we have from fascists while initiating change from a new organization built from the ground up.
I'm extremely anticapitalist, and Unions are currently the best way for Workers to protect their own interests within current structures, and have the potential to replace current Capitalist ownership. A full replacement of Capitalist structures will be necessary eventually, but Unionization can be an arm to muscle that change through.
Thanks for sharing!
We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans.
How's that going? Republicans are enacting all manner of bigoted policy. What are the Democrats doing to reverse their hateful shit at the federal level?
I’d love if we didn’t have to worry about fascists, but we don’t have that luxury. As long as they’re a hair’s breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.
We don't have that option. We have Democrats, who will always care more about decorum and procedural bullshit than they ever will about protecting anyone.
They don't have the numbers in Congress necessary to take federal action. It's a vicious circle -- people don't think they're doing enough, so they don't vote for them. As a result, they don't have the numbers necessary to actually affect change. And then people don't think they're doing enough, and so forth. The justice department is suing states at least, but I agree that's nowhere near enough.
If you have a way to get 60 Senate votes to protect minorities (or 50-51 who also are willing to overturn the filibuster) and the House majority, I'm all for it, and you have my support. In the absence of that, any action we take will be inadequate, no matter who is in office.
And Democrats may not be perfect, but a vote that doesn't go to fascists is a win in my book. I also think we should try to maintain norms and decorum for as long as possible -- if we can beat back fascism without compromising on our institutions, we emerge as a much stronger democracy than if we have to break the rules. If that's what it takes to stop fascists though, then so be it. I just worry that you end up in a French Revolution type situation where there's no stable governance because everyone's given up on the rules.
•
We're not going to get rid of the two party system without switching to a proportional representation system. I have my preference for America (5 seat districts with proportional approval voting) but any reasonable proportional system will do.
There's no chance they'd ever let an actual Socialist into office within the 2 party Capitalist system.
That's why you pull a reverse Sinema. Lie your ass off and pretend to be the most corporate corpodem that ever sold out. You'll only have to fight one major party instead of both of them to get elected, then you can move as far to the left as you want, so long as you avoid small aircraft.
Even there, though, even as a president, you can't meaningfully move much without the support of the party. The difference for fascists is that the Republican party legitimately has a ton of actual fascists, so fascist presidents are extremely dangerous. If a Socialist led the DNC, it would be spoiled and wouldn't have much of a chance to move left.
while fascists gleefully vote republican.
If I was a fascist, I'd vote Dem - fascism just gets more traction with liberals in the Waffle House, and Dems are utterly ineffective at actually doing anything to stop fascism anyway. It was Trump whipping the fascists into a froth while a lib was in the Waffle House that brought antifa into the streets - not Trump actually humiliating himself on a daily basis in the Offal Office.
Fascists just gets more from a Dem regime - the Dems are doing a fine job strengthening fascist institutions. If Pig City was being constructed under Trump, the resistance to it would be ten times stronger.
None of this means you are wrong, of course (you're not) - but if voting can stop fascists it simply means the political institutions aren't ready to hand power over to them just yet. They are working on it, though.
Accelerationism works both ways, I suppose, but there legitimately are fascists in the republican party.
but there legitimately are fascists in the republican party.
Doesn't matter. The actual fascists doesn't matter. The thing to be concerned about isn't the fascists themselves - what matters is the liberals that will hand power to the fascists if their precious status quo is threatened enough.
The thing about fascists that nobody except leftists seem to understand is that fascists serve a very distinct purpose in the classical liberal nation-state - they don't exist in a vacuum as some kind of "aberration". Fascism cannot exist without threatened capitalists funding them. Fascism cannot exist without liberals handing power to them to maintain their precious "Law & Order."
There is no such thing as "grass-roots fascism" - it's all coming from above.
It makes sense, but I think the downvotes are from people feeling like this is victim blaming as opposed to recognizing what you're actually saying.
It's not Johnny Democrat going to the polls that's allowing fascists to take power, it's Joe Manchin protecting his own wealth by "allowing" a "friendly fascist" to take power, or pass a bill, if it means stopping a Bernie Sanders from taking office or stopping a popular bill that would cost him potential profit. Unless I'm the one who's misunderstanding lol
The downvotes are from reasonable people who understand that this kind of cynicism is privileged teenager nonsense.
Unless I’m the one who’s misunderstanding lol
No, you're not. If voting could undo fascism it wouldn't exist. If the wants of the majority of people in the US actually counted the US would be a place we couldn't even imagine in this reality - and so would the rest of the world.
downvotes are from people
I got the exact same response in 2016 as well... even leftists who should have known better hysterically accused me of "accelerationsim" for stating that a Trump presidency would energize the left - which it did (mysteriously, without any "accelerationism" on my part at all).
I don't blame them... people are grasping at straws. It was the same in 2016.
yes, we could have preserved basic human rights for women by just voting for them directly when we had the chance, but it's much more entertaining for me if a bunch of people suffer needlessly to achieve the same goal
How fucking privileged can you be? This isn't a fucking game. Grow the fuck up.
for women by just voting for them directly
Are you talking about a certain neocolonialist prodigy of notorious mass-murderer Henry Kissinger, perhaps?
Do tell, liberal - how many lives in the 3rd world would you sacrifice for your venal and hollow "girlboss" fake-feminism?
Yes it does matter; millions of people will die if Trump wins a second term. Don't lie to our face by claiming it doesn't matter.
millions of people will die if Trump wins a second term.
Probably. And if the US political establishment actually manages to dig out a competent fascist, many, many more than that will die or have their lives destroyed (which has never been an unusual thing in the US at all - or anywhere the US does "foreign policy").
Your problem isn't Trump. There's a lot more (and much viler) where he came from. Your problem is the political establishment that allows his existence - will they be allowing you to vote on that any time soon?
The problem is a contingent of poorly educated small brained white trash who very incorrectly believe trump can help them out of their sorry economic conditions (in fact he actually helped make them poorer). The problem is lack of education and lack of humanity that is very evident in the responses posted on this forum.l
The problem is a contingent of poorly educated small brained white trash
Oh... so you are placing the blame for the failure of your faux-democratic capitalism on white people who have the least economic power of all white people in the US?
I wonder... if we were to look at the socio-economic background of the average alt-right supporter - what would we find, liberal?
Your cognitive dissonance is palpable.
Trump has plainly stated he will destroy anyone who doesn't cast a vote for him this time around. If that isn't frightening, you need to check your pulse.
Well according to recent articles in USA Today and the local Tribune, we do have the votes now. The current polling shows Biden way ahead among the popular votes. We are entitled to everyone of them, thanks for agreeing with me on that.
"the actual fascists don't matter" .......There's no way you just typed that in good faith.
Lol! It's quite hysterical - the one minute I'm arguing with people who don't believe anything in the US could possibly be fascist, the next I'm arguing with people who believe fascism can be stopped through voting.
No - the fascists don't matter as far as your actual vote is concerned. You can't "establish" fascism through voting. How much power the fascists get depends completely on the political establishment regardless of how the voting goes. You've had four years of Biden and the fascists haven't grown any weaker, have they?
When you vote for a liberal you are basically voting for them because they pinky-swore that they won't hand more and more power to the fascists (never mind them actually doing something about the fascists because they won't) - but they don't need your permission to do so. You have to understand that they, being political elites, will inevitably be incentivized to do so.
There's a good reason we call US "formal" politics a glorified "good cop/bad cop" routine.
If Pig City was being constructed under Trump, the resistance to it would be ten times stronger.
I think I once would have believed this but I do not anymore, and I wouldn't be willing to bet the lives of all people who aren't white, heterosexual cis-men on a resistance suddenly appearing. If anything, it seems like people are more willing to normalize, or at least look away from, atrocities than I would have ever imagined in the past.
Feels like for months all we heard about was kids in cages and how terrible it was (under Trump). Now nobody says a gd thing (under Biden). Seems like it's only acceptable to fight against fascism when it's "the other team."
and I wouldn’t be willing to bet the lives of all people who aren’t white, heterosexual cis-men on a resistance suddenly appearing
You won't get the chance to bet on it - it is simply the direction in which the US political establishment is careening. By all means, vote your conscience - hell, I'll vote with you - but don't be surprised when that doesn't alter the course much... or even at all.
If anything, it seems like people are more willing to normalize, or at least look away from, atrocities than I would have ever imagined in the past.
Certainly - but then, again... a lot of us always have. That's how we ended up here in the first place, isn't it?
If you were intelligent and you're not, you would already be voting Democratic. That you can't tell who are the bad from the good guys in this scenario just speaks to how illiterate and unintelligent you right wingers truly are.
No democrat has ever helped "strengthen" a fascist institution. It's possible you're just idiotic and haven't had any education. In fact, I'd say you just proved it beyond all question.
And frankly I'd rather have democratic fascists anyway. Whatever that looks like - I'll take it over a repuglican one anyday.
No democrat has ever helped “strengthen” a fascist institution.
"Fund the police" - Joe Biden.
A great example of what I mean. Fund the police, not the facists. Which is a police I totally agree with. Only the dimmest of dimwits would want to see the police go unfunded.
No democrat has ever helped “strengthen” a fascist institution.
Biden literally had a pig for a running mate, genius - what did you think the police really is?
I bet you can't tell me what the first police department in the world was called or why they were created, eh?
Like all "enlightened centrists," you don't even know - and don't want to know - the history of the institutions you are so desperate to normalize. Like all "enlightened centrists," you don't want to see the brutal violence that upholds your precious status quo. It's only when it shows up on your doorstep that you start ineffectively whining about it.
It's true what the leftists say - fascism is just colonialism coming home to roost. And it's only the "coming home" part that you have a problem with.
And frankly I’d rather have democratic fascists anyway
Oh, I know what those look like - I grew up in Apartheid-era South Africa. They were pretty "democratic" - and their "democracy" would be quite compatible with your batshit liberal conception of it.
The US is about as "democratic" as the USSR was "socialist" - ie, they never were and never will be. You couldn't handle actual democracy, Clyde - your understanding of politics is too constrained to even recognize it when it happens and instead you feel threatened by it.
So go... vote "harder." But when (not if) the faux "democrats" you put your faith in delivers you onto the fascists do remember - somebody tried to explain to you why.
Your views are so inept and wrong I can't bring myself to read them, but I'm sure they're just as idiotic as ever. Have a nice life, loser.
Your views are so inept and wrong
Do tell, Clyde... what has your faux-democrats done to weaken the fascists?
They are weaker, right?
I am not saying I am not voting for Biden, but running on the platform of "vote for us or bad things will happen" is a shitty platform.
Fucking thank you! I read so much bullshit about this group or that one saying they're not gonna support Biden because of whatever, it makes me want to scream
It really depends on what fields you're comparing. For example, in terms of climate change, both parties, policies will result in the destruction of the planet. Period.
When people say that, they're saying we need radical change to stop the problems right in front of us, and neither party is doing that.
Ok so you DEFINITELY don't know what you're talking about then. Climate change is one of the issues that they're furthest apart on. One has repeatedly made efforts to work with the international community to expand green energy and reduce emissions, and the other believes it's a lie and wants to double down on fossil fuel production and consumption. Just because it's not the immediate, drastic, quasi-legal action that you'd like to see, doesn't mean it isn't happening.
That the thing. We are out of time. Period.
It does not matter unless it is immediate and now.
Except it does matter. If you can keep opposition at bay, slow change can very quickly turn into drastic change if you allow it to compound. The problem has always been people turning back any change made. So long as people still exist to enact change, we're not out of time. Climate change is like riding an elevator down to hell, you can get off whenever you like, but the longer you wait the further you have to climb back up, there is no rock bottom but extinction. Defeatists like yourself are functionally no different than the deniers because you are discouraging action.
No not at all. I'm encouraging that they do something. Right now!
You're the only one discouraging that
Or maybe people plugging their ears and pretending everything is some giant misinformation campaign against their home team because they think they deserve the win without trying are being shocked to find they don't have the support they think is owed to them for simply not being fascists.
If everything you hear is just some fake person with no real problems you miss the people actually complaining about their legitimate ones and feel forgotten about and at best don't vote and at worst vote for the side that agrees that it would be fun to pick on the people perceived as above them.
Biden should at least run debates or else people are just going to be in exactly their own bubble of awareness and have his results of his presidency to work with and hopes and dreams of the other and people suck at objective looks at reality and are much more willing to believe in fairy tales than you think.
And I know my statement makes everyone foam at theouth cause "How dare I say this!" But it is what it is. You must look reality in the face of you want to have any hope controlling it.
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions. If you want change, find local elections with candidates you agree with. Their campaigns typically pay well, in my experience, or you can volunteer if the pay doesn’t matter to you. It’s more fruitful than throwing your hands in the air and shouting about disenfranchisement.
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions
Yeah the blame for them never codifying Roe into law, their carcass in the supreme court refusing to retire, them running a terrible candidate against the will of their own voters and that candidate running an awful campaign is the fault of... people arguing on the internet
Hillary Clinton was a poor candidate. Why is it that the neo liberals never want to give her any amount of credit for her loss?
People just want human rights, you egg salad. Try not to ruin that for everyone and I won’t call you a smelly foodstuff on the internet again.
I do too, which was why I fiercely advocated for literally any other candidate in 2016. I held my nose and voted for her, but I absolutely called it. Too many people just ignored the base, and it bit all of us in the butt.
She did win the popular vote, for whatever good that does us. But what prevented a Clinton presidency was Russia seeding propaganda about her on the internet topped off with the FBI being used as a political tool. The 2016 Green Party candidate flying off to Russia last year is still a funny little sign of how absolutely fucked we are when it comes to asymmetrical information warfare.
Without arguments like these in 2016, women in the south would still be able to have abortions.
What the heck? What's the logic on that? People pointing out bad candidates is why they lost? Like seriously how on earth do you blame the weather man for the rain?
Seriously though I point out that blindly refusing to interact with conversation that makes people uncomfortable means not being prepared and the response was that this caused large standing issues with the governmental bodies that have been plaguing this country for longer than a single election?
2016 wasn't the sole deciding factor and everyone is being very emotional and really fucking stupid in here. The push to volunteer is a really good one but doesn't just make up for the idea that people talking are the issue. The share of ideas and push for betterment is necessary and sticking fingers I your ears and blindly blaming anyone that tries to point it out makes you just as fucking blind and ignorant as the people you call lesser.
It's really fucking pathetic. It's like being mad at a doctor who tells you to stop eating sugar cause you are diabetic.
Look, you have an optimistic view on this but impotent complaints don’t solve anything besides venting your frustrations. In objective USA, there are two parties on the national stage, one of which is actively, malignantly harmful. Detracting from the lesser of two evils is a boon to the greater.
I swear to god, if trump wins because of public sentiments on the internet again, I’m going to subtly inflict alcoholism upon every republican I know. Enjoy your relapses, fuckos.
Real simple. I could shut up and you would see no change. Just not hear the conversation about it directly. If you think I or any of the tiny percentage of the real world impact the Internet has is gonna be the changing factor you are incorrectly assuming and overconfidently ascribing power to what happens here. In this fraction of a fraction of a percentage.
Good luck with that prank though. Sounds like a banger of an own.
you are incorrectly assuming and overconfidently ascribing power to what happens here
How long ago were you first legally allowed to purchase alcohol?
Right, people who are “Biden is genocide!!” while republicans would be worse about Palestine and trump is calling for genocide against Central Americans.
If Biden wants those groups to stop being detractors, there is a very easy solution - simply hold a primary for DNC president, and let them cast their “other” vote there. Then Dems can galvanize support for the winning candidate in ‘24.
Unfortunately they know this won’t work due to how massively unpopular Biden is, and so they refuse. So, the problem is that DNC doesn’t want a democratically elected president, they want to try to force a genocidal dinosaur down our throats and somehow at the same time claim that the end of democracy is voting for the other guy. It’s a lose-lose for America - thanks, Biden.
Yeah, Biden doesn't have to support genocide. He can do the right thing. He just chooses not to.
Precisely. The claims of at least trying to protect civilian lives might be believable if the US wasn’t blocking every single effort at the UN to send in peacekeepers to stop the genocide. Or, you know, not approving $14Bn more taxpayer dollars to go towards sending them even more bombs to drop.
Biden’s lies to provide cover for Israel’s war crimes are boldfaced, undeniable, and disgustingly cowardly.
Biden has to earn my vote, just like every other candidate. If you want me to vote for Biden, convince me. What do you like about his platform? Can you convince me to vote for Biden without bringing up Trump?
That doesn't make any sense. You're basically saying that you refuse to look at a suite of potential consequences of your vote. That's not responsible at all.
Can you convince me to vote for Biden without bringing up Trump?
What would be the point in that when Trump is the only other candidate who has a chance of winning? The rational thing to do is to compare and contrast them.
If you're not going to vote for either of them, you might as well not vote at all. You're not going to have an effect. Decades of people voting third party have not gotten any third party anywhere. Not even when Ross Perot tried it and he actually had a decent chance.
I think there's something wrong with a system that every 4 years have you pick wether you'd rather get repeatedly punched in the face or shot
Where am I being shot? Maybe it's someplace kinda safe like the ass. I would take a bullet to the ass over being punched in the face.
This is not trump support, was a joke about how neither is a good experience. But whatever y'all
Just to name a few:
Continued support and funding to Israel with only the most tepid condemnation as people became more aware of their genocide against Palestinians.
busting the railway union which arguably, if their demand had been met, may not have had the disaster in Ohio. A move rivaled only by Regan
Despite being told that we had to fight for “kids in cages” nothing has actually come to fruition on that front
Woah woah. Biden is definitely the getting punched in the face candidate less we remember that Trump will happily send innocent people to jail for calling him names.
He tear gassed a protest to get a photo of him as supreme leader with his upside down borrowed ǝlqı𐐒.
He will happily roll back any regulations and protections and enrich anyone and any country that makes his erection harder.
Trump is absolutely the getting shot option and it's in the leg and you think it may have nicked an artery.
On Israel, you're spot on.
The rail union thing...that was a hard one, but ultimately, 3/4 of the unions involved had already approved the deal the government forced. A strike could have cost 750k jobs across the entire economy, and we'd be in full-on recession mode right now.
On immigration... We stopped forcibly removing kids from their families and have been working to reunite the families Trump separated. They're currently working on reestablishing judicial discretion (which the Trump admin removed) and fired a bunch of the Trump-appointed immigration judges. The system still really sucks, but that's a legislative issue, not an executive one. At this point, the alternative is talking about immigrants poisoning the blood of our country.
Joe ain't left-wing, that's for sure, but he's the best candidate in the batch at this point (that can win the presidency while we're locked into a 2 party system).
3/4 of the unions involved had already approved the deal the government forced
Nowhere near 3/4 of the union MEMBERS, though. The ones that had already caved were a lot of smaller unions with much less bargaining power than the bigger ones who were able to hold on until Biden pulled the rug from under them.
A strike could have cost 750k jobs across the entire economy
Not without corporations doing the actual firing. Like Biden, you're acting like mass layoffs are just a natural consequence of workers demanding fair pay and decent conditions.
It isn't. It's the result of giant corporations CHOOSING to destroy lives to save their equivalent of pocket change that they could easily spare.
Joe ain't left-wing, that's for sure
True.
he's the
bestby far least awful candidate in the batch at this point (that can win the presidency while we're locked into a 2 party system).
Fixed that for you.
Biden made the best of a bad situation with the railway union issue. He worked pretty hard and without any need for adulation behind the scenes to continue resolving the strikers needs.
Allowing the railways to collapse would have been financially devastating.
If the economy can be destroyed by a private business going under, then it needs to be nationalized.
That's a bit over simplistic, it wasn't a 'single private business', it was a sector involving transport of freight across the entire country.
But I agree re nationalising integral industries.
Kinda. By Lauren McFerran of the NLRB and other unsung pro-labor heroes cleaning up the mess Biden made to get much worse deals than they would have been able to if the president hadn't strongarmed Congress into taking their rights away.
The only positive things Biden has done for unions and workers in general is appoint people who are more pro-labor than he is to relevant positions. Usually on the advice of yet other people who are also much more pro-labor than The Senator from MBNA.
And no, that doesn't mean that I'd advise anyone to not vote for him next year.
Being punched in the face is still almost infinitely better than being shot in the genitals and left to die in agony from the resulting blood loss.
Just once, though, it would be LOVELY to have a helping hand to vote for rather than a fist or a bullet.
I don't want Trump to get another term. And Biden putting on his big boy pants and doing popular things is our best chance to preventing a second Trump term. It's retail politics, not rocket science.
There are tons of popular things he's not doing. For one, he could just straight up order the decriminalization of marijuana at the federal level. And by that, I mean, banning enforcement of the law.
Biden literally instructed the DEA to reschedule cannabis already. This kind of rulemaking requires actual policy studies, as the courts have repeatedly stated that it can't be done capriciously.
It's crazy how people know every fucking awful thing the government does but never the stuff they ostensibly support. I'll say it again - the biggest problem with progressive US politics is the cynicism and engagement gap
Biden literally instructed the DEA to reschedule cannabis already.
He directed them to look into it. That's not the same thing as telling them to reschedule it.
"Along with the pardons, Biden directed the HHS secretary and the attorney general to review how marijuana is scheduled"
You're just straight up lying. He hasn't done that at all. He's getting them to start thinking about it.
That is literally what they said, your link supports them lol
Progressive politics is when you just vibe how you feel about things, right?
I specifically said he could decriminalize it at the federal level today. He ordered for it to be looked at potentially, but it has not happened, and there is nothing that stops him from ordering it definitively right now.
The user I responded to specifically said that he already ordered the decriminalization of it.
Centrists consider thinking about doing something to be the same as doing it, and become very angry when people expect tangible results.
I'm pretty sure the executive branch can't unilaterally decriminalize marijuana. And especially not force states to decriminalize it.
I get that the FDA could reclassify marijuana, but the real issue i think is that Congress needs to get on the ball and deal with legalizing it . There are laws on the books that have to be dealt with regarding sale and distribution and banking issues.
Couldnt that be done after decriminalization. Decrim will stop ruining lives and filling jails in an immediate way. People first, then economics would go a long way.
A lot of decriminalization has started with justice department changes. But honestly don't we want something that will stick and not be taken away as soon as a different party is in charge?
It's neat watching "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" and "Politics is the art of the possible" become "I don't want to do it, so nothing is good enough."
The president is in charge of the executive branch, he can decide to decriminalize it overnight and fire any prosecutor that challenges him. Who is going to stop him, conservative judges ruling by decree in Texas? Hahaha.
I mean yeah. That's how it has been working for the last few years. Some conservative lower judge decides to kill an executive order and it works its way to the SCOTUS and they kill it.
The marijuana thing is a no brainer. It's political malpractice they haven't done anything on that front.
Agencies within the executive branch have quite a bit of independence, which is a very good thing, because if they didn't, Trump would have done vastly more damage than he did.
A second Trump term is everything you hate about Biden plus more shit. Biden still the lesser of two evils, you should vote for him.
But I will say Biden is a fucking moron for doing so many unpopular things late in his term. I guess some of these geriatric Dems would rather punch down on the left than secure democracy against it's biggest threat in decades. I get the frustration.
Who is running third party for folks to rally behind? Moreover, who is running that would somehow overcome both major parties' candidates by drawing enough away from them to win or in some way effect a change in process?
Let me know when there's a third party candidate worth my time. Jill Stein has done nothing to earn my vote, and unless she addresses her anti science remarks, she'll never get it.
Everybody needs to vote for who they honestly think the best candidate is. If that's Biden, vote Biden. If that's Jill Stein or Cornel West or whoever the Libertarians are running, then vote for them.
Vote your hopes, not your fears. Or, as Jill Stein said, "Don't vote for the lesser evil. Vote for the greater good."
Vote Democrat, but remember they are chosen because they are marginally better, not because they are great.
Do everything in your power to end the rule of a stupid two-party system, for one party going full fascist allows the other to stop fighting for your rights the way it should.
If the DNC wanted to, it could pass ballot & electoral reform. It doesn’t, because FPTP/winner takes all benefits them doubly - either they lose and can fundraise off “red team bad” messaging, or they win power and get their turn at the levers of power.
If you’re politically homeless on the right, anything even slightly to the right of median is preferential to ‘conserve’ the world you’re clutching to. Slowing or preventing change is your mantra politically, because you like the status quo today/previously
If you’re politically homeless on the left, you’re bullied in liberal unity under big-tent centrism, even though it’ll never effectively serve your core interests like right wing unity would. There may be some overlap, but good luck with actual legislative movement on LGBTQ+, unionization, campaign finance reform, alternative policing, etc
Under a different system we’d actually have coalitions and better representation on issues- especially topics with entrenched left-right collusion like foreign policy.
The argument for voting for Biden as the lesser evil is reasonable enough, but things like this really makes it seem like the Biden stans don't understand why people find Biden so objectionable. It goes a lot deeper than "disagrees on a few things."
Yeah it's a real moral conundrum. Do you vote for the fascists who want to destroy the country of America, or the other party who wants to bring people together and have some good social programs going. It's really a very tough and confusing choice.
The side the listener is on believes this to be true regardless of whichever perspective you're speaking from.
The left thinks the right are fascists without exception. The right thinks the left are fascists without exception.
How did those fringe minority opinions suddenly become mainstream as if you can paint a whole population with such a generalization.
I'm not saying both are the same, as one inherently requires the suffering of many to have their desires met. However, both sides will use this "team sport, win at all costs" mentality so long as it resonates with the population they try to reach.
The difference being Republicans have been saying that for... 60 years now?
Democrats have only started seriously saying that since Trump.
You can argue slightly for Bush and retaliation for 9/11. But nobody was thinking the state of American democracy was at stake lol.
Plenty of Democrats allowed nuance for misguided Republicans right up until they voted for Trump a second time. Or saying the quiet part out loud, or preferred convicted pedophiles over the other team.
It ripped the rose tinted glasses off. Most people who lean even slightly left know better now. What your average republican voters says means nothing if you continue voting in fascists lol.
Not sure why the downvotes. Republicans truly believe that Democrats will destroy the country if they win the next election.
The downvotes are because one side has attempted an insurrection, constantly attempts to subvert the outcome of elections, and is saying out loud they plan on weaponizing police against their opposition, while the other is the fucking Democrats. Saying "both sides think that" doesn't neutralize people's genuine concerns that a not insignificant amount of politicians in one fucking party are willing to completely throw out any election that doesn't suit them, which means they are already attempting to take over. Both sides may think that, but one side thinks it credibly while the other thinks it based on absolutely nothing.
My intention wasnt to say both sides think the same, it's exactly the opposite. It's that neither side thinks the way the other is painted.
While both extreme fringes are being sold as mainstream now, the majority of people are simply more complicated than that. People on the right need to recognize that their party has been taken over, and put aside the greed of short term wins to consider if they really back this ideology. You're instantly branded a RINO and tossed aside if you do, and fear arising from cultlike mob mentality is used to keep people at the fringes.
People on the right need to recognize that their party has been taken over, and put aside the greed of short term wins to consider if they really back this ideology.
Depending on how you want to count, they've had at least 6 years to consider this. Clearly their decision has been made.
It's also been 6 years of a concerted effort to sway their opinion towards the fringe through bad actors slowly and methodically moving the goalposts.
Some are in the deep end, but many are just blindly following like sheep because they're too busy simply trying to get by. They're not evil by nature, they're just stupid and have been weaponized. There needs to be work to bring them back in a manner that doesn't scare or shame them.
I understand all of that. The OP was just saying that both sides feel the same about each other. He was not saying that one side is better than the other, or that both sides are the same, they are clearly not the same.
The media demonizes everything it can about the other side while downplaying or denying everything their side has done wrong. Everyone sticks to their 'feed' or 'channel' and so only understands their weaponized story of events. There are teams of professionals spinning each of these stories to the best of their ability. There are extremely complex algorithms pulling people further and further over their side of the boat to maintain enngagement and sell ads.
If they only ever watch 'Fox News' then they'll only hear about the good stuff their party doing and fear mongering over the other party. If they happen to see a counter argument on 'CNN' or something they'll see it as fake/misleading/out of context/false. They'll go into their similar minded social media communities and discuss and rant with a group that they see as everybody, validating their concerns.
This is a media bubble, a worsening bipolar extermist movement driven my massive market forces. We have to acknowledge we are subject to the same media bubble effects as they are, the same market forces are being applied to us. Swap the positions of 'Fox News' and 'CNN' in the above paragraph and reread it.
Until people acknowledge this and learn to engage with their opposition in a productive manner, the political climate in this country will continue to worsen. The politicians and media will never engaged the opposition productively as it is against their interests to do so. This bipolar extremism works too well for improving votes, user engagement, donations, and merch sales. Yet in the end, it is us who they are competing over. De-escalation is the best path forward from this. While that effort is against the flow of the system, we are the only ones who can do it.
Democratic leadership and a literal few sane Republicans Representatives do indeed engage with their opposition at the detriment to how their base views either of them. They are a very fickle bridge currently holding our democracy together.
That doesn't mean that either base is incorrect on vehemently denying the others stances. Plenty of people see eye to eye on a multitude of issues. Only Republicans almost unanimously agrees with their opposition but still votes against their own wishes. That's what single issue voting and scare tactics gets you.
You're falsely conflating a Democrats ability to vote with confidence in their parties stances and a Republicans ability to vote against a democrats. The Republican view harshly belies their ability to find an olive branch.
Take an upvote, well said and i can't disagree with you.
My reason in speaking out is to hopefully promote positive change. I see too many people here giving in to the us vs them, 'deport them' mindset that the other side has maintained for so long. Positive change requires one side to act better than the other and engage with them positively.
I generally agree. There have always been far more bridges crossed with kindness and understanding than there have been in othering your neighbors.
However like we've said, the issues everyone disagrees on are also very real, visceral, and part of of an every growing divide that happens naturally in democratic environments.
Too many people forget that you can compromise on a lot, but once you've gone through everything, you end up with stances that cannot be budged on. They're antithetical to how your entire worldview may work. And that's fine to draw the line, but don't mistake it for something you can't whittle away at. Knowledge and understanding can get past a lot it, and sometimes, you never will. But it doesn't make it NOT the best avenue for non-violent change.
Here's what I don't get about this. If you vote for Trump this time, you know what you're getting. He was already president, so you know what you're in for. Is there really anybody on the fence here? I mean, I understand hating both candidates and declining to vote for either one, but if you vote for Trump, then you agree with Trump.
The machine is set up in such a way that this does not matter. It only turns to the right.
Alternatively, when Democrats (rarely) control Congress, it's by a hair, nearly 50/50. When Republicans control Congress it's much closer to 55/45.
This is largely what leads to the rachet effect.
It does. Biden is able to get away with being toothless and doing things like continuing to build the border wall. It feels like his only redemption is he's not Trump. I will vote my mind during the primaries but if it's Biden, I'm gonna hate that I have to vote for him simply because the alternative is worse.
Really good npr podcast on the medias failing by trying to stay nonpartisan and treat both candidates like they are equal.
Made a point to say there were more articles about bidens dog biting someone than trump saying he wants to execute a general.
Bonkers
"Both parties are the same" is an obviously silly statement.
At the same time, "Vote for the man who says he can't avoid building Trump's wall, but can use executive power to sell weapons specifically to be used for genocide... Because the other guy is worse." is not a great way to raise voter turnout.
Some of the people criticizing others in this thread have been organizing against genocide. Have been calling their representatives, protesting in the street, etc.
If that's you; Great! My beef is not with you.
If not, and especially if you were telling people to vote for Biden in 2020 because we could "push him to the left"; Maybe work on getting Biden to stop funding genocide and generally push an agenda that will make people want to vote for him.
With current levels of partisanship, turnout is what makes the difference in elections.
Criticizing the very people you're trying to get to vote is at best counter-productive.
Like it or not, if you're campaigning for Biden then you're an embassador for the Democratic party. People notice what you spend your energy on, and what you don't. If you spend more time calling people on the left "stupid" than you do campaigning to end genocide? People will notice, and they will associate Biden supporters with hypocrites that don't actually care about them or people like them.
Being a dick is easier than actually organizing; But it won't achieve your stated goals.
Yeah I tend to agree with what he says but the way he says it is so annoying. I'm surprised that post didn't start with "holy fucking shit!"
I feel like his posts are usually just lukewarm takes on topics that many other people have already articulated (obviously with fewer f bombs). I rarely see him post anything that actually adds anything to the discourse. People have pointed out the ridiculousness of the "bOtH sIdEs" mindset plenty of times for a long time.
If this tweet had been in response to something specific it would be fine, but with no meaningful context it's just Jeff Tiedrich once again shouting "holy fucking shit [insert extremely common left wing opinion here] fuckity fuck" to his echo chamber of a follower list.