I am really not following all the vitriol in the comments, are people not only ignoring the article to react to the headline but then also mis-reading the headline?
It's not saying anyone ought to vote a certain way, it's just pointing out that low-propensity voters tend to support Trump.
I suspect this is due to the recent polarization around education. Highly educated people tend to vote more, and over the last decade they have tended to vote more and more for Democrats. And vice versa for low-formal-education folks.
Yeah, when I read the headline I figured it was saying that if you don't vote, that means you're actively supporting trump. But after reading the article, it's definitely not saying that as far as I can tell.
I chalk it up to the headline being worded weirdly, and just the fact that people have been saying things sorta like that.
Yup, which is why the Republicans try to make it as difficult as possible to vote, especially for minorities. Don't forget Trump said if minorities vote, Republicans will never win another election.
Also, why they focus on voter suppression and divisive propaganda every election to get the lefties all riled up about whatever makes them stay home. I wonder which issue it is right now!?
Israel. The tankies (some of whom are probably Russian trolls) are pushing the "Genocide Joe" narrative. They like to talk about principles but that means nothing when the brown shirts start throwing punches and are backed by the government.
I really wish Biden would take a harder line to get that under control. At the very least it's aid that ought to be going to Ukraine which is instead being used for that disgusting mess.
The only justification I can think of is that it's the only leverage we have over them and without it they would have no reason to be "restrained" at all. Even then I have my doubts.
As an outsider, though neighbor in Canada, I can't truely comprehend why Trump has the support he does. I sort of get it when looking at specifics (some people enjoy racism, others think he'd stir things up and create change) but the Evangelical support alone is baffling. I'm not religious but went to schools with religion as a subject (didn't always focus on Christianity in the Anglican one but other one did) and the idea that anyone remotely Christian, or anyone that thinks they have religious values could vote for him makes me want to do the exorcist head spin and spew green pea soup. I didn't think of that idea in a religious way just an absurd reaction to the situation but it sort of fits.
I'd definitely vote for the inanimate carbon rod over Trump, but the sandwich has merit too.
I think a lot of Trump's support is imaginary. We've had several elections, including the 2022 election, where the polls said we were going to get destroyed, but the Republicans way underperformed their polls. Perhaps it's over-correction for 2016 when the polls overstated Democratic Party chances. Perhaps they're over-sampling Republicans, not accounting for the fact that many older, more Republican-leaning people who distrusted the science behind COVID got themselves sick with COVID and then died from it. Or maybe they're just making wild-ass guesses and don't have a fucking clue because asking 1000 people what 220 million people are going to do six months away is always a tough thing to do.
That said, I'd still campaign like I was 5 points down in the polls if I was Biden, going 50 State Strategy to get ALL the votes he can, even the ones that 'don't count', and if I was a voter that's even REMOTELY aligned to the Left, I'd VOTE like he was down 1 point in the polls, and make damn sure I got my vote in for him. The alternative is just that much worse.
Trump isn't racist. That's a narrative the Left has been throwing around for years. He's won numerous black awards, has had numerous black support, and only when he ran against Democrats was he labeled by the left as a "racist."
Religious people will always vote conservative, no matter who the candidate is. My Mexican family are very religious Catholics, and even they vote for Trump because they always feel that a Republican better protects their religious rights.
The Democrat party is doing everything and anything to stop him from running, and this only makes his case stronger.
Meanwhile, there's MILLIONS who are going to vote for him because everyone keeps telling them not too...I love how minorities are told that they're "not good enough" to vote Republican.
I want to repeat this as much as possible because I think it's incredibly important. When you vote for a president, you are not voting for one person, you are voting for thousands. You are voting for an entire branch of government, possibly 2. The president appoints an insane amount of positions, so when you vote for the one person you need to also think about all the other positions they will be nominating people for. Hundreds of federal judges, hundreds of secretaries, dozens of heads of departments and agencies, hundreds of ambassadors, and most importantly, potentially lifetime appointments of Supreme court judges, which can flip an entire other branch of government. There are also tons of lower level positions on top of those, and if that's not enough already, many of these appointments span multiple presidencies, so you're not just voting for the next 4 years, but potentially long after that.
So when you're looking at the ballot, do not think about the names on the paper, think about the thousands of incredibly important, powerful, and influential roles that they will fill. As powerful as the president is, when you add up all those other positions, they are even more important than the one position of president.
And if you want to know why we haven't made much forward progress, well... we flip parties every 8 years.
If you want to know why we're backsliding, it's because when Republicans have an advantage it's 58/42 and when Democrats have an advantage it's 51/50 for two weeks.
Over the past 50 years Republicans have had more political power in this country.
Democrats held a comfortable dual majority during four years Obama's presidency and aside from the ACA did fuck all with it. And that's just in recent history. Go back a bit farther and they had 8 straight years. Go back a bit farther and Democrats had comfortable dual majorities for 26 years straight.
Your own link disproves your point and makes mine. Yeah, there were times with House and Senate Democrat majorities, usually with a Republican president.
Republicans have had more control.over the direction of this country than Democrats for the past fifty years.
You could also make the thin line for president larger, which would make it more obvious.
My fucking god what is it going to take for you fucking zealots to wake the fuck up and get angry at rich politicians fucking us over regardless of party? Fucking wake up. What the fuck.
Fuck the Democrats. Fuck the Republicans. Fuck this procorporate trash.
Serinus made a great point. Republicans have had their hands on the levers of power because shitheads want to see liberals suffer, and OTHER shitheads scream bloody murder because they didn't get the rainbow alicorn they swore they were promised. Cluebus for ya, pal. More than ultra-leftie liberals get to call the shot in the USA and you taking your fucking ball and going home hurts all of us...
If you have thoughts of suicide, do what the article says to do and talk to someone. If things are so bad that you're contemplating killing yourself, this is a dangerous position to be, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone, even a Trumper or a useful idiot. But throwing that link about suicide down won't change my point.
You don't always get exactly what you want from a politician. Ask the Kiwis. They recently stayed home, DESPITE their country offering multiple Left-Wing parties and a system that ensures their vote for one of those Left-Wing parties won't result in one of the Right-Wing Parties being elected, and now, National, ACT, and NZ First (their Conservative parties, going from main-stream to whacko-extreme) are calling the shots and have rolled back EVERY left-wing priority they could get their hands on at a rapid pace. This is what you get when you say 'not liberal enough' and stay home, and that's BEFORE FPTP used here in the USA gets in on the game.
Again. One of two things will happen in January.
Biden will start his second term, doing much the same as he's done in the first term, SLOOOWLY and ever so painfully eeking out some Liberal priority or another, and then being shut down by the Right-Wing Court.
Trump will start his second term, and you'll be fighting to not be disappeared into the back of some white van by literal secret police while Trump's goons enact Project 2025 to 'erase woke everywhere'.
Every vote Biden doesn't get...is an increase of the chance that everything you supposedly stand for BEYOND Israel being undone while you dodge shitheads with white vans like Floyd Protesters did in Seattle. I'm just going to be here to remind you and everyone else who reads this of that truth.
The article is actually about how people that have voted more consistently will vote for Biden and people that vote more inconsistently will vote for Trump.
Very different from how I interpreted the headline.
The less you campaign for electoral reform in your state, the more you support the republican party.
Switching away from first past the post voting allows people to vote for who represents them best while still counting their vote against those they dont want to win. Just search for videos on FPTP voting if you want an explanation on how and why the spoiler effect exists.
Electoral reform is possible in each individual state (for now), we dont need federal reform! Maine and Alaska have already passed electoral reform.
Republicans are moving to make alternative electoral systems illegal in their states. Why would you want to use the same voting system republicans prefer?
More political parties means a higher percentage of the population is representedby their choices in the voting booth. More people involved in the electoral process, more people engaged.
Its a win win win all around for not just the people, but also for the democratic party. More people voting means more democratic votes. The numbers dont lie. So what’s the hold up blue states?
You believe it’s critical to vote for the democrats to beat the Republicans, thus you should 100% be fully invested in passing electoral reform in your state.
Electoral reform needs to be the number one priority for every democrat. This is a existential threat to our nation, so we must use EVERY tool at our disposal. No more waiting. This especially goes for those in blue states.
Consider starting a campaign to change how we vote in your own state! Force our representatives to compete with fresh outside ideas. We deserve the best representation, not excuses.
In other words, more elections years you voted in since 2018 makes it more likely you voted for Biden.
This makes sense because Trump pushed turnout for the Dems with his deeply unpopular presidency. And this same dynamic can sink Biden in 2024 if he continues to be more unpopular than Trump.
This ain't no big revelation to anyone. Since the 1960's Republicans have relied on liberal voter's apathy to win seats in government. It's liberalism's greatest weakness and failure - the belief that someone else should be responsible because they can't be bothered.
I had difficulty parsing the article title. I thought it meant that not voting means you back trump (since this is a common narrative by democrat supporters), but actually it's saying that people who vote less consistently support trump more.
When you don't vote you are voting for the guy who wins.
You hate trump but you hate the other guy too. You don't vote. That's one more vote not going against the guy who wins.
Say you have 100 people voting.
60 people decide not to vote.
Out of the 40 people who vote 25 vote for guy A and 15 vote for guy B.
Guy A wins majority even though only 25 people out of 100 voted for him. This means that guy A caters to the 25 people who voted for him and the 60 people who didn't bother to vote get zero representation even though they're the majority.
If the 60 people who didn't vote decided "he's not great but he's better than guy A I will vote for guy B" guy B would win with 75 votes, an actual majority.
Sometimes it's better to vote for the lesser of two evils and push the not great guy to do better than to just resign your fate to the worst guy and let the entire thing just burn.
That may be true and all but I take it you didn't read the article, because that not what it was about.
They polled people and those who are regularly vote in past elections tend to be pro Biden, those whom hadn't voted in recent elections tended to be pro Trump.
Which is ironic because if everyone just got out and voted we might just have a send Trump presidency on our hands. I could be wrong, but I suspect that's the opposite of what you are thinking would happen.
need I remind you that Trump lost the popular vote and won? With 100% (99.99%...) then it likely wouldn't have been so close. Trump won because of voter apathy towards HRC.
Also your comment doesn't take into account voter suppression, disenfranchisement and gerrymandering- all of which are self evidently powerful by token of how common they are.
President Joe Biden performed much better among frequent voters, while Trump had a large lead among people who haven't voted recently.
Yes, it seems you are correct; according to this article if you want Biden to win you have to tell people NOT to vote. I imagine (I don't have numbers) this is the opposite of what most of us expected.
I'm not sure why you think liberals are the solution. They're just as much a part of the problem and not in a "liberals have slowly shifted to the right" way.
Keep in mind, Eugenics received pretty heavy support from liberals. Liberals are just as responsible for the corporate hellscape we're currently entering, they're just the parent in the abusive household that comes in and makes sure you don't make problems for the other one that just got done beating you.
Idk what the solution is, but something makes me doubt it's liberals teaming up.
The various trolls infesting lemmy love to play on the nearly opposite meaning of "liberal" in the global political sense vs the US political sense.
In other countries, they use "liberal" or "liberalism" to refer to a right wing ideology. In the US, "liberal" means a left wing ideology, like social democracy.
I think the misalignment in meaning actually has more to do with the 1-dimensional binary you just pointed to than to a reversal of meanings.
Liberalism is an ideology of individualism, which has some overlap with both left and right US political categories, but is certainly not "left" in the poly-sci sense of the word.
You're still talking about European liberalism. Liberalism in the United States is more collectivist. Liberals in the US believe that improving the common good makes all our lives better, and believe that those more fortunate should be made to help those less fortunate.
I understand the US political category and the normalized usage of it, but liberalism has a very distinct meaning in polysci. There are aspects of liberalism (in the classical use of the word) within the US political category 'liberal', especially when it comes to fiscal policy. People who castigate liberals from the left are those who primarily take issue with that particular quality of US Democratic policy, not the qualities you're speaking fondly of here.
Edit: I should say - it is still just a term that describes a particular thing, so if that term isn't adequately describing what you're talking about, then maybe a different word should be used
I'm not a troll. Liberals haven't saved us, I'm not sure why you would think a Liberal is going to. I'm voting Biden because a U.S. under Trump is worse, but if you think stifling any conversation about what happens next with "the libs will save us" is contributing anything then you're just as fucking dumb as the pugs that frequent hexbear.
The libs could save us, if we could ever get enough in power.
Of course the libs haven't saved us, they haven't had the numbers. It's been neck and neck with the fascists for 20 years.
Imagine what we could do if the Dems had a 20 year supermajority. Universal healthcare, UBI, free college, wealth tax, these are all things that standard-issue Dems would love to do if it were feasible. The reason centrist Dems take baby steps isn't because that's all they want, it's because that's all they can do. Give em the power and they'll do more.
I'm voting Biden because Trump is demonstrably worse.
That being said, if you think that Biden is going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. If you think that the libs are going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. You stifling any conversation because you don't like the context matter and are predispositioned to assume you're unable to reach any consensus with the person on the other side is, guess what? BAD.
tell me how you're going to fix the "corporate hellscape".
I can't. I would need the help of the people that are around me, the people that I can communicate to with words.
Let's see, half of the country is religious. So that's obviously an uphill battle, the other half... oh that would probably be the side that has people like you and the other people downvoting me.
Gonna go ahead and say it's an uphill battle on both sides. Imagine actually demanding an entire plan that requires both uniting the country, which includes eradicating white supremacy and the various inequalities in the U.S., and then solving climate change.
My long term solution would be uniting the under 50 vote to add the 28th amendment.
The 28th amendment needs to eliminate money/donations/bribes/grifts from the election process. It also needs to eliminate any form of augmented monetary enrichment for elected officials.
Until corruption via monetary gain can be somewhat controlled, we can never achieve a legitimate democracy.
How much time is your plan going to take? Because we're on a clock.
There are plenty of conservatives in the under 50 bracket, obviously that will change as more babies are born; but how is your plan going to play out with population replacement rates falling globally?
I'm not intentionally poking holes, your suggestion is great and it is absolutely a step that needs to be taken. I just think that we've entered unfamiliar territory and I fear that old strategies may not be applicable. The conservatives have basically been waging a whisper campaign on the people of the U.S. and we're seeing the effects of that coming to a head. We will not simply "unite the people under 50".
This is true, but why? Because we have plurality voting and the electoral college. STAR voting, approval voting, ranked choice voting. Any of those voting systems would fix that, along with ending the electoral college. 1 Citizen, 1 Vote.
so is the line now that even though the biden administrations policies are wildly unpopular there's no reason to be worried or examine support held for the party because the turnout will make up the difference?
You were probably taught in school that democracy is a wondrous ideal thing.
When you become an adult you realize democracy isn't about voting for who you like the most. It's about preventing bad people from getting power. You will never get to vote for some ideal perfect person, and even if you did the general muddiness of politics would prevent that person from being able to make the change they want.
Yes, it's "the line" now. But to be more accurate, it's always been the line.
It's what US democracy is. In a lot of countries, you get to vote for people who represent you, and the system works out stopping people who are widely disliked by parties forming coalitions after the vote.
Look at the NL, and how it deals with a Trump-like candidate. He got a plurality of the vote, yet is unable to form a government because none of the other parties cooperate.
That's my point, this is how the US works, this is not how democracy in general works. OP was saying that these faults are a natural consequence and inseparable from democracy. I'm bringing up a counterexample. It can be done better.
I think we agree on that the US system is incapable of stopping such a wildly unpopular candidate if they reach a plurality of the votes.
There's a difference between voting for an ideal candidate and not being able to vote for one materially supporting a genocide. "not funding genocide" isn't an ideal, it's a bare minimum. If not funding genocide is 'idealistic' to you, then I want no part of anything you're trying to sell and normalize.
Yes, it’s “the line” now. But to be more accurate, it’s always been the line.
You're not wrong, but also, when one of the parties purposely manipulates your vote by using the premise that you described, because they have a bad candidate, then they're no better than the other party that are the "bad guys".
There are more than just two candidates available in the whole United States of America that could run for president.
There are more than just two candidates available in the whole United States of America that could run for president
Yeah and they either decided not to run or were eliminated in the primaries. Ideally I think a ranked choice system would be better than a primary system, but the primaries are a somewhat reasonable approximation, albeit an antiquated one.
The thing about democracy is the winner is the person that gets the most votes, not decided by solely your vote. And you can't force people to run. Bernie Sanders ran in the 2020 primary and lost to Joe Biden. He decided not to run in this primary. You can be bitter about this, maybe come up with some conspiracy theories about the DNC somehow putting Bernie in duress to keep out of the race. Or do the same for anyone else you prefer.
But the fact is the imperfect run off system of the US electoral system determined it's Biden vs. Trump again. You can be emotional about how you wanted something different, but it's not going to change anything. You can be angry at other voters for not choosing different candidates. Still not going to change anything.
And Joe Biden is legit the best President of my lifetime. Not something you'll hear from content decided by social media algorithms. He's done a lot despite some bad actors in congress, and he could do more if there were just a few more Dem Senators and a majority in the House. Only criticism I really hear is from either republicans and kids that are ageist and/or learned about foreign policy from TikTok.
You can be emotional about how you wanted something different, but it’s not going to change anything.
You can call someone out for their misdeeds without being emotional about it.
And things should be called out, and not just accepted, because you're embarrassed someone might want to call you out as being emotional, as a way of 'killing the messenger'.
And Joe Biden is legit the best President of my lifetime.
The bad people are already in power. Always have been, at least in my lifetime. Am I supposed to find comfort in voting for bad people because other people are worse? It's as hollow of an argument as "other people have worse lives than you do so you're not allowed to care that your life sucks."
If you support Biden or hope that he’s elected this article should deeply disturb you.
Polls are looking bad recently and instead of having a party line of “we’re gonna change, we recognize that no one wants to suffer under rising inflation while their government supports a genocide.” They’re saying “it’s fine that the polls are bad, our supporters will come out and vote for us no matter what”.
I'm Canadian, and judging from history things tend to go badly for countries that neighbour fascist countries with a powerful military. So yeah I want Old Joe to continue to be President.
But I'm not too worried about polling, they were off in 2016 because they people considered unlikely voters actually did vote, and they voted for Trump. So the statisticians compensated for this and they were much closer to the mark in 2020, but still somewhat under-counted Trump support. So they have to compensate some more. But my gut feeling is that a siginificant of the unlikely voters that turned out for Trump in the past two elections probably won't turn out for him again. But statistics is a scientific thing, they can't just mark Trump supporters as unlikely voters again because of a gut feeling. They have to follow the process and do the math without any gut feelings about it.
So... the polls about support for Trump aren't reliable at all. So no point in worrying about them one way or another.
The real concern right now is how young people are pushed into some strange politics by social media. The Olds are going to vote the way they always do, and there's less of them with each passing day. The kids are getting sucked into accelerationist doomerism so who knows what will happen there. Constant emotional manipulation on social media can send people down some dark paths. I used to think the kids are alright, but I'm not so sure anymore.
I am voting for neither. I'm going to match what I care about with a specific candidate, because I don't like Trump or Biden.
[/opinion]
Now I'll just sit and wait for the "you idiot" comments and the vitriol geyser to blow. This should be entertaining to watch people think my vote's going to make a difference in the electoral college.
To be clear, I've surrendered nothing to you whatsoever. My vote will be counted toward another candidate available to me on the ticket, just neither Trump nor Biden. That you intend to vote for genocide or fascism is something you are so gleeful to do. Enjoy.
To be clear, thanks again for surrendering your choice to me.
Honestly it's kinda weird that you prefer genocide and fascism to genocide or fascism, so it really is best you let more rational people decide for you.
To be clear, I'm voting productively instead of as a sheep. It's not surrendering anything to you. If you are beholden to the two party system and fall into the trap of "keep the other guy out" instead of voting for someone in good conscience, that's you being part of the problem.
Well, for one, vote for the only major party that MIGHT give a shit about Gaza or may be less gung-ho about supporting Israel, and for two, advocate in other ways. Organize protests, make calls to your representatives and senators, donate to charities that will assist the people of Gaza, etc.
Keep in mind, Donald Trump moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and doesn’t give a flying fuck about Gaza. He’s worse for Gaza than “Genocide Joe” is.
It’s like you’re expecting national policy to turn instantly based on protests. That’s now how the world works, unfortunately. Things take time.
It’s terrible, I’m not in any way trying to downplay the genocide that is happening. But Israel and the US have been firm allies for a long time. Change won’t come quickly. And it won’t come at all if Trump is elected.
In any case, no they didn't. The Democratic National Convention didn't cancel any state primaries. Your state party did. Your local Democrats decided to not have a primary.
That's not how it happened. Yeah, sure, it's technically up to the state party, but it was at the request of the DNC. There is authority, and then there is soft power.
Getting to pick between two candidates chosen for me by oligarchs doesn't seem like Democracy to me.
Public information bro. Conspiracies actually do happen BTW. We have a former president being charged with involvement in several of you haven't been keeping up with the news
"National party exerts pressure on state party" is hardly a great plot for an X-files episode. And that's assuming it took more than a polite phone call
It would honestly be harder to believe that a state party would exclude someone from the ballot without at least discussing it with the national party.
I actually agree with OP that everyone should be voting Biden in the general, but this constant messaging is tone-deaf as Hillary Clinton and is going to be self defeating.
Pretty much, yeah. I realize you’re just engaged ins some tankie sarcasm in some twisted attempt to dissuade voting for Biden, but this time we do need to vote for Biden. Sitting on your hands is a vote for trump and fascism, turning Israel loose on Palestine, and handing Ukraine to Russia. But you tankies should have spent more money on buying a better republican instead of this absolute idiot trump. But that would probably mean someone smarter who wouldnt buy your BS.
And elect Trump. Cool. Nice principles. Hope they keep you warm in the camps while you watch your family dragged away and killed. Or maybe it will be your neighbors and not your problem bc you're not a target demographic. Yet. Thanks for your service hero. You're affecting change with all your logic and practical action.
I didn't do that. I vote DSA. I primary'd Pelosi. I'm accepting the current situation and trying to make change where there's no risk of elimination of any possible future change (allowing fascism in the oval office).
So how does electing Trump, whoever of us do it, make things better? What's your proposal? Besides not voting for Biden, what are you doing?
Me and my queer family are thrilled to be sacrificed for your ideological purity. Hopefully we'll get to watch from the camps as the Trump-led US helps Israel "finish the job" (Trump, 2024) in Gaza and "stolen" elections are eliminated in America.
It takes a truly privileged position to ignore that Repubs will make life worse for women, minorities, LGBT people, oh, and the entire planet because of climate. "Joseph Bidden isn't helping the climate," yeah I agree, the alternative is dismantling the EPA and ramping up emissions even further.
Hilarious when statistic are saying that of the voters getting apathetic they tend to be black and/or female. But stand on the name of those groups while you ignore how they're actually moving some more.
I don't think that's an acceptable argument in favor of making them worse. Women were better off before this Roe v. Wade bullshit. You have the privilege to not give a shit, so you'll do whatever you want with your ballot, I guess.
So let's let Trump put in another supreme court justice or two. He already got three, which is why Roe was overturned. I don't understand how you think Democrats were complicit OR had any means of opposing it. It's the supreme court.
Oh, I've actually seen that argument before. I can explain: they know women's body autonomy is a big issue, they know they're very visibly on the wrong side, but the best their propaganda network has come up with is "it happened during a Dem presidency sooooooooooo..."
It's really neat how you far-righties think that anyone other than yourselves finds that argument credible. Ok, Dems are impotent to stop Repub malfeasance, I guess I had better throw my vote in the trash instead of voting against Repubs, great thinking.
Nah. Lefties are smart enough to understand who placed which judge on SCOTUS. Lefties understand the mathematics behind FPTP voting. And lefties care about the erosion of human rights from having Repubs in office. You have none of those qualities.
There has never been a wider gap between the Democrats and the Republicans than there is right now.
I get it you want to prove your hardcore che guevara t-shirt socialist cred. But you want to be credible at all you gotta at least sometimes look at the facts.
Perfect example. Trump says he wants to deport people that were born in the US (which obviously isn't legal). Call in the military, shoot people attempting to cross the border. Texas is putting barbed wire on the border, the the Federal government (that's Biden) is opposing it. They want the border completely shut down and people of certain ethnicity banned.
The Dems want additional judges to process asylum applications faster. Which is good for everyone. There are some bad things in the bill, but Biden doesn't have to enforce them and the courts will likely overturn them like they did with Trump's Muslim ban. Getting the additional judges and staff needed to deal with the backlog of asylum claims is super important and will lessen the hardship on immigrants seeking asylum.
So explain to me how trying to get asylum claims processed faster is exactly the same thing as Trump's Muslim ban? Or building a wall? Or shooting people?
Its a federal border. That barbed wire is his barbed wire. This is his presidency, this is how he is running the border.
There are some bad things in the bill, but Biden doesn’t have to enforce them and the courts will likely overturn them like they did with Trump’s Muslim ban.
You do realize i have absolutely zero trust in Biden and this hinges on blind faith in Biden. Or at least youre arguing it does, i dont think Biden has any ability to control the bad things like fewer asylum approvals. Democrats, including Biden, have been using the same rhetoric as republicans, actively appealing to conservatives, assuring them they want a "stronger border"
Its a federal border. That barbed wire is his barbed wire.
You haven't been following the news. The Texas Governor put the barbed wire there. The Supreme Court upheld that he was able to do so(because of course they did). Biden is trying to remove it.
Maybe try diversifying your news sources beyond TikTok.
I definitely have a better opinion of people who vote for third party candidates than people who don't vote at all. A major problem with our current elections is that it's far more mud-slinging about the opposition than positivity. If the race becomes a little bit less two-party, candidates might start talking about their advantages, rather than deriding the opponents.
That said, it will still do nothing healthy for this election - it's a long-term strategy, in a world where a bad president can do so much damage in the short term.
Thank you stranger! I completely agree. I can't keep track of what I've said and what threads, but my whole basic idea is if you're not in a swing state then vote third party. I completely agree it's a long term strategy.
You've clearly never heard of 3rd party candidates then! If you have heard of them, I want you to ask yourself why you feel compelled to so overly simplify a situation that you boil it down to a blatant lie.
Mean tweet orange guy also supports the genocide. With the added caveat that he wpuld like to expedite this genocide because not enough people are dying.
This is the future that the GOP is offering Americans.
Climate Chaos. Huge national debt. Huge income inequality. Nuclear proliferation. Medical industry profiteering. Putin's Evil Empire. The end of democracy.
Democrats have failed to offer any viable alternative. Even when golden opportunities present themselves they choose corporations over the people. Every single time.
Exactly. It's such a Trumpy thing to say, it's exactly in line with all his other nicknames for people, I don't know how anyone gets taken in by this shit
This is the future that the GOP is offering Americans.
Climate Chaos. Huge national debt. Huge income inequality. Nuclear proliferation. Medical industry profiteering. Putin’s Evil Empire. The end of democracy.
No one is being shamed here. The title of the article is a simple truth. And if you actually read the article, you’d have seen that it’s pretty well explained and understood fact.
But that’s not your game here, is it? I mean, your post and comment history illustrates the fact that from appearances… you’re here in bad faith.
You- and MANY like you here, are seemingly only critical of the left- NEVER the right. You’ve been called out for this before. And yet, you never have an explanation for it. Also….Anyone can check your comment history in the mod logs to see how much misinformation is shared by you. So it’s no big secret anymore why you are here and what you’re about.
But don’t let this get in the way of- whatever it is you think you’re doing here.
Don't just think about the position of president. Think about the thousands of appointments they make. It's not voting for 1 position, it's voting for an entire branch of government, potentially 2. Whatever you think about them, remember that it's gonna be either Biden or Trump appointing all those positions, so even if you hate both of them equally, add up all the incredibly powerful positions they appoint and compare the sum of it all. It's a compounding magnitude, so I cannot imagine how anyone can not have a preference when you are considering the full reach and impact that the 1 position has. Supreme court justices, federal judges, agency and department heads, countless secretaries, regulatory board heads, ambassadors and more and more, plus all the influence on positions those appointees have below them.
Nah, anyone who protest votes is doing it because they're an immature asshole. We can convert some people on the fringe to sense but a lot of people can't handle the fact that it's imperative that they put their name next to the less bad of two people.
Just to remind you, Trump will institute a national abortion ban - voting for Biden will directly save hundreds of women's lives... it's the absolute easiest action to avert unnecessary deaths you'll ever have in your lifetime.
If you can't do this, you can't do fucking anything.
All these posts blaming protest voters and those who don’t vote are all generated because of the bad numbers from the primaries right? And the over all loss in confidence in Biden due to his willful protection of isreal right?
Just got to remind people that they don’t really have a choice when the real voting happens. I think if you wanted to reach these voters these posts would be more detrimental then helpful.
What would help is if Biden stopped doing the hated things.
I think I was pretty fucking clear. I'm posting because it will save lives. Imagine how difficult it is to pull someone from a burning car, now imagine how difficult it would be to fill in the bubble next to Biden on a ballot - both actions will save lives.
So why is it so fucking difficult to fill in that bubble?
No you are not. This isn’t some revelation. That people just didn’t know that fracturing the Democratic parties vote hurts their chances against the republicans. You are making this post for selfish reasons.
Like i said, demonizing people who find it hard to vote for someone protecting a genocide is for your own self gratification. Its not to change minds, its not to help Biden beat trump. Its solely to start a circle jerk to validate your decision to vote blue no matter who, and to quiet that little voice about how bad of a candidate he is
I love how all these people who are suddenly vocal about the terrible situation in Gaza fall short of realizing that getting Trump in office would be catastrophically worse. With that logic, the only practical option is to vote for Biden in the general. A 3rd party vote is just throwing your vote away.
The only conclusion I see here is these people are either disinformation agents, naive fools, or both.
It fucking sucks and I strongly support the uncommitted movement and putting all the pressure we can on him about Gaza (see my post history if you want). Trump is going to be as bad or worse on Gaza, it fucking sucks but there isn't a way you can vote to fix Gaza.
And you somehow think voting for Trump, or giving him an advantage, will help in Gaza?
He will put zero pressure on Netanyahu. He'll likely openly support the effort and say something like "the Palestinians are just like the illegals crossing our border."
Voting isn't picking someone you like, voting is choosing the person with the best chance of winning and creating policies aligned with your values and ideals. If you vote for somebody with zero chance of winning, you're giving an advantage to the candidate who undermines your values being implemented in the long term.
If we had ranked choice voting, or if the alternative candidate wasn't openly threatening democracy, the rationale would be very different.
The smart people tried to explain to the voters that Brexit would be an enormous failure, but the voters let their emotions get in the way of being rational, and now they're suffering and wished they had voted differently.
We have the potential for something much worse with Trump. Much worse. If you can't see through your emotions to understand that if Trump is elected your vote may never matter again, I'm not sure you have the rationale capacity to be worth the time I spent typing this response.
The blaming of the protest voters shamed them into voting for Biden? Yea i doubt that.
Though right now the situation is different. Biden has done some things that make voters balk. Maybe he should stop doing that. It might help more then making circle jerk posts on Lemmy
You say that like this math factors into any part of why people are protest voting. They know this already and this gives nothing to the conversation. Instead, your best bet is to find out what they want and maybe go over a plan that gets them what they need. Sure as shit attempting to shame people with your basic math will only accomplish in widening the divide and pushing contrariness.
I took some time to look at who the 2020 Biden voter are who are considering not voting for him.
While there are a growing number of such groups, one of the biggest is Muslims. They get that Trump is a racist and hates Muslims. They're also currently watching Biden going out of his way to support Israel in their genocide. To them, Biden doesn't just represent monsters, he is a monster. They're logic is essentially, "We're fucked either way. Let's get rid of the monster in front of us and then we'll worry about the next monster."
It doesn't matter if you or I agree with that. They're not asking for permission to feel that way. If the Democratic leadership doesn't address those concerns with significantly more empathy than, "don't be stupid", the likely outcome is that Biden will miss out on many of those votes.
Unfortunately Biden has been racking up voter groups that feel betrayed by him. My preference would have been for Biden to find some other Democratic candidate, retire gracefully and strongly back the new candidate.
"If Biden is elected, he's going to be 82 years old in four years and he won't be running for reelection," a prominent adviser to the campaign told Politico.
From what i recall, he was undecided. The media and others were projecting and suggesting that he should be a 1-term president. —Honestly, his vagueness about policy and his advocacy for nothing but the status-quo are primarily what led me to vote Green for the last presidential election.
Do you think that this disagreement is likely to change anyone's mind?
Take a fairly famous example. Bassem Youssef has very publicly embraced the sentiment I'm describing. How does your agreement or disagreement have any impact at all?
I'd argue that it will only have an impact if you choose an action that's likely to induce change. He very clearly says that he considers the threats that "If you don't vote for Biden you're voting for Trump," messages to be a form of blackmail.
He finds it unconvincing so it fails to work on him. As near as I can tell, his attitude is fairly representative of a significant number of voters.
There is currently some percentage of people who plan to vote for Biden, some that plan to vote for Trump and some who are undecided.
Most polling shows that, if there was an election today, Biden would lose pretty badly.
If you simply agree or disagree, is that likely to change anyone's planned voting behavior?
If you continue to insult the people who do not currently plan to vote for Biden, do you think that will change their minds?
Bro is publicly selling out to the highest bidder while pedaling antisemitism, vaccine denial, and whatever other grift he can. At least choose the right high horse like Cornel West or something jfc
I’m sorry. I thought you were asking for the source of the headline claim. I believe the person you’re responding to was referring to the insurrectionists. Right-wing media tends to label them as dissidents, activists, demonstrators, etc. when they should be described as criminals.
Presuming you’re talking about disenfranchised citizens, that’s mostly felons. And IMO it is abhorrent to take away a citizen’s right to vote unless that citizen committed a specific type of crime against the government (being that it is the representative of the people), like sedition, treason, or insurrection. And even then, disenfranchisement should not be permanent.
But notably people are disenfranchised by their state and city jurisdictions. The federal government does not determine whether you can vote in any given election, just the rules that apply to all elections. If you want to blame a federal body, there’s plenty to go around - SCOTUS has upheld disenfranchisement as constitutional and Congress has not really passed meaningful laws defining and regulating the practice. But I can’t think of a law that Biden has been instrumental in that contributes here, other than, of course, his 1994 crime bill. That’s not a small deal but it is far more complicated than “Biden took away voter rights”
425 Comments
TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world · 107 pts · 2y
I want to vote more, but when I try to vote more than once the poll workers get upset and tell me to leave.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world · 51 pts · 2y
I’m voting as hard as I can
irreticent@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2y
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
There’s just no privacy anywhere anymore.
reverendsteveii@lemm.ee · 9 pts · 2y
you need to be a republican governor's son. if you are, you can vote illegally as many times as you like and no one cares.
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/glenn-youngkins-underage-son-tried-to-vote-in-virginia-governors-election-officials-say/2870695/
danc4498@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
You should try being a republican.
kikutwo@lemmy.world · 52 pts · 2y
The less you brain, the more you back Trump.
OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee · 49 pts · 2y
I am really not following all the vitriol in the comments, are people not only ignoring the article to react to the headline but then also mis-reading the headline?
It's not saying anyone ought to vote a certain way, it's just pointing out that low-propensity voters tend to support Trump.
I suspect this is due to the recent polarization around education. Highly educated people tend to vote more, and over the last decade they have tended to vote more and more for Democrats. And vice versa for low-formal-education folks.
Kase@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 2y
Yeah, when I read the headline I figured it was saying that if you don't vote, that means you're actively supporting trump. But after reading the article, it's definitely not saying that as far as I can tell.
I chalk it up to the headline being worded weirdly, and just the fact that people have been saying things sorta like that.
Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de · 47 pts · 2y
This has been a recipe for a democratic win for a for decades. High turnouts favor democrats.
cultsuperstar@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 2y
Yup, which is why the Republicans try to make it as difficult as possible to vote, especially for minorities. Don't forget Trump said if minorities vote, Republicans will never win another election.
Dramaking37@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 2y
Also, why they focus on voter suppression and divisive propaganda every election to get the lefties all riled up about whatever makes them stay home. I wonder which issue it is right now!?
harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 2y
Israel. The tankies (some of whom are probably Russian trolls) are pushing the "Genocide Joe" narrative. They like to talk about principles but that means nothing when the brown shirts start throwing punches and are backed by the government.
BigilusDickilus@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
I really wish Biden would take a harder line to get that under control. At the very least it's aid that ought to be going to Ukraine which is instead being used for that disgusting mess.
The only justification I can think of is that it's the only leverage we have over them and without it they would have no reason to be "restrained" at all. Even then I have my doubts.
laverabe@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 2y
The entire premise of the article is the exact opposite - that Trump did better when turnout was high.
rockettaco37@lemmy.world · 38 pts · 2y
You could literally put a half eaten turkey sandwich against Trump and I'd vote for the sandwich 100% of the time.
Kolanaki@yiffit.net · 18 pts · 2y
orbitz@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 2y
As an outsider, though neighbor in Canada, I can't truely comprehend why Trump has the support he does. I sort of get it when looking at specifics (some people enjoy racism, others think he'd stir things up and create change) but the Evangelical support alone is baffling. I'm not religious but went to schools with religion as a subject (didn't always focus on Christianity in the Anglican one but other one did) and the idea that anyone remotely Christian, or anyone that thinks they have religious values could vote for him makes me want to do the exorcist head spin and spew green pea soup. I didn't think of that idea in a religious way just an absurd reaction to the situation but it sort of fits.
I'd definitely vote for the inanimate carbon rod over Trump, but the sandwich has merit too.
jhymesba@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
I think a lot of Trump's support is imaginary. We've had several elections, including the 2022 election, where the polls said we were going to get destroyed, but the Republicans way underperformed their polls. Perhaps it's over-correction for 2016 when the polls overstated Democratic Party chances. Perhaps they're over-sampling Republicans, not accounting for the fact that many older, more Republican-leaning people who distrusted the science behind COVID got themselves sick with COVID and then died from it. Or maybe they're just making wild-ass guesses and don't have a fucking clue because asking 1000 people what 220 million people are going to do six months away is always a tough thing to do.
That said, I'd still campaign like I was 5 points down in the polls if I was Biden, going 50 State Strategy to get ALL the votes he can, even the ones that 'don't count', and if I was a voter that's even REMOTELY aligned to the Left, I'd VOTE like he was down 1 point in the polls, and make damn sure I got my vote in for him. The alternative is just that much worse.
MilitantVegan@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
rockettaco37@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
Exactly... I think it's horrific how politically behind we are here in America compared to most other industrialized nations.
ZK686@lemmy.world · -16 pts · 2y
Trump isn't racist. That's a narrative the Left has been throwing around for years. He's won numerous black awards, has had numerous black support, and only when he ran against Democrats was he labeled by the left as a "racist."
Religious people will always vote conservative, no matter who the candidate is. My Mexican family are very religious Catholics, and even they vote for Trump because they always feel that a Republican better protects their religious rights.
The Democrat party is doing everything and anything to stop him from running, and this only makes his case stronger.
Theprogressivist@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
That's a lie.
silence7@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 2y
Trump literally took out newspaper ads calling for the execution of a group of African-American teens falsely accused of a crime. He refuses to apologize
Hard to see that as anything other than racist.
ZK686@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 2y
Trump has been part of the African American community for most of his life..and now, he's all of a sudden a racist...come on...
ZK686@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 2y
Meanwhile, there's MILLIONS who are going to vote for him because everyone keeps telling them not too...I love how minorities are told that they're "not good enough" to vote Republican.
rockettaco37@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
If you wanna drink the right wing Kool-aid, that's your own prerogative
jhymesba@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
How I'd say that. ;)
rockettaco37@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
I'm trying to be respectful, but yes. :p
fidodo@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 2y
I want to repeat this as much as possible because I think it's incredibly important. When you vote for a president, you are not voting for one person, you are voting for thousands. You are voting for an entire branch of government, possibly 2. The president appoints an insane amount of positions, so when you vote for the one person you need to also think about all the other positions they will be nominating people for. Hundreds of federal judges, hundreds of secretaries, dozens of heads of departments and agencies, hundreds of ambassadors, and most importantly, potentially lifetime appointments of Supreme court judges, which can flip an entire other branch of government. There are also tons of lower level positions on top of those, and if that's not enough already, many of these appointments span multiple presidencies, so you're not just voting for the next 4 years, but potentially long after that.
So when you're looking at the ballot, do not think about the names on the paper, think about the thousands of incredibly important, powerful, and influential roles that they will fill. As powerful as the president is, when you add up all those other positions, they are even more important than the one position of president.
Serinus@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 2y
And if you want to know why we haven't made much forward progress, well... we flip parties every 8 years.
If you want to know why we're backsliding, it's because when Republicans have an advantage it's 58/42 and when Democrats have an advantage it's 51/50 for two weeks.
Over the past 50 years Republicans have had more political power in this country.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
Democrats held a comfortable dual majority during four years Obama's presidency and aside from the ACA did fuck all with it. And that's just in recent history. Go back a bit farther and they had 8 straight years. Go back a bit farther and Democrats had comfortable dual majorities for 26 years straight.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Combined--Control_of_the_U.S._House_of_Representatives_-_Control_of_the_U.S._Senate.png
Serinus@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Combined--Control_of_the_U.S.House_of_Representatives-_Control_of_the_U.S._Senate.png
Your own link disproves your point and makes mine. Yeah, there were times with House and Senate Democrat majorities, usually with a Republican president.
Republicans have had more control.over the direction of this country than Democrats for the past fifty years.
You could also make the thin line for president larger, which would make it more obvious.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
My fucking god what is it going to take for you fucking zealots to wake the fuck up and get angry at rich politicians fucking us over regardless of party? Fucking wake up. What the fuck.
Fuck the Democrats. Fuck the Republicans. Fuck this procorporate trash.
Serinus@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
Where are you from?
jhymesba@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
Zealot? Well, fuck you too, buddy.
Serinus made a great point. Republicans have had their hands on the levers of power because shitheads want to see liberals suffer, and OTHER shitheads scream bloody murder because they didn't get the rainbow alicorn they swore they were promised. Cluebus for ya, pal. More than ultra-leftie liberals get to call the shot in the USA and you taking your fucking ball and going home hurts all of us...
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Nobody promised us a rainbow alicorn. But they did make promises and they were broken. We are not morally obligated to accept that kind of treatment.
Oh buddy. We're taking more than the ball. We're taking our lives.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68782177
Go fuck yourself.
jhymesba@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
If you have thoughts of suicide, do what the article says to do and talk to someone. If things are so bad that you're contemplating killing yourself, this is a dangerous position to be, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone, even a Trumper or a useful idiot. But throwing that link about suicide down won't change my point.
You don't always get exactly what you want from a politician. Ask the Kiwis. They recently stayed home, DESPITE their country offering multiple Left-Wing parties and a system that ensures their vote for one of those Left-Wing parties won't result in one of the Right-Wing Parties being elected, and now, National, ACT, and NZ First (their Conservative parties, going from main-stream to whacko-extreme) are calling the shots and have rolled back EVERY left-wing priority they could get their hands on at a rapid pace. This is what you get when you say 'not liberal enough' and stay home, and that's BEFORE FPTP used here in the USA gets in on the game.
Again. One of two things will happen in January.
Every vote Biden doesn't get...is an increase of the chance that everything you supposedly stand for BEYOND Israel being undone while you dodge shitheads with white vans like Floyd Protesters did in Seattle. I'm just going to be here to remind you and everyone else who reads this of that truth.
And fuck yourself back to you, pal.
Kase@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 2y
Well, this is a fun discussion!
...Anyways, I like to think that the title implies you're supposed to vote more than once lol
Worx@lemmynsfw.com · 12 pts · 2y
It also implies that not voting for Trump somehow counts more than voting for Trump does
danc4498@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2y
The article is actually about how people that have voted more consistently will vote for Biden and people that vote more inconsistently will vote for Trump.
Very different from how I interpreted the headline.
BallsandBayonets@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
Ok then! One vote for Trump is better than multiple not-votes for no one, so I'll vote for Trump!
/s
Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 2y
The less you campaign for electoral reform in your state, the more you support the republican party.
Switching away from first past the post voting allows people to vote for who represents them best while still counting their vote against those they dont want to win. Just search for videos on FPTP voting if you want an explanation on how and why the spoiler effect exists.
Electoral reform is possible in each individual state (for now), we dont need federal reform! Maine and Alaska have already passed electoral reform.
Republicans are moving to make alternative electoral systems illegal in their states. Why would you want to use the same voting system republicans prefer?
More political parties means a higher percentage of the population is representedby their choices in the voting booth. More people involved in the electoral process, more people engaged.
Its a win win win all around for not just the people, but also for the democratic party. More people voting means more democratic votes. The numbers dont lie. So what’s the hold up blue states?
You believe it’s critical to vote for the democrats to beat the Republicans, thus you should 100% be fully invested in passing electoral reform in your state.
Electoral reform needs to be the number one priority for every democrat. This is a existential threat to our nation, so we must use EVERY tool at our disposal. No more waiting. This especially goes for those in blue states.
Consider starting a campaign to change how we vote in your own state! Force our representatives to compete with fresh outside ideas. We deserve the best representation, not excuses.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Never going to happen.
damnedfurry@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
Yeah, I've wanted for decades for instant runoff voting to be the system the US uses, but it's clear that it's never going to realistically happen.
We can't even get rid of the dumbass electoral college after all this time, lol.
gastationsushi@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 2y
In other words, more elections years you voted in since 2018 makes it more likely you voted for Biden.
This makes sense because Trump pushed turnout for the Dems with his deeply unpopular presidency. And this same dynamic can sink Biden in 2024 if he continues to be more unpopular than Trump.
bluewing@lemm.ee · 13 pts · 2y
This ain't no big revelation to anyone. Since the 1960's Republicans have relied on liberal voter's apathy to win seats in government. It's liberalism's greatest weakness and failure - the belief that someone else should be responsible because they can't be bothered.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2y
Makes you wonder why Democrats continue to foster that apathy.
PanArab@lemm.ee · 6 pts · 2y
A controlled opposition
admin@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 2y
how?
PanArab@lemm.ee · 0 pts · 2y
For example when Obama had the power to codify Roe v. Wade he didn't.
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 2y
What if your a lifelong red voter and you vote less?
Like I get where your coming from, but it’s only because your audience are the sane ones.
hark@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
I had difficulty parsing the article title. I thought it meant that not voting means you back trump (since this is a common narrative by democrat supporters), but actually it's saying that people who vote less consistently support trump more.
Ascend910@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2y
I dont really understand the math behind it, can some one explain to me please ?
CultHero@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 2y
When you don't vote you are voting for the guy who wins.
You hate trump but you hate the other guy too. You don't vote. That's one more vote not going against the guy who wins.
Say you have 100 people voting. 60 people decide not to vote. Out of the 40 people who vote 25 vote for guy A and 15 vote for guy B. Guy A wins majority even though only 25 people out of 100 voted for him. This means that guy A caters to the 25 people who voted for him and the 60 people who didn't bother to vote get zero representation even though they're the majority.
If the 60 people who didn't vote decided "he's not great but he's better than guy A I will vote for guy B" guy B would win with 75 votes, an actual majority.
Sometimes it's better to vote for the lesser of two evils and push the not great guy to do better than to just resign your fate to the worst guy and let the entire thing just burn.
Soulcreator@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 2y
That may be true and all but I take it you didn't read the article, because that not what it was about.
They polled people and those who are regularly vote in past elections tend to be pro Biden, those whom hadn't voted in recent elections tended to be pro Trump.
Which is ironic because if everyone just got out and voted we might just have a send Trump presidency on our hands. I could be wrong, but I suspect that's the opposite of what you are thinking would happen.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 2y
need I remind you that Trump lost the popular vote and won? With 100% (99.99%...) then it likely wouldn't have been so close. Trump won because of voter apathy towards HRC.
Also your comment doesn't take into account voter suppression, disenfranchisement and gerrymandering- all of which are self evidently powerful by token of how common they are.
mightyfoolish@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2y
Yes, it seems you are correct; according to this article if you want Biden to win you have to tell people NOT to vote. I imagine (I don't have numbers) this is the opposite of what most of us expected.
archomrade@midwest.social · 6 pts · 2y
He's in office right now, the time to push was the last three and a half years and for the next 6 months.
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
I feel like if I pushed Biden on anything he'd fall over and break a hip.
Still voting for him tho
danc4498@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
Jax@sh.itjust.works · -20 pts · 2y
I'm not sure why you think liberals are the solution. They're just as much a part of the problem and not in a "liberals have slowly shifted to the right" way.
Keep in mind, Eugenics received pretty heavy support from liberals. Liberals are just as responsible for the corporate hellscape we're currently entering, they're just the parent in the abusive household that comes in and makes sure you don't make problems for the other one that just got done beating you.
Idk what the solution is, but something makes me doubt it's liberals teaming up.
danc4498@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
Clearly we’re not talking about the same “liberals” if you think the liberals I’m referring to would support Eugenics.
I deleted my post btw since I read the article and realized my comment had nothing to do when it.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
The various trolls infesting lemmy love to play on the nearly opposite meaning of "liberal" in the global political sense vs the US political sense.
In other countries, they use "liberal" or "liberalism" to refer to a right wing ideology. In the US, "liberal" means a left wing ideology, like social democracy.
archomrade@midwest.social · 4 pts · 2y
I think the misalignment in meaning actually has more to do with the 1-dimensional binary you just pointed to than to a reversal of meanings.
Liberalism is an ideology of individualism, which has some overlap with both left and right US political categories, but is certainly not "left" in the poly-sci sense of the word.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
You're still talking about European liberalism. Liberalism in the United States is more collectivist. Liberals in the US believe that improving the common good makes all our lives better, and believe that those more fortunate should be made to help those less fortunate.
archomrade@midwest.social · 5 pts · 2y
I understand the US political category and the normalized usage of it, but liberalism has a very distinct meaning in polysci. There are aspects of liberalism (in the classical use of the word) within the US political category 'liberal', especially when it comes to fiscal policy. People who castigate liberals from the left are those who primarily take issue with that particular quality of US Democratic policy, not the qualities you're speaking fondly of here.
Edit: I should say - it is still just a term that describes a particular thing, so if that term isn't adequately describing what you're talking about, then maybe a different word should be used
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
...which doesn't matter outside of academic discussions.
Sure, but they still generally mean opposite things. And trolls are still exploiting that.
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 2y
I'm not a troll. Liberals haven't saved us, I'm not sure why you would think a Liberal is going to. I'm voting Biden because a U.S. under Trump is worse, but if you think stifling any conversation about what happens next with "the libs will save us" is contributing anything then you're just as fucking dumb as the pugs that frequent hexbear.
danc4498@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Do you consider Biden to be a liberal?
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Yes.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 2y
The libs could save us, if we could ever get enough in power.
Of course the libs haven't saved us, they haven't had the numbers. It's been neck and neck with the fascists for 20 years.
Imagine what we could do if the Dems had a 20 year supermajority. Universal healthcare, UBI, free college, wealth tax, these are all things that standard-issue Dems would love to do if it were feasible. The reason centrist Dems take baby steps isn't because that's all they want, it's because that's all they can do. Give em the power and they'll do more.
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 2y
As I've said, I will be voting Biden. I'm inclined to believe things will not change.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
Give Dems the power, and we'll prove you wrong. You'll love it.
Don't forget to vote downballot! And in non Presidential elections!
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
We were.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
For a few months, and in that time they passed legislation that saved thousands of lives and brought us closer to universal health care.
madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
What's your strategy?
I'm not saying you're wrong on some points, but tell me how you're going to fix the "corporate hellscape."
And not a simple, "vote for a 3rd party" response. Provide a viable, long-term strategy for getting out of this mess.
Then tell me which candidate gives you the highest likelihood of executing your strategy.
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 2y
Biden.
I'm voting Biden because Trump is demonstrably worse.
That being said, if you think that Biden is going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. If you think that the libs are going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. You stifling any conversation because you don't like the context matter and are predispositioned to assume you're unable to reach any consensus with the person on the other side is, guess what? BAD.
I can't. I would need the help of the people that are around me, the people that I can communicate to with words.
Let's see, half of the country is religious. So that's obviously an uphill battle, the other half... oh that would probably be the side that has people like you and the other people downvoting me.
Gonna go ahead and say it's an uphill battle on both sides. Imagine actually demanding an entire plan that requires both uniting the country, which includes eradicating white supremacy and the various inequalities in the U.S., and then solving climate change.
God it's like half the people here are children.
madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
My long term solution would be uniting the under 50 vote to add the 28th amendment.
The 28th amendment needs to eliminate money/donations/bribes/grifts from the election process. It also needs to eliminate any form of augmented monetary enrichment for elected officials.
Until corruption via monetary gain can be somewhat controlled, we can never achieve a legitimate democracy.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
How many Democrat senators would you say we'd need for that? 50? 60? 70? 80?
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 2y
Sure, absolutely.
How much time is your plan going to take? Because we're on a clock.
There are plenty of conservatives in the under 50 bracket, obviously that will change as more babies are born; but how is your plan going to play out with population replacement rates falling globally?
I'm not intentionally poking holes, your suggestion is great and it is absolutely a step that needs to be taken. I just think that we've entered unfamiliar territory and I fear that old strategies may not be applicable. The conservatives have basically been waging a whisper campaign on the people of the U.S. and we're seeing the effects of that coming to a head. We will not simply "unite the people under 50".
Leviathan@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Vote like your (or someone you love's) life depends on it and convince everyone you know to do the same, because it does.
3volver@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
This is true, but why? Because we have plurality voting and the electoral college. STAR voting, approval voting, ranked choice voting. Any of those voting systems would fix that, along with ending the electoral college. 1 Citizen, 1 Vote.
mister_monster@monero.town · 0 pts · 2y
Wouldn't that mean the opposite then? Voters more likely to vote will vote Biden, so if the less likely to vote don't vote that gives Biden an edge?
Bobmighty@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
Wow, this article sure did get the bot trash buzzing lol.
bloodfart@lemmy.ml · -5 pts · 2y
so is the line now that even though the biden administrations policies are wildly unpopular there's no reason to be worried or examine support held for the party because the turnout will make up the difference?
shoo!
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 19 pts · 2y
You were probably taught in school that democracy is a wondrous ideal thing.
When you become an adult you realize democracy isn't about voting for who you like the most. It's about preventing bad people from getting power. You will never get to vote for some ideal perfect person, and even if you did the general muddiness of politics would prevent that person from being able to make the change they want.
Yes, it's "the line" now. But to be more accurate, it's always been the line.
maynarkh@feddit.nl · 11 pts · 2y
It's what US democracy is. In a lot of countries, you get to vote for people who represent you, and the system works out stopping people who are widely disliked by parties forming coalitions after the vote.
Look at the NL, and how it deals with a Trump-like candidate. He got a plurality of the vote, yet is unable to form a government because none of the other parties cooperate.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
Great. We're not in the NL. That's not how it works here.
maynarkh@feddit.nl · 5 pts · 2y
That's my point, this is how the US works, this is not how democracy in general works. OP was saying that these faults are a natural consequence and inseparable from democracy. I'm bringing up a counterexample. It can be done better.
I think we agree on that the US system is incapable of stopping such a wildly unpopular candidate if they reach a plurality of the votes.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Right, I'm just trying to head off the ridiculous idea that some people have that in the US we can vote for our ideal candidate.
agitatedpotato@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
There's a difference between voting for an ideal candidate and not being able to vote for one materially supporting a genocide. "not funding genocide" isn't an ideal, it's a bare minimum. If not funding genocide is 'idealistic' to you, then I want no part of anything you're trying to sell and normalize.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
Doesn't matter, that option is not one of the two choices.
It's "try to restrain the genocide" or "make genocide worse". Pick one. And if you say they're equally bad, you're an idiot.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
This is your idea of something worth saving?
CosmicCleric@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 2y
You're not wrong, but also, when one of the parties purposely manipulates your vote by using the premise that you described, because they have a bad candidate, then they're no better than the other party that are the "bad guys".
There are more than just two candidates available in the whole United States of America that could run for president.
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 2y
Yeah and they either decided not to run or were eliminated in the primaries. Ideally I think a ranked choice system would be better than a primary system, but the primaries are a somewhat reasonable approximation, albeit an antiquated one.
The thing about democracy is the winner is the person that gets the most votes, not decided by solely your vote. And you can't force people to run. Bernie Sanders ran in the 2020 primary and lost to Joe Biden. He decided not to run in this primary. You can be bitter about this, maybe come up with some conspiracy theories about the DNC somehow putting Bernie in duress to keep out of the race. Or do the same for anyone else you prefer.
But the fact is the imperfect run off system of the US electoral system determined it's Biden vs. Trump again. You can be emotional about how you wanted something different, but it's not going to change anything. You can be angry at other voters for not choosing different candidates. Still not going to change anything.
And Joe Biden is legit the best President of my lifetime. Not something you'll hear from content decided by social media algorithms. He's done a lot despite some bad actors in congress, and he could do more if there were just a few more Dem Senators and a majority in the House. Only criticism I really hear is from either republicans and kids that are ageist and/or learned about foreign policy from TikTok.
CosmicCleric@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
You can call someone out for their misdeeds without being emotional about it.
And things should be called out, and not just accepted, because you're embarrassed someone might want to call you out as being emotional, as a way of 'killing the messenger'.
You must be young. Or an astroturfer.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Gaslight
Obstruct
Project <--- you are here
CosmicCleric@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
Whatever lets you sleep at night.
BallsandBayonets@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 2y
The bad people are already in power. Always have been, at least in my lifetime. Am I supposed to find comfort in voting for bad people because other people are worse? It's as hollow of an argument as "other people have worse lives than you do so you're not allowed to care that your life sucks."
bloodfart@lemmy.ml · -10 pts · 2y
Uhh…
If you support Biden or hope that he’s elected this article should deeply disturb you.
Polls are looking bad recently and instead of having a party line of “we’re gonna change, we recognize that no one wants to suffer under rising inflation while their government supports a genocide.” They’re saying “it’s fine that the polls are bad, our supporters will come out and vote for us no matter what”.
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 2y
I'm Canadian, and judging from history things tend to go badly for countries that neighbour fascist countries with a powerful military. So yeah I want Old Joe to continue to be President.
But I'm not too worried about polling, they were off in 2016 because they people considered unlikely voters actually did vote, and they voted for Trump. So the statisticians compensated for this and they were much closer to the mark in 2020, but still somewhat under-counted Trump support. So they have to compensate some more. But my gut feeling is that a siginificant of the unlikely voters that turned out for Trump in the past two elections probably won't turn out for him again. But statistics is a scientific thing, they can't just mark Trump supporters as unlikely voters again because of a gut feeling. They have to follow the process and do the math without any gut feelings about it.
So... the polls about support for Trump aren't reliable at all. So no point in worrying about them one way or another.
The real concern right now is how young people are pushed into some strange politics by social media. The Olds are going to vote the way they always do, and there's less of them with each passing day. The kids are getting sucked into accelerationist doomerism so who knows what will happen there. Constant emotional manipulation on social media can send people down some dark paths. I used to think the kids are alright, but I'm not so sure anymore.
bloodfart@lemmy.ml · -5 pts · 2y
That’s not what I’m talking about.
Media saying that it’s fine democrats are pursuing wildly unpopular policies because they have a durable support base is bad.
It doesn’t matter if it’s true (it’s not) or if that kind of thinking has been the norm in Washington forever (it has).
You never want to treat voters like they don’t have a choice, even if you believe it.
This is how they turn a huge swath of potential electorate into “Biden, hell no” people, just like me.
Shadywack@lemmy.world · -9 pts · 2y
How to piss off everyone at LW, watch:
I am voting for neither. I'm going to match what I care about with a specific candidate, because I don't like Trump or Biden. [/opinion]
Now I'll just sit and wait for the "you idiot" comments and the vitriol geyser to blow. This should be entertaining to watch people think my vote's going to make a difference in the electoral college.
stanleytweedle@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2y
Thanks for surrendering what little choice you have to me.
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · -15 pts · 2y
Here's that guy that was foretold by the prophecy. The one who doesn't understand the electoral college. Lmao
stanleytweedle@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
Very appropriate username.
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 2y
Thanks 👈😎
stanleytweedle@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
You're welcome!
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 2y
I hope one day you know as much about us politics as you think you do now ☺️
stanleytweedle@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Teach me!
Shadywack@lemmy.world · -19 pts · 2y
Cool, have fun picking between fascism and genocide.
stanleytweedle@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 2y
Sure thing! Thanks again!
Shadywack@lemmy.world · -10 pts · 2y
To be clear, I've surrendered nothing to you whatsoever. My vote will be counted toward another candidate available to me on the ticket, just neither Trump nor Biden. That you intend to vote for genocide or fascism is something you are so gleeful to do. Enjoy.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2y
That's called surrendering.
Shadywack@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
No, it's called a society of sheep who don't want to change from the two party system.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!
stanleytweedle@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
To be clear, thanks again for surrendering your choice to me.
Honestly it's kinda weird that you prefer genocide and fascism to genocide or fascism, so it really is best you let more rational people decide for you.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
I'm sure the history books will remember your rational perspective.
Shadywack@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
You're all idiots.
Shadywack@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
To be clear, I'm voting productively instead of as a sheep. It's not surrendering anything to you. If you are beholden to the two party system and fall into the trap of "keep the other guy out" instead of voting for someone in good conscience, that's you being part of the problem.
Belastend@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2y
*fascism+genocide and genocide.
TheRealKuni@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
So there’s this cool thing with math where you can factor out common values.
So if we have fascism+genocide vs notfascism+genocide, and we factor out the support for Israel, we get fascism vs nonfascism.
That’s still an important election, regardless of whether both sides support Israel.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
Sure, but consider what you're saying here, if we cannot use our votes to effect change then what are you proposing people do?
TheRealKuni@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Well, for one, vote for the only major party that MIGHT give a shit about Gaza or may be less gung-ho about supporting Israel, and for two, advocate in other ways. Organize protests, make calls to your representatives and senators, donate to charities that will assist the people of Gaza, etc.
Keep in mind, Donald Trump moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and doesn’t give a flying fuck about Gaza. He’s worse for Gaza than “Genocide Joe” is.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
There have been protests about Biden sending arms to Israel. He continues to send arms to Israel. Politicians ignore protests.
People have called their representatives and senators objecting to sending arms to Israel. Arms continue to be sent to Israel.
Clearly neither of these have worked. What else have you got?
TheRealKuni@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
It’s like you’re expecting national policy to turn instantly based on protests. That’s now how the world works, unfortunately. Things take time.
It’s terrible, I’m not in any way trying to downplay the genocide that is happening. But Israel and the US have been firm allies for a long time. Change won’t come quickly. And it won’t come at all if Trump is elected.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2y
Isn't genocide the reason we don't like fascism?
agitatedpotato@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
Fascism is the reason we don't like fascism.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2y
What does that mean to you?
Tinidril@midwest.social · -10 pts · 2y
I tried to vote, but the DNC cancelled the Democratic primary in my state.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
You have another vote coming up.
In any case, no they didn't. The Democratic National Convention didn't cancel any state primaries. Your state party did. Your local Democrats decided to not have a primary.
Tinidril@midwest.social · -1 pts · 2y
That's not how it happened. Yeah, sure, it's technically up to the state party, but it was at the request of the DNC. There is authority, and then there is soft power.
Getting to pick between two candidates chosen for me by oligarchs doesn't seem like Democracy to me.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
And now we're into conspiracy theory territory.
That's usually a clue that you're wrong about something.
Tinidril@midwest.social · 1 pts · 2y
Public information bro. Conspiracies actually do happen BTW. We have a former president being charged with involvement in several of you haven't been keeping up with the news
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
They do happen but they're rare. That's why they're in the news.
Generally speaking, you should think "maybe I'm wrong" before you think "there's a conspiracy".
Tinidril@midwest.social · 1 pts · 2y
"National party exerts pressure on state party" is hardly a great plot for an X-files episode. And that's assuming it took more than a polite phone call
It would honestly be harder to believe that a state party would exclude someone from the ballot without at least discussing it with the national party.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Still their decision. And the reasoning for their decision was not arbitrary. Some no-name candidate didn't qualify in time. That's not a conspiracy.
PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
I don't know why you're getting downvoted. This is accurate. They did not want your vote.
Tinidril@midwest.social · 2 pts · 2y
I'm getting downvoted because it's accurate.
I actually agree with OP that everyone should be voting Biden in the general, but this constant messaging is tone-deaf as Hillary Clinton and is going to be self defeating.
ZK686@lemmy.world · -13 pts · 2y
"Everyone should only vote Democrat, and only vote for Biden." Sincerely, Lemmy.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
Pretty much, yeah. I realize you’re just engaged ins some tankie sarcasm in some twisted attempt to dissuade voting for Biden, but this time we do need to vote for Biden. Sitting on your hands is a vote for trump and fascism, turning Israel loose on Palestine, and handing Ukraine to Russia. But you tankies should have spent more money on buying a better republican instead of this absolute idiot trump. But that would probably mean someone smarter who wouldnt buy your BS.
PanArab@lemm.ee · -4 pts · 2y
"Otherwise democracy dies. We can tolerate a genocide but not another Trump presidency".
force@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
you think trump winning means genocide is gone?
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
blazera@lemmy.world · -18 pts · 2y
The more conservative BS you let the DNC get away with, the more you back Trump. Im not gonna vote for conservatives no matter how bad one of em is.
blazeknave@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 2y
And elect Trump. Cool. Nice principles. Hope they keep you warm in the camps while you watch your family dragged away and killed. Or maybe it will be your neighbors and not your problem bc you're not a target demographic. Yet. Thanks for your service hero. You're affecting change with all your logic and practical action.
blazera@lemmy.world · -13 pts · 2y
You're electing Trump by not allowing any viable candidates to be considered
Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 2y
Who's viable besides Trump and Biden?
blazera@lemmy.world · -9 pts · 2y
entirely up to the voters to decide.
Wrench@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2y
They did. Now it's time for the general election, and those 2 are the choices.
blazera@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
When did they?
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
March 12.
blazeknave@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Okay, whatever. We're here now. Those are the two candidates. You're not going to respond to this with an answer bc you're not an actual human.
ripcord@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
Yeah, that's the attitude that got him elected and see how that turned out for everyone.
It's not like doing that is going to inject much meaningful change. It's not a strategy to address the problem you want to fix.
blazeknave@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
They never have solutions. Just criticism, whining, dreaming, and shoe gazing. If they're not just working 9 to 5 in Russian troll farms.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 2y
The attitude that got Biden elected was "we'll push him further left after the election".
blazera@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 2y
I'd say the attitude that got him elected was a doomed candidate in Hillary. And Im saying Biden this year is similarly doomed.
blazeknave@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
I didn't do that. I vote DSA. I primary'd Pelosi. I'm accepting the current situation and trying to make change where there's no risk of elimination of any possible future change (allowing fascism in the oval office).
So how does electing Trump, whoever of us do it, make things better? What's your proposal? Besides not voting for Biden, what are you doing?
reverendsteveii@lemm.ee · 9 pts · 2y
Me and my queer family are thrilled to be sacrificed for your ideological purity. Hopefully we'll get to watch from the camps as the Trump-led US helps Israel "finish the job" (Trump, 2024) in Gaza and "stolen" elections are eliminated in America.
blazera@lemmy.world · -10 pts · 2y
Really weird to try using Bidens failings as a warning for what might happen if he's not reelected.
jkrtn@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 2y
It takes a truly privileged position to ignore that Repubs will make life worse for women, minorities, LGBT people, oh, and the entire planet because of climate. "Joseph Bidden isn't helping the climate," yeah I agree, the alternative is dismantling the EPA and ramping up emissions even further.
agitatedpotato@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
Hilarious when statistic are saying that of the voters getting apathetic they tend to be black and/or female. But stand on the name of those groups while you ignore how they're actually moving some more.
jkrtn@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 2y
How are you suggesting that one best support women's access to healthcare? Voter apathy because of the people becoming apathetic many tend to be women? Grow up. Women who aren't apathetic absolutely do care about Dobbs. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/women-have-swung-toward-democrats-since-the-dobbs-decision/
blazera@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 2y
I dont think things are currently going well for any of these groups
jkrtn@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 2y
I don't think that's an acceptable argument in favor of making them worse. Women were better off before this Roe v. Wade bullshit. You have the privilege to not give a shit, so you'll do whatever you want with your ballot, I guess.
blazera@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
absolutely. check out when that happened. If I cant convince you democrats are complicit in it, at least realize they're impotent at opposing it.
MutilationWave@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
So let's let Trump put in another supreme court justice or two. He already got three, which is why Roe was overturned. I don't understand how you think Democrats were complicit OR had any means of opposing it. It's the supreme court.
jkrtn@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 2y
Oh, I've actually seen that argument before. I can explain: they know women's body autonomy is a big issue, they know they're very visibly on the wrong side, but the best their propaganda network has come up with is "it happened during a Dem presidency sooooooooooo..."
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2y
They can expand it
blazera@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
Where's Biden's? If you think they have no means of opposing it, why do you want them elected? Whats the point?
jkrtn@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2y
It's really neat how you far-righties think that anyone other than yourselves finds that argument credible. Ok, Dems are impotent to stop Repub malfeasance, I guess I had better throw my vote in the trash instead of voting against Repubs, great thinking.
blazera@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
Far lefty. Dems and republicans are both conservative from my perspective.
jkrtn@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 2y
Nah. Lefties are smart enough to understand who placed which judge on SCOTUS. Lefties understand the mathematics behind FPTP voting. And lefties care about the erosion of human rights from having Repubs in office. You have none of those qualities.
Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2y
You're absolutely right... Since things suck for them now, we should accelerate their demise!
blazera@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 2y
elect someone that wont continue to make things worse for them.
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 2y
There has never been a wider gap between the Democrats and the Republicans than there is right now.
I get it you want to prove your hardcore che guevara t-shirt socialist cred. But you want to be credible at all you gotta at least sometimes look at the facts.
blazera@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
what a chasm of a gap. Except for like, immigration now https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/28/senate-dems-asylum-ukraine-money-00128970
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 2y
Perfect example. Trump says he wants to deport people that were born in the US (which obviously isn't legal). Call in the military, shoot people attempting to cross the border. Texas is putting barbed wire on the border, the the Federal government (that's Biden) is opposing it. They want the border completely shut down and people of certain ethnicity banned.
The Dems want additional judges to process asylum applications faster. Which is good for everyone. There are some bad things in the bill, but Biden doesn't have to enforce them and the courts will likely overturn them like they did with Trump's Muslim ban. Getting the additional judges and staff needed to deal with the backlog of asylum claims is super important and will lessen the hardship on immigrants seeking asylum.
So explain to me how trying to get asylum claims processed faster is exactly the same thing as Trump's Muslim ban? Or building a wall? Or shooting people?
blazera@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 2y
Its a federal border. That barbed wire is his barbed wire. This is his presidency, this is how he is running the border.
You do realize i have absolutely zero trust in Biden and this hinges on blind faith in Biden. Or at least youre arguing it does, i dont think Biden has any ability to control the bad things like fewer asylum approvals. Democrats, including Biden, have been using the same rhetoric as republicans, actively appealing to conservatives, assuring them they want a "stronger border"
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2y
Address the main point. Do you think democrats and Republicans are equally bad when it comes to immigration?
blazera@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
Yes. When is the difference supposed to be made clear? Like, theyre currently working with republicans on a bill to make things worse for immigrants.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
You think Democrats want to call in the national guard to shoot any immigrants attempting to cross the border?
Or is that just Republicans?
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 0 pts · 2y
You haven't been following the news. The Texas Governor put the barbed wire there. The Supreme Court upheld that he was able to do so(because of course they did). Biden is trying to remove it.
Maybe try diversifying your news sources beyond TikTok.
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -22 pts · 2y
Dems still trying to shame people to vote for Genocide lmao.
GiddyGap@lemm.ee · 11 pts · 2y
Yeah, I'm sure Trump will help Gaza all day long if elected...
You have the choice between someone who doesn't care enough and someone who doesn't care at all. I'll vote for the one who doesn't care enough.
Igloojoe@lemm.ee · 1 pts · 2y
I believe Trump already made the comment to just glass Gaza.
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · -15 pts · 2y
And then they love to pretend that there's no other candidates 🤣
Katana314@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
I definitely have a better opinion of people who vote for third party candidates than people who don't vote at all. A major problem with our current elections is that it's far more mud-slinging about the opposition than positivity. If the race becomes a little bit less two-party, candidates might start talking about their advantages, rather than deriding the opponents.
That said, it will still do nothing healthy for this election - it's a long-term strategy, in a world where a bad president can do so much damage in the short term.
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
Thank you stranger! I completely agree. I can't keep track of what I've said and what threads, but my whole basic idea is if you're not in a swing state then vote third party. I completely agree it's a long term strategy.
GiddyGap@lemm.ee · 2 pts · 2y
Username checks out
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
Thanks I made it myself 👈😎
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
There aren't.
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
You've clearly never heard of 3rd party candidates then! If you have heard of them, I want you to ask yourself why you feel compelled to so overly simplify a situation that you boil it down to a blatant lie.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
They don't matter in a first past the post election. They're the functional equivalent of not voting, or voting for Mikey Mouse.
LazyPhilosopher@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
Did you ask yourself why you felt the need to lie before?
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
I didn't lie. There's no other candidates. You can write whatever name you want, but only either Joe Biden or Donald Trump will win.
theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com · 7 pts · 2y
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -17 pts · 2y
Genocide Joe certainly isn't trying to be a lesser evil anymore.
theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com · 11 pts · 2y
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
No, Biden will be the reason.
theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com · 0 pts · 2y
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
I mean... okay. But mostly the most powerful man on the planet ignoring the will of the people he needs in order to be re-elected.
History will not be kind to Joe Biden.
theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com · 0 pts · 2y
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 2y
Not the people who actually voted for Trump - it's leftists with any standards whatsoever (funding genocide) who are the reason.
theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com · -1 pts · 2y
BallsandBayonets@lemmy.world · -12 pts · 2y
And we'll happily blame people like you, whose toxic attitude is half the reason we're choosing not to choose in the first place.
ripcord@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 2y
And you'll be wrong.
That would be an incredibly immature reason not to vote.
Shadywack@lemmy.world · -12 pts · 2y
Choosing between genocide or mean tweet orange guy? Yeah totally immature. How dare we dislike genocide.
ripcord@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
I was responding to the comment
youthey made, not whatever this garbage is.Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
The guy who tried to violently overthrow our democracy is just "mean tweet guy"?
Belastend@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
Mean tweet orange guy also supports the genocide. With the added caveat that he wpuld like to expedite this genocide because not enough people are dying.
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 2y
Cutting off your nose to spite your face doesn't make you a visionary, it makes you a stupid child that's never known real suffering.
You are either the stupid child, or a liar pretending to be one. I have immense sympathy for the child, you will suffer greatly.
The liar should die.
btaf45@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
This is the future that the GOP is offering Americans.
Climate Chaos. Huge national debt. Huge income inequality. Nuclear proliferation. Medical industry profiteering. Putin's Evil Empire. The end of democracy.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Democrats have failed to offer any viable alternative. Even when golden opportunities present themselves they choose corporations over the people. Every single time.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
Are you voting?
theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com · 1 pts · 2y
Theprogressivist@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
Linkerbaan, stop trying to make Genocide Joe happen! It's not going to happen!
LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 2y
It's exactly the kind of epithet I'd expect from a Maga crew though, they're not keeping up the "concerned leftist" ruse very well.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
Exactly. It's such a Trumpy thing to say, it's exactly in line with all his other nicknames for people, I don't know how anyone gets taken in by this shit
btaf45@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2y
This is the future that the GOP is offering Americans.
Climate Chaos. Huge national debt. Huge income inequality. Nuclear proliferation. Medical industry profiteering. Putin’s Evil Empire. The end of democracy.
Stop trying to make all this stuff happen.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Who’s trying to make that happen?
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Anyone who doesn't vote for Biden.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
No shit.
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 2y
Try telling Genocide Joe to stop making Genocide happen.
Genocide Joe has been a thing for over 5 months not sure where you've been.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2y
In the real world.
You should try it.
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 2y
One of us is there already. The other one denies Genocide.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2y
You live in a world of black and white, right and wrong that must be very comforting when things seem scary.
I understand that the world is actually shades of grey and very complicated.
Mastengwe@lemm.ee · 0 pts · 2y
gEnOciDE JOe!
Mastengwe@lemm.ee · 1 pts · 2y
Is it any worse than tankies/MAGA trolls trying to shame people for voting for him?
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
Neolibs trying to shame people into voting for and keep whining when called out.
Consider reading the title of this article.
Mastengwe@lemm.ee · 1 pts · 2y
No one is being shamed here. The title of the article is a simple truth. And if you actually read the article, you’d have seen that it’s pretty well explained and understood fact.
But that’s not your game here, is it? I mean, your post and comment history illustrates the fact that from appearances… you’re here in bad faith.
You- and MANY like you here, are seemingly only critical of the left- NEVER the right. You’ve been called out for this before. And yet, you never have an explanation for it. Also….Anyone can check your comment history in the mod logs to see how much misinformation is shared by you. So it’s no big secret anymore why you are here and what you’re about.
But don’t let this get in the way of- whatever it is you think you’re doing here.
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
This is blatantly untrue. Selective lib memory strikes again.
Mastengwe@lemm.ee · -1 pts · 2y
Your comment history serves as proof of what I say.
a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 2y
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 2y
Oh no not the strange tribe of people that don't condone Genocide. From the cult of "Nazis are not cool".
fidodo@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y
Don't just think about the position of president. Think about the thousands of appointments they make. It's not voting for 1 position, it's voting for an entire branch of government, potentially 2. Whatever you think about them, remember that it's gonna be either Biden or Trump appointing all those positions, so even if you hate both of them equally, add up all the incredibly powerful positions they appoint and compare the sum of it all. It's a compounding magnitude, so I cannot imagine how anyone can not have a preference when you are considering the full reach and impact that the 1 position has. Supreme court justices, federal judges, agency and department heads, countless secretaries, regulatory board heads, ambassadors and more and more, plus all the influence on positions those appointees have below them.
Linkerbaan@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
Biden ignores all his staffers telling him to stop supporting Genocide.
The good Biden staffers have quit
mlg@lemmy.world · -27 pts · 2y
votes third party
LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works · 42 pts · 2y
That's just voting for Trump with extra steps.
jo3jo3@lemmy.world · -23 pts · 2y
No it isn't
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 2y
I believe you if you’re logging in from the multiverse instance where West polls at over 40%, or the one where federal rank choice voting exists.
jo3jo3@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 2y
Don't have to believe me, you already made yourself sound like an idiot with that claim, my vote is for the person I voted for, nobody else.
blazera@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 2y
Do you want ranked choice voting?
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2y
I have it in my area for city / county seats. And I voted for it.
blazera@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 2y
You specified federal. Thats available to vote for too you know
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2y
Yes. I like ranked choice, I have voted in favor of it in the past, and I would be in support of it for more elections. Including federal elections.
WraithGear@lemmy.world · -24 pts · 2y
Nope. And either way these posts are really good at making protest voters
xmunk@sh.itjust.works · 19 pts · 2y
Nah, anyone who protest votes is doing it because they're an immature asshole. We can convert some people on the fringe to sense but a lot of people can't handle the fact that it's imperative that they put their name next to the less bad of two people.
Just to remind you, Trump will institute a national abortion ban - voting for Biden will directly save hundreds of women's lives... it's the absolute easiest action to avert unnecessary deaths you'll ever have in your lifetime.
If you can't do this, you can't do fucking anything.
WraithGear@lemmy.world · -16 pts · 2y
All these posts blaming protest voters and those who don’t vote are all generated because of the bad numbers from the primaries right? And the over all loss in confidence in Biden due to his willful protection of isreal right?
Just got to remind people that they don’t really have a choice when the real voting happens. I think if you wanted to reach these voters these posts would be more detrimental then helpful.
What would help is if Biden stopped doing the hated things.
Or is this just a circle jerk reddit thing?
xmunk@sh.itjust.works · 17 pts · 2y
I think I was pretty fucking clear. I'm posting because it will save lives. Imagine how difficult it is to pull someone from a burning car, now imagine how difficult it would be to fill in the bubble next to Biden on a ballot - both actions will save lives.
So why is it so fucking difficult to fill in that bubble?
PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 2y
I don't know the inverse to that is also true. Joe Biden could throw progressive some more bones if it meant saving women's lives.
It's bizarre to me that the onus is on us and not the candidate running for office to convince us.
WraithGear@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 2y
No you are not. This isn’t some revelation. That people just didn’t know that fracturing the Democratic parties vote hurts their chances against the republicans. You are making this post for selfish reasons.
Like i said, demonizing people who find it hard to vote for someone protecting a genocide is for your own self gratification. Its not to change minds, its not to help Biden beat trump. Its solely to start a circle jerk to validate your decision to vote blue no matter who, and to quiet that little voice about how bad of a candidate he is
You are doing no one any favors
jumjummy@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2y
I love how all these people who are suddenly vocal about the terrible situation in Gaza fall short of realizing that getting Trump in office would be catastrophically worse. With that logic, the only practical option is to vote for Biden in the general. A 3rd party vote is just throwing your vote away.
The only conclusion I see here is these people are either disinformation agents, naive fools, or both.
Wrench@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
The idea isn't to convert you. The idea is to help others see your arguments for what they are and not fall down the same nihilistic trap.
blazera@lemmy.world · -9 pts · 2y
All those lives in Gaza saved.
jkrtn@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 2y
Donald said "Israel should finish the job." IDK how much more directly one can reference "Final Solution." Sure, he will save the Palestinians.
xmunk@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 2y
It fucking sucks and I strongly support the uncommitted movement and putting all the pressure we can on him about Gaza (see my post history if you want). Trump is going to be as bad or worse on Gaza, it fucking sucks but there isn't a way you can vote to fix Gaza.
madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2y
And you somehow think voting for Trump, or giving him an advantage, will help in Gaza?
He will put zero pressure on Netanyahu. He'll likely openly support the effort and say something like "the Palestinians are just like the illegals crossing our border."
Voting isn't picking someone you like, voting is choosing the person with the best chance of winning and creating policies aligned with your values and ideals. If you vote for somebody with zero chance of winning, you're giving an advantage to the candidate who undermines your values being implemented in the long term.
If we had ranked choice voting, or if the alternative candidate wasn't openly threatening democracy, the rationale would be very different.
The smart people tried to explain to the voters that Brexit would be an enormous failure, but the voters let their emotions get in the way of being rational, and now they're suffering and wished they had voted differently.
We have the potential for something much worse with Trump. Much worse. If you can't see through your emotions to understand that if Trump is elected your vote may never matter again, I'm not sure you have the rationale capacity to be worth the time I spent typing this response.
Leviathan@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 2y
That's what they said the last election and voter turnout was nuts.
WraithGear@lemmy.world · -12 pts · 2y
The blaming of the protest voters shamed them into voting for Biden? Yea i doubt that.
Though right now the situation is different. Biden has done some things that make voters balk. Maybe he should stop doing that. It might help more then making circle jerk posts on Lemmy
Leviathan@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 2y
This has nothing to do with blame. It's mathematics. You can either add to the resistance against Trump or not.
WraithGear@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
You say that like this math factors into any part of why people are protest voting. They know this already and this gives nothing to the conversation. Instead, your best bet is to find out what they want and maybe go over a plan that gets them what they need. Sure as shit attempting to shame people with your basic math will only accomplish in widening the divide and pushing contrariness.
samus12345@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 2y
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 2y
Ironically, in that episode, voting third party was best because both candidates were monsters.
Today one is a monster and the other is the not a monster but still mostly represents monsters, but some people too.
samus12345@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!
nednobbins@lemm.ee · 4 pts · 2y
I took some time to look at who the 2020 Biden voter are who are considering not voting for him.
While there are a growing number of such groups, one of the biggest is Muslims. They get that Trump is a racist and hates Muslims. They're also currently watching Biden going out of his way to support Israel in their genocide. To them, Biden doesn't just represent monsters, he is a monster. They're logic is essentially, "We're fucked either way. Let's get rid of the monster in front of us and then we'll worry about the next monster."
It doesn't matter if you or I agree with that. They're not asking for permission to feel that way. If the Democratic leadership doesn't address those concerns with significantly more empathy than, "don't be stupid", the likely outcome is that Biden will miss out on many of those votes.
Unfortunately Biden has been racking up voter groups that feel betrayed by him. My preference would have been for Biden to find some other Democratic candidate, retire gracefully and strongly back the new candidate.
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 2y
He even said during 2020 that he wanted to be a one term president, that he was only there to beat trump.
I guess you can argue he still needs to beat trump.
nednobbins@lemm.ee · 2 pts · 2y
I'm all for someone trying to beat Trump.
It's looking less and less like Biden will be able to pull that off.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
He literally never said that. This is pure propaganda.
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2y
https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2019-12-11/joe-biden-suggests-he-would-only-serve-one-term-if-elected-president
I guess the words didn’t come from his mouth in particular but when your a politician, your staff are your representatives, and his said it.
Can’t believe people would call our verifiable facts as propaganda so confidently with nothing to back it up…
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
Like I said,
One fucking advisor to the campaign said it. Not even his official staff. An advisor.
"Verifiable facts", my ass. It's propaganda and you just repeated it without ever looking into it.
NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 2y
From what i recall, he was undecided. The media and others were projecting and suggesting that he should be a 1-term president. —Honestly, his vagueness about policy and his advocacy for nothing but the status-quo are primarily what led me to vote Green for the last presidential election.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
I'd argue it matters a lot.
nednobbins@lemm.ee · 0 pts · 2y
What's the argument that it does?
Do you think that this disagreement is likely to change anyone's mind?
Take a fairly famous example. Bassem Youssef has very publicly embraced the sentiment I'm describing. How does your agreement or disagreement have any impact at all?
I'd argue that it will only have an impact if you choose an action that's likely to induce change. He very clearly says that he considers the threats that "If you don't vote for Biden you're voting for Trump," messages to be a form of blackmail.
He finds it unconvincing so it fails to work on him. As near as I can tell, his attitude is fairly representative of a significant number of voters.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
This is a democracy. Potential voters are being influenced right now by the discussions we're having.
nednobbins@lemm.ee · 0 pts · 2y
I should clarify then.
There is currently some percentage of people who plan to vote for Biden, some that plan to vote for Trump and some who are undecided.
Most polling shows that, if there was an election today, Biden would lose pretty badly.
If you simply agree or disagree, is that likely to change anyone's planned voting behavior? If you continue to insult the people who do not currently plan to vote for Biden, do you think that will change their minds?
EatATaco@lemm.ee · 9 pts · 2y
How does this make any sense in the context of the article?
ripcord@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
It doesn't. They didn't read it.
YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world · -70 pts · 2y
Alright. RFK Jr. it is then...
tsonfeir@lemm.ee · 40 pts · 2y
So, you voted for Trump.
YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world · -31 pts · 2y
MrPenguinSky@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
The only true candidate for president.
blazeknave@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2y
@yadownwithcpp think you used your wrong alt to stir shit up. Commie fucking scum. Stay in your troll farm.
JudahBenHur@lemm.ee · -1 pts · 2y
easy
naught@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 2y
Bro is publicly selling out to the highest bidder while pedaling antisemitism, vaccine denial, and whatever other grift he can. At least choose the right high horse like Cornel West or something jfc
originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee · 11 pts · 2y
You’re really gonna stick it to…whoever you wanna stick it to, I guess.
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2y
They’re going to stick it to themself.
ickplant@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
Ew.
verdantbanana@lemmy.world · -102 pts · 2y
so does this include the US dissidents not allowed to vote legally?
fuck that
politicians like Biden crafted and wrote laws over the years that culminated in mine and others votes being taken away
not our fault people keep voting Demopublicans in
we need to get rid of both these corporate bought parties
dhork@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 2y
[Citation Needed]
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 2y
According to the article:
dhork@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 2y
Does that say that Biden's support is due to "US dissidents not allowed to vote legally"?
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 2y
I’m sorry. I thought you were asking for the source of the headline claim. I believe the person you’re responding to was referring to the insurrectionists. Right-wing media tends to label them as dissidents, activists, demonstrators, etc. when they should be described as criminals.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 2y
Do you mean criminals? Are you referring to the insurrectionists or simply people who speak out against the government? Because one of those is legal.
originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee · 23 pts · 2y
Presuming you’re talking about disenfranchised citizens, that’s mostly felons. And IMO it is abhorrent to take away a citizen’s right to vote unless that citizen committed a specific type of crime against the government (being that it is the representative of the people), like sedition, treason, or insurrection. And even then, disenfranchisement should not be permanent.
But notably people are disenfranchised by their state and city jurisdictions. The federal government does not determine whether you can vote in any given election, just the rules that apply to all elections. If you want to blame a federal body, there’s plenty to go around - SCOTUS has upheld disenfranchisement as constitutional and Congress has not really passed meaningful laws defining and regulating the practice. But I can’t think of a law that Biden has been instrumental in that contributes here, other than, of course, his 1994 crime bill. That’s not a small deal but it is far more complicated than “Biden took away voter rights”
Theprogressivist@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 2y
You're not being oppressed. You post this every single time.
Dagwood222@lemm.ee · 21 pts · 2y
It's like you've never picked up a US history book.
Back before women were allowed the vote, they would still go out and work for candidates.
tsonfeir@lemm.ee · 4 pts · 2y
You lost your voting rights… how?