• PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    People don’t vote because politicians don’t materially benefit them. When politicians provide significant support to regular ass people in way that materially benefit them you will see more voters turn out, not when you whine to them about them not voting. If politicians wanted this to occur, our state reps and their staffers would be in our work places, talking to people, giving them reasons to be involved with the political party apparatus, and providing material aid to the poorest and least represented among us with their own hands. We have bad voter turn out because shitty, myopic politics breeds political disinvestment. This post has it pretty much exactly backwards.

    Anecdotally, I have friends from MA who don’t give one fuck about politics. Haven’t voted in years despite me telling them, messaging them with voter registration status, and locations, giving them every resource they need to make it as easy as possible. None of it mattered. Two of these friends in the last year have told me they want to vote for Governor Healy because they intend to use the free community college program, unprompted. Went out of their way to tell me. Another friend told me they like their state rep because they showed up at a union rally for their union and my friend realized from talking to the politician personally that the rep was a socialist who just happened to have a D next to their name.

  • Krauerking@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    That’s right reader. YOU are responsible for this nightmare. If only you recycled your plastics more, used a non plastic straw, shouted at your peers to vote, you could have prevented this hell hole. So hold yourself personally responsible and then push that anxiety and stress onto others without any nuance. Cause if you can prove your moral goodness maybe the world might be heaven without any work other than checking a box.

    This is not really at all accurate math and it won’t change the people happily voting the other way. Or the Electoral College. Or the ridiculous amount of bribes, corruption and party politics.

    I hate this photo for so many reasons and I also think voting should be a mandatory holiday. I just refuse to pretend that this idea that it would fix everything because you yelled at enough people to pray harder, vote more.

  • daltotron@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Time is a flat circle, except the cycle comes back around again every second. The same conversations over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Had at such frequency, with such vitriol, it is totally indistinguishable from pure noise. It’s like a root canal for your brain.

    Someone brings up wanting to not vote, on some principle. Could be Gaza, could be them not so slowly capitulating to the right on every issue since FDR got out of office, to the point that we’re now running george dubya 2 as president. Then someone says, ah, well, you should vote democrat anyways, because they’re better than republicans. Then we get one of two answers, we either get, ah, well, no they aren’t, or, they aren’t better on this one particular issue that I care about, so fuck it, right. Which is not a super convincing counterargument. Or, we get the real argument, we get the deeper dive into the actual political process, which we all collectively understand to be completely fucked as to basically be unrecoverable, and yet still, somehow, this is a source of constant disagreement. Usually because people who don’t know any alternative have deluded themselves into cynically caping for the same broken system as some form of what is basically escapism.

    Ah, not in a swing state? You live in a population center? Seems like your vote doesn’t matter, better luck next time. Ahh, you don’t live in one of like, twelve counties in those swing states? Ahh, well, seems like your vote doesn’t matter, either, because of gerrymandering, so, sucks to suck for you. Ahh, well, guess the electorate decided to pick someone different than what you voted for, so, better luck next time. The democrats lost? Ahh, well, if only the left had turned up to vote. You just gotta vote, and then we’ll be granted such an overwhelming victory that we will be able to implement all of the milquetoast reforms you’ve ever wanted! The democrats win? Ahh, well, time to pull to the right twelve more degrees, since we’ve won the race, and now whatever the voters care about doesn’t fucking matter at all. The democrats win, but then the supreme court decides to veto the recount because the voting system in a single state was so totally and completely fucked? Ahh, well, looks like we gotta go kill a million fucking people in iraq for oil money, champ, sorry about that.

    It’s especially fucking insane because the idea of voting for them in the first place is an acknowledgement that we live in a FPTP system where you cynically have to vote for the lesser evil. Every other qualification and quality that the system has, which makes it worse? That shit doesn’t exist. We’re taking the most simplified, common idiot stance, here. It is so insane that I struggle to think that it’s not just bad faith drudgery. Out of the 350 million, only like 5% of that are people who even approach mattering, and, as we also know, it’s kind of dubious even then. So, if those are the only people whose votes matter, and we all FUCKING know that, then why the hell am I inundated with constant removed and moaning and whining about how I just simple NEED to vote democrat or else nooo nooo we’re going to be plunged into literally a hitlerian dystopia like handmaid’s tail? Look around you, look at what is currently happening.

    Oh no! Another democratic senator has decided to stand in opposition to this bill, narrowly swinging the votes around and keeping us deadlocked into an eternal hell where nothing except bipartisan things like border spending, foreign policy, spending on the military industrial complex, banning shit like tiktok, and the basic foundational elements of neoliberal economic policy ever get done. Whatever shall we do? Guess the answer is just to vote harder!

    If the democrats did actually get an overwhelming victory, you wouldn’t get FDR again. They’ve been very clear about exactly what their policies are, and they’ve calculated that position as a way to push the buck as far in favor of their corporate sponsors and themselves as they can get away with, while both winning, and also presenting a constant war to the public where it’s a struggle to get anything done. The narrowest margin of victory is actually a boon, in that circumstance. It means they can both run on unpopular policy and they can make it look as though they’re trying to get things done and oops whoops they’re just narrowly failing. If they somehow got a massive win on that platform, probably through some absolutely massive unforced error by republicans. I don’t even know what that would look like, at this point. They would probably all have to collectively catch a disease and die simultaneously, and I think that would probably also spell chaos for the nation. You wouldn’t see the dems suddenly run to the left, after that, because the left would have basically no leverage over them, no bargaining power, no hand in their win. You especially wouldn’t see them drift to the left because THAT’S NOT WHAT THEY’RE FUCKING CAMPAIGNING ON. SO THAT CAN’T BE WHY THEY GOT ELECTED. The only way they would get that majority in the first place is basically through them moving to the left to begin with, which as previously described, they will never do, or, worse off, and what they are currently trying to happen, is if like, 40 - 50% of the population suddenly drifted super rightward and became neocons.

    No democratic party politician is some secret communist that, ah, once they get an 80% majority, after enough election engineering, enough rightward drift, enough calculations that they can get into power unilaterally, then, suddenly then they’ll become a communist. The most you might see is that republicans, after losing so badly, might make a better run at implementation of actually populist policies, but then that’s kind of obviously a nonstarter for them because they’re ALSO owned by corporate entities and they’re ALSO doing this same exact gambit. The idea of getting a huge win somehow also relies on the utter delusion that you can outflank the republican party from the right, or, outflank them with your competence at right-wing policy. You could maybe outflank them in competence, but that’s both not a good thing, obviously, and it also wouldn’t matter to their core base of delusional evangelical suburban whites that have an outsized amount of voting power and oil money.

    The reason some people think this, if they even do, and aren’t just assuming whatever cynical position they have to in order to push things around, is because they’re idealistic and totally delusional about the incentives the system naturally produces. How people in power go through many filters that all but guarantee they’ll be acting in their own self-interest by the time they reach the top. There’s no secret leftist that is going to reach a presidential level of power and then suddenly come down and save us all. I’d love to be proven wrong there, but it’s not fucking happening.

    And you know what’s the worst about all this shit? Every election cycle, every single time, at the one time when there is the most political interest flaring up in the population, we are met with this fucking insanely dumb conversation that we have over and over and over and over and over again. It eats up space that could otherwise be reserved for actual serious conversations about strategic voting, how to look into local policies and politicians and how to vote for them, where those resources are, how to organize, how to gain political leverage, how to unionize your workplace, how to stage a protest, participate in a protest, when a protest should even be done and what amount of political leverage such an act might buy you. None of that ever gets talked about. Instead we need like a year out of every four where the only political conversations anyone is capable of having is this repetitive overly simplified bullshit. This ideological poison which totally stymies any serious dialogue. And then turn around and wonder why nobody except the dumbest and most aggressive sacks of shit on the planet, that are obviously just taking out their anger issues actually want to talk to you about this shit, sacks of shit like me. It’s insane. I don’t understand how we keep falling down the stairs. I don’t understand how this keeps happening.

  • meiti@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Forgive my ignorance please, I’m not an american. I see these posts often on reddit and lemmy, but shouldn’t these posts be displayed on tiktok, billboards, or anywhere that those poeple who don’t vote frequent? Is there any stat at all to show whether such posts work?

    • daltotron@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think it’s actually mostly a product of the overton window kind of being split, but, not really split in the ways that you might think. It’s not so much that each party is getting more extreme in what their actual beliefs are, it’s just that people are getting more extreme in their rhetoric, more extreme in their isolation. This, if anything, encourages people they disagree with not to vote. You need only look beneath these kinds of posts to see the sheer amount of people that chirp up, disagree at any time, and then totally fail to be convinced.

      No, much like underpantsweevil said, this is purely something that’s for the in-group, to make them feel good, to make them feel like they’re doing something productive, and more than any of that, it’s a way for them to work out ideological insecurities and reinforce pre-existing beliefs. Which further feeds into that rhetorical isolation. Keep that running for 30 years online (maybe more like 10 if you’re just considering web 2.0), and you shake out to about where we are now. Continue this for another 10 or 20 years and you’re probably directly headed for some absolutely heinous shit as the gulf gets wider and wider.

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Pay no attention to them, they want people to vote for someone who supports genocide. They know they’re losing so they’re doing everything and anything they can right now, just tune them out.

      • Stez@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Dude there are 2 options in the us both support genocide just one of them wants to deport every immigrant and put in a ton of awful policies And genuinely is a threat to democracy pick the better option and vote

        • lunar_solstice@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          one of them wants to deport every immigrant

          They both deport the same amounts of immigrants: https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2019/table39 Obama deported more than Trump

          a threat to democracy

          You just admitted that you don’t have democracy two seconds ago. You can’t say “I have no choice but to let my rulers commit genocide in my name” and two seconds later say “We have a democracy worth defending”

          • Stez@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Have you not heard their new plans for deportation its going to be wayyy worse than he was when he was in office.

            At least there are 2 shitty options versus none

            • daltotron@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The democrats have also drifted rightward on deportation in this election, saying that they’ll be harder on the border than trump was in 2016, which, again, they already had been doing. The cost benefit here is an argument over whether or not one or the other will be like, 5% worse, and some of us, like you’ve just been sent evidence for in the previous comment, aren’t even convinced that the democrats will be any better.

              Perhaps there is a third approach here, yes? Perhaps there is something in the specifics of this lack of actual, tangible democracy that exists for people, that means your specific vote is mostly meaningless anyways, which means it’s freed up to be thrown at some third party candidate, yes? Do you live in a swing state? Do you live in a gerrymandered swing district in one of said swing states? Do you live in a state where your electoral college candidate has to obey your vote? If the answer to any of those was no, then congrats, you basically have free reign to vote for whoever actually aligns closest to your beliefs, because your vote doesn’t actually matter.

              • theparadox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                Bullshit. Your vote matters. It might not impact you local election but the more obviously backward the electoral college looks the more likely someone will throw it in the trash like they should have decades ago.

                • daltotron@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Do you have any actual argument other than just saying “Bullshit. your vote matters.” though? Anything more to back that up, with a basis in how the system actually functions? Do you think the democrats will legitimately provide a challenge to FPTP voting? To the electoral college? Do you think the republicans will? How would that get overturned, what would that actually look like?

  • Allonzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I’m voting Democrat like I always do. I remember being the only non-right wing senior citizen looking person at my polling place for Hilary Clinton when no one showed up. Not with any hope, just so I can say I voted against gleeful hatred.

    I’m just pissed that I will never, ever get a vote against market capitalism, as it controls both parties on economic policy and we only get a vote on how to manage the social issue symptoms it causes.

    • Noodle07@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you keep the left in power your can steer them left, if the right gets in power you reset your progress to 0

      • wpb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Could you walk me through steering them left when they’re in power? Over the years the democrats seem to only get more right wing. The thing is, I always thought that you steer politicians through your vote, and if I guarantee my vote to you regardless of what you have done in the past or are currently doing, what incentive do you have to change course in a way that I like?

        • sushibowl@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The thing is, I always thought that you steer politicians through your vote

          To some extent, yes. However the amount of steering you can do this way is rather limited, since a vote only indicates a preference of one candidate over the other.

          For example, if you decide to vote Republican out of protest, Democrats might conclude that you like republican policies, and to win your vote back, they need to move even further right. If you decide to stay home and not vote, you don’t really give any information to democrats what they actually need to do. They may decide that you are an unlikely voter in any case, and focus towards those folks most likely to turn out (that’s generally older white conservative folks).

          One option is to vote for some leftist third party. This sends a pretty clear message about what policies you like. The problem is that, apart from the messaging, your vote is almost certainly wasted. You are in effect helping your enemy win in the short term.

          The other option is to engage politically outside of just voting. Most people have been convinced by establishment politicians that your only influence is your vote. This is not true. Protests, activism, grassroots movements, local politics are all effective ways to steer your preferred party in your preferred direction. This does require substantially more effort.

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Why are we so preoccupied with ensuring the party we hate most loses, rather than focusing on the party you want most winning.

            I’d rather everyone vote closest to their actual morals and values, and give no consideration to who loses.

            If we keep fighting over who’s the biggest loser, how can we possibly expect things to improve?

            • wpb@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              And also when the democrats win, if you look at the way policy has evolved during the clinton years, during the obama years, and also now during the biden years.

        • daltotron@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The actual incentive that they have should ideally be actual political activism that exercises some real and material form of leverage against their power. Seeing as these movements have all been totally deconstructed, mostly by the federal government, instead, you’ll find that the way you’re supposed to change the party is just by voting harder for them, and then just kind of hoping that they somehow naturally decide to swing left, after you’ve already handed them the keys to the kingdom. It’s pure cope, basically.

        • someguy3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          The Dems need all 3 of presidency, house of reps, and Senate to do anything. And they’ve only had that for 4 of the last 24 years. Or 6 of the last 32 years. Or 6 of the last 44 years. That’s why they keep going to the center to find voters, because they need all 3 and basically never get it. So how do you get them to go left? By giving them consistent and overwhelming victories.

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            You realize this all happened with Gore and Bush, and then Obama and Hilary and so on. The story has been the same every time. End of a democracy, republicans will destroy the country, blah blah blah.

            You know what else happens? The democrats talk a huge game before the election, and do fuck all with it while in office. Even if you take something like obamacare, it wouldnt have gotten passed if there wasnt money in it for the wealthy.

            And just the non stop war crimes and global terrorism. You know its literally been my whole life that this country has done this and its never mattered who was in office. Military expansion in this day and age is absurd, and its harder and harder to hide the truth that most of our wealth is stolen.

            Its like a mafia family that can’t hide that their protection racket is actually what’s causing the danger in the first place. Apparently we don’t need a godfather sequel because its here in real life on a national scale.

        • d00phy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          It works the same way the Republicans have been steered further right while not in power. When Democrats have to worry about moderates, they move to the right. If they only have to worry about liberals, they can support and back more progressive positions. If they don’t, they are more likely to be primaried.

          See also: the Tea Party takeover of the GOP which pushed them further down the path to the current fascism.

          • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            There’s a lot of this assumption that democrats get more votes by going for moderates. Meanwhile they’ve alienated the entire left, and (I know, not a representative sample) but my Lemmy feed is jam packed with arguments about “you have to vote blue to stop fascism” vs “I really don’t don’t want to vote in favor of genocide”. No one seems to actually like the democrats, they’re whole appeal is basically “not fascist”.

            Bernie Sanders got people excited, and while not exactly a leftist, he did represent a move toward the left. But they couldn’t let Bernie happen, he was too radical, apparently. You’ve heard the term “Bernie bro”, but where are the Biden bros? They aren’t, because Joe is boring.

            So I don’t think they “have to worry about moderates”. The post here claims that if they could motivate people to go vote, they’d win. So offer something fresh. Present a real alternative to the inexorable right wing decline of all of US politics. Do you not think that would work? Why are they 0% willing to consider it?

            • d00phy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              Adding that both things need to happen for the country to reverse the rightward shift. More liberals need to vote, AND the party needs to recognize, or be shown in primary elections, that they can publicly embrace more liberal stances. On or the other and we wind up with the status quo.

              • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                the party needs to recognize, or be shown in primary elections, that they can publicly embrace more liberal stances

                Not “can”. Need. Or else we, the voters, are at the whims of their donors. They “can” move left now. There is policy on the left that polls very well with the general populace, much better even than what they’re running with now. It’s just a matter of framing and defending good policy instead of limply letting the republicans run the show. Biden did it just a couple days ago “I never heard of getting lead out of the drinking water being a bad thing” (paraphrasing). That is what needs to happen, more broadly.

                The only election that matters as to whether they as a party get to hold power or not is the general, thus it is the only election that can show them they need to do any particular thing to get a base of support large enough to get them elected.

                They don’t want a majority, or they would have it. Easily. They’re playing the same game as Republicans, 50 + 1 to win. No less. No more.

                The liberals will vote, and the left will too. If you motivate them with policy that actually stands up to criticism and makes voters more optimistic than cynical about a Democrat win.

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            The criticism of the democrats is that they think they are on the left but they aren’t. They do represent a lot of Americans, but they don’t represent the true left very well at all.

            • d00phy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              You’re absolutely right about the current Democratic Party, but that party’s been pulled to the right by moderates and former moderate republicans. If the country really is more liberal than our representation would indicate, as put forth by the meme, then a more progressive voting populace will eventually result in more progressive liberal party. Right now everything is skewed to the right because of the oversized influence of moderates and moderate conservatives who don’t want to vote for fascism.

              • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                I think its the social shaming from democrats and republicans to third party voters. It reminds me of some of the stuff church cults do to prevent people leaving the group. Let people vote how they want to, or at the very least attempt to win them over with discussions and policy rather than throwing them under a bus.

        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          The Dems seek out the people who actually vote.

          If the Left stays home every election, the Dems have no reason to listen to them.

          • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Clearly they’ll just voter shame and we’ll end up exactly where we are. I’d argue the reason we are where we are is exactly that reason.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I think all the third party voter shaming is actually for the democrat population. Its a warning of how you will be treated if you defect. Churches and cults do stuff like this in some cases, also to preempt members leaving.

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    “I’m not going to vote because democrats aren’t communist which makes them basically republicans” - average Lemmy.ml user

    Jk it’s actually something more like “I’m not going to vote because I’m European”

    • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Do you not think genocide is a good reason to not vote for someone else? As far as red lines go, that’s a pretty good one.

      • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        it is more like genocide vs genocide + whole bunch of other human rights violations.

        if you are not planning to overthrow the government by revolution then there is no way to go from these two options to an “ideologically perfect” (whatever that means) government in just one election cycle, needs to be done in smaller steps.

        • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Withholding your vote until genocide is taken off the table pressures her to give in to their demands, though. There’s no universal constant saying we need to have a genocide. Either she loves genocide, or she’s supporting it because she’s worried she won’t get the votes without it. If it’s the second one, and I hope it is, then the Uncommitted movement is simply doing the same thing to establish their own power, and for a better reason: to save the lives of their friends, family, aid workers, doctors, and journalists.