Yes, they suck. They suck a lot less than Trump and the Republican party though, and in a choice between two you absolutely should be voting for the less shit choice.
I'll remind that a vote for anyone doesn't prevent you from taking other actions. Considering the way that this administration has gone so far, not voting might drastically limit other actions that can be taken.
From best option in voting to worst:
Voting for a good candidate
Voting for a better candidate than you have
Voting for the least shit choice
Not voting
Voting for the worst possible choice
My options will not be great in all races, but you can damn well bet I'll be voting.
I'll also note that they wouldn't be working so hard to try and take away peoples right to vote if they didn't think it risked their plans.
Please, put their plans at risk. Take every path to a better option.
I can't wait for you to realize your voting option list is literally this for many people:
Voting for a good candidate -> trump!
Voting for a better candidate than you have -> trump!
Voting for the least shit choice -> trump!
Not Voting -> fuck this noise
Voting for the worst possible choice -> what troll dems are running!
Once you start putting magnitudes on directionality you wont get the outcome you think you'll get. see literally the campaigns of harris/clinton.
When people tell you your candidate sucks and they wont vote for them, that's a problem for you and your candidate to resolve not the voter who is informing you of their disdain for your candidate.
Please, put their plans at risk.
Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing when I'm withholding my vote from shitty dem and repub candidates who have been enabling this behavior for decades. (see above)
I have a related degree, but it's no secret that you target those who are never going to vote for you with propaganda to make them cynical and abstain from voting. It's what Cambridge Analytica was infamous for (Brexit, first Trump campaign, etc.), but there are others.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Cynicism was a significant factor in the downfall of the Weimar Republic. That cynicism was in large part fostered and exacerbated by Nazi propaganda.
Everyone is susceptible to propaganda, but especially those who think they aren't. Propaganda is especially effective when it contains a kernel of truth.
Its funny that the propaganda you refer to is always 'well they werent going to do anything for you anyways' and have it be true. last time i heard a mainstream democrat run on a decent platform was obama. since then its been nothing but 'well we cant do that! its not capitalist!'
My dad is worse than your dad! I Never said it was a tough choice. just that my choice is not to vote for either shit pile. you're free to continue voting for whatever idiot you want to. I'll occassional toss my vote in when it offers material change on the ground. if it doesnt, then i wont.
Here is a list of things that will get that check box:
candidate needs to full throatedly support single payer.
candidate needs to shut their whore mouths about 'supporting {minority group} is costing us the elections!'
full throated prolabour positions: minimum paid / sick leave / paternity leave / living wage automatic inflation adjustments / forcing companies to bring labor position back or UBI.
full throated support for monopoly busting.
I'll take any one of those bullet points and I'll be arsed to roll out of bed for your candidate. There are other things as well but I dont think an exhaustive list is necessary.
Who said I'm pouting/not playing. just because i dont for your candidate doesnt mean Im not taking actions. Sorry I'm currently busy running a network protecting my local community from the jackboots. LMK when you have a candidate who isnt running on 'planning to murder friends and family in the middle east' and 'going to continue promoting corporate interests at the expense of working americans' and I'll vote for them.
You're literally doing the same thing the person who I called out is doing. inferring incorrect motives from a noisy signal.
I'm just curious if you're getting involved in grassroots activism, promoting candidates you agree with, canvassing the neighborhood to try to drum up support, etc. Because these are the sorts of things that need to happen in order to produce a candidate you agree with. It's completely disienguous to put the entire onus of finding a candidate you agree with on other people.
I want you to vote. I care less about who you vote for than I do you voting at all. Exercising your civic right to choose your representation is a big deal, and I encourage you to stop getting mad at other people for not doing your own legwork, and instead get out there and promote a candidate you agree with. Hell, maybe you should run yourself. I don't know, but I do know that sitting around getting mad because you don't like the major candidates without doing anything about it gets us all nowhere.
Oh so now someone has to promote candidates they agree with in order to be involved in grassroots organizing
this is an anarchist space
Why is it so hard for people to get that the problem is the system, that by promoting any candidate for any role is promoting the system itself? There will never be a candidate I agree with because the people who are empowered by the American constitution to dissolve the union aren't elected officials.
"I tried nothing and it didn't work" isn't a strategy that works for me.
I'm not going to sit on my butt and complain into the void. I will do everything I can to get to where I want the world to where I hope it can go.
Organizing is not in conflict with anarchism.
Pretending the system doesn't exist or that not participating in any way will change it is a fool's errand.
Feel free to find another way to participate, but trying to push others to not do what they can, to me, is (at best) an effort to continue the downward trend.
This is absurd. Electoral organizing isn't the only kind of organizing. Organizing outside of electoral campaigns is not doing nothing. Telling people the only way to organize or do anything to influence politics is through election campaigns is absolutely in conflict with anarchism.
I’m just curious if you’re getting involved in grassroots activism, promoting candidates you agree with, canvassing the neighborhood to try to drum up support, etc. ...
It’s completely disienguous to put the entire onus of finding a candidate you agree with on other people.
Talk about being disingenuous. not to mention holier than thou.
Sorry I’m currently busy running a network protecting my local community from the jackboots.
What part of this statement makes you think I havent/dont do all the above. I'm mad that you chuckle fucks keep riding the vote harder while continuing to give your support to candidates neither of us, allegedly, want instead of letting those candidates just lose because they literally suck.
You are confusing individual action to limit further harm with a candidate's strategy to win votes. They are not the same thing. No one is saying "we want apathetic do-nothings to win" they're saying "I'd rather not have the villians win, if possible"
Oi, god people are so dense. Please tell me, which one did I think was not a villian? If you want your candidate to win, please put forward one who isnt a villian and I'll glad vote for them.
This isnt about you. I've told you this repeatedly. Its about the people you're trying to get to vote and they dont care about your preferences. LMK when you have a point that isnt 'other people should vote like i do'
Yes, they suck. They suck a lot less than Trump and the Republican party though, and in a choice between two you >absolutely should be voting for the less shit choice.
I’ll remind that a vote for anyone doesn’t prevent you from taking other actions. Considering the way that this administration >has gone so far, not voting might drastically limit other actions that can be taken.
From best option in voting to worst:
literally the initial comment I responded to w/ you. lol. if you can't find a candidate you can say 'hey this is the person you can vote for because of ....' thats a candidates problem. not the voter who has 0 interest in voting for them because they're shitty.
you're entire post is 'vote for this less genocidal candidate' as if its incentive. fuck off.
you think not voting is different from voting for the least shit choice. where is my corporate needs you to find the differences photo.... if you want someones vote you need to find a candidate that has a platform they'll vote for. simple as that.
false. I vote every election, I dont vote for everything on the ballot, sometimes i leave the ballot empty. two very different things. all you need to do is look at mandami's results for the distinction. spend some time there and understand that there are many people willing to show up for the right candidate but wont show up for the shitshow that is the dem party currently.
You need to stop putting your values into your distinctions between the tiers.
All I see if you here struggling to prove yourself right.
That sounds like a you problem. ;)
functionally I'm grateful harris lost it woke a lot of people up. sadly not you though. you'll continue trucking on with your 'at least I voted for the least horrible fucking option!' path blindly until the ground falls out below you into fascism.
No it doesnt. stop telling yourself this lie all you're doing is preventing real solutions being brought to the fore.
Realize that democratic moderates are shit candidates and many people dont support them and move on the faster shit will get fixed. No more - 'they're more electable!' 'X wont win' 'harm reduction' no one cares.
If your shitty candidate is more electable than mine then you dont need my vote. if they're not, then your candidate better have something i support and not things you imagine i should support. heads up libs gavin/peter/etc are not on my 2028 card.
That’s what primaries are for. If you elected a bad Democrat, that’s your fault.
Man I have a super powerful vote! lol. No primaries are to try to influence the result in the general. The general election is something I'm more than willing to sit out on if the primary decides to put in a shit candidate.
Ah yes, infantilizing someone who didnt vote for your preferred candidate. but no it wasnt. I stopped voting for dem presidents back in 1992 with a small hiccup in 2008 when it looked like we might get universal healthcare at a minimum.
what are you on about lol. this thread has never been about me. Its literally been about people not listening to what voters want from the get go and demanding votes for nothing.
Stop voting for shit stain moderate dems entirely general/primary or otherwise.
organize locally for someone / run for office yourself. <--- you're failing here.
falling for db0's click bait isnt effective use of your time. unfortunately if your local area failed on 1 & 2 you're semi stuck for this cycle and do whats in your best interest this cycle. stop looking to others.
As if wasting your time is doing any sort of electoralism is going to achieve anything. Hint of your "socialist" candidates are going to just do Capitalism again.
Eh, not really. Kinda for the first 2 years, but that included people like Manchin, Sinema, Golden from Maine (the only one to vote against the Floyd Justice in Policing Act and the Covid19 stimulus), along with Gottheimer, Schrader, Costa, Case, Murphy, Rice, Vela, Bordeaux, and Cueller who were the most right leaning of the bunch in the house, pretty much all members of the shitheels known as the Blue Dog Coalition.
That last group is why the tax hikes for the wealthy and capital gains increases didn't go through. Along with a lot of the infrastructure bill getting yoinked and drug pricing reform bill getting reduced down.
Eh, they did convict him of dozens of felonies, though. Didn't matter. The supposedly tough on crime party elected a felon.
The people actively making the world a worse place to live in for everyone are the ones who benefit by people not voting out of protest. They aren't going to stop if Americans sit by and leave them in power, so wouldn't the better option be to vote out the jokers who are in and make the powers that be bribe new politicians? At least make them work.
If left in power, the ones not getting voted out will mistake complacency for capitulation and consent and both for support of what they are doing. And, they won't be entirely wrong if the people don't do what's in their power and within the law to do.
They aren't even threatening to imprison Trump or the nazi party for their crimes anymore. They aren't using their power to inspect ICE facilities or making a coordinated, public effort to document all the crimes. There are over 250 Dem reps in Washington and most of them are silent, taking the extended leave the nazi party granted; occasionally virtue signaling on the nazi xitter platform; settling into the kleptocracy and taking part in the corruption, the same as the Dem majority always has.
We only have two parties, so our choices are limited. Dems are no picnic, but they are still better than MAGAs. All we had in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024 were all the same Corpo-Establishment Dems that helped MAGA rise to power.
But since 2024, things have been changing, and the Progressive/ Socialists have been taking over the Dems, so 2026 will be much different.
If we can get through 2026 and 2028, and establish new leadership in the party and Congress, then we might be able to save our country.
If we just end up with the same Corpo-Establishment losers like Schmuck & Jeffries, then yeah, we might as well burn it all down.
I live in a country with many parties. It's still the same. And I've seen or heard of countries with only one party, even worse. It doesn't matter the number of parties, the rich and powerful will rule over us until the power is kept by the people, within the people, and people alone, without giving any of it away to any 'leader'.
You know what the definition of insanity is right?
Yes:
"unsoundness of mind or lack of the ability to understand that prevents someone from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or that releases someone from criminal or civil responsibility"
No, it is doing something over and over expecting a different result (according to the late great psychologist Alfred Einstein MD who didn't even say that).
That's interesting too though because it's the definition of a factoid, which is an erroneous statement presented as fact because of broad repetition.
Here's the definition of insanity btw since people think that a quip misattributed to Einstein about something unrelated is the actual definition for some reason.
Even if Democrats did win last election, you'd see them do pretty much the exact same shit as Republicans except in a different form, with barely anyone paying attention because "the good guys are in charge". Turns out that no matter how radical or conservative a bourgeois party is, their job when being in control is growing capital in order to compete with other powers and responding to any domestic crises that might occur
90 Comments
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 60 pts · 9h
Vote anyway.
Yes, they suck. They suck a lot less than Trump and the Republican party though, and in a choice between two you absolutely should be voting for the less shit choice.
I'll remind that a vote for anyone doesn't prevent you from taking other actions. Considering the way that this administration has gone so far, not voting might drastically limit other actions that can be taken.
From best option in voting to worst:
My options will not be great in all races, but you can damn well bet I'll be voting.
I'll also note that they wouldn't be working so hard to try and take away peoples right to vote if they didn't think it risked their plans.
Please, put their plans at risk. Take every path to a better option.
luokaton@lemmy.zip · -2 pts · 3h
Before “voting for a good candidate” there’s also “mass protests” and “general strike”
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 12 pts · 3h
Those aren't election items though, and please read the last line again.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -47 pts · 8h
I can't wait for you to realize your voting option list is literally this for many people:
Voting for a good candidate -> trump!
Voting for a better candidate than you have -> trump!
Voting for the least shit choice -> trump!
Not Voting -> fuck this noise
Voting for the worst possible choice -> what troll dems are running!
Once you start putting magnitudes on directionality you wont get the outcome you think you'll get. see literally the campaigns of harris/clinton.
When people tell you your candidate sucks and they wont vote for them, that's a problem for you and your candidate to resolve not the voter who is informing you of their disdain for your candidate.
Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing when I'm withholding my vote from shitty dem and repub candidates who have been enabling this behavior for decades. (see above)
ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world · 36 pts · 8h
So what's your solution? Pouting in the corner and saying "I'm not playing"?
cloudpersona@lemmy.zip · 21 pts · 8h
Souvenir@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 10 pts · 6h
Plenty have been targetted with propaganda.
I have a related degree, but it's no secret that you target those who are never going to vote for you with propaganda to make them cynical and abstain from voting. It's what Cambridge Analytica was infamous for (Brexit, first Trump campaign, etc.), but there are others.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Cynicism was a significant factor in the downfall of the Weimar Republic. That cynicism was in large part fostered and exacerbated by Nazi propaganda.
Everyone is susceptible to propaganda, but especially those who think they aren't. Propaganda is especially effective when it contains a kernel of truth.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -3 pts · 3h
Its funny that the propaganda you refer to is always 'well they werent going to do anything for you anyways' and have it be true. last time i heard a mainstream democrat run on a decent platform was obama. since then its been nothing but 'well we cant do that! its not capitalist!'
NEZ27@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 2h
Yes that is just as bad as Trump and Co actively dismantling institutions and lining their pockets at our expense. What a tough choice.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 2h
My dad is worse than your dad! I Never said it was a tough choice. just that my choice is not to vote for either shit pile. you're free to continue voting for whatever idiot you want to. I'll occassional toss my vote in when it offers material change on the ground. if it doesnt, then i wont.
Here is a list of things that will get that check box:
I'll take any one of those bullet points and I'll be arsed to roll out of bed for your candidate. There are other things as well but I dont think an exhaustive list is necessary.
village604@adultswim.fan · 7 pts · 6h
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -9 pts · 7h
Who said I'm pouting/not playing. just because i dont for your candidate doesnt mean Im not taking actions. Sorry I'm currently busy running a network protecting my local community from the jackboots. LMK when you have a candidate who isnt running on 'planning to murder friends and family in the middle east' and 'going to continue promoting corporate interests at the expense of working americans' and I'll vote for them.
You're literally doing the same thing the person who I called out is doing. inferring incorrect motives from a noisy signal.
ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 7h
I'm just curious if you're getting involved in grassroots activism, promoting candidates you agree with, canvassing the neighborhood to try to drum up support, etc. Because these are the sorts of things that need to happen in order to produce a candidate you agree with. It's completely disienguous to put the entire onus of finding a candidate you agree with on other people.
I want you to vote. I care less about who you vote for than I do you voting at all. Exercising your civic right to choose your representation is a big deal, and I encourage you to stop getting mad at other people for not doing your own legwork, and instead get out there and promote a candidate you agree with. Hell, maybe you should run yourself. I don't know, but I do know that sitting around getting mad because you don't like the major candidates without doing anything about it gets us all nowhere.
sculptor0725@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 4h
Oh so now someone has to promote candidates they agree with in order to be involved in grassroots organizing
this is an anarchist space
Why is it so hard for people to get that the problem is the system, that by promoting any candidate for any role is promoting the system itself? There will never be a candidate I agree with because the people who are empowered by the American constitution to dissolve the union aren't elected officials.
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 5 pts · 4h
"I tried nothing and it didn't work" isn't a strategy that works for me.
I'm not going to sit on my butt and complain into the void. I will do everything I can to get to where I want the world to where I hope it can go.
Organizing is not in conflict with anarchism.
Pretending the system doesn't exist or that not participating in any way will change it is a fool's errand.
Feel free to find another way to participate, but trying to push others to not do what they can, to me, is (at best) an effort to continue the downward trend.
sculptor0725@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 3h
This is absurd. Electoral organizing isn't the only kind of organizing. Organizing outside of electoral campaigns is not doing nothing. Telling people the only way to organize or do anything to influence politics is through election campaigns is absolutely in conflict with anarchism.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -4 pts · 3h
This is literally what you're doing, right now.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -5 pts · 4h
Talk about being disingenuous. not to mention holier than thou.
What part of this statement makes you think I havent/dont do all the above. I'm mad that you chuckle fucks keep riding the vote harder while continuing to give your support to candidates neither of us, allegedly, want instead of letting those candidates just lose because they literally suck.
naught101@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 7h
I mean, the DSA is doing a half way decent job of that in at least a few electorates...
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 5h
Indeed they are. guess what candidates I've done work for....
chuckleslord@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 8h
You are confusing individual action to limit further harm with a candidate's strategy to win votes. They are not the same thing. No one is saying "we want apathetic do-nothings to win" they're saying "I'd rather not have the villians win, if possible"
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -10 pts · 7h
Oi, god people are so dense. Please tell me, which one did I think was not a villian? If you want your candidate to win, please put forward one who isnt a villian and I'll glad vote for them.
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 8 pts · 6h
I wasn't the person you replied to here, but I think we are talking about Palpatine vs Team Rocket here.
I'd vote for Team Rocket over Palpatine any day of the week.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -8 pts · 6h
This isnt about you. I've told you this repeatedly. Its about the people you're trying to get to vote and they dont care about your preferences. LMK when you have a point that isnt 'other people should vote like i do'
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 6 pts · 5h
I don't believe I said that at any point, and I'd encourage you to not try and put words in my mouth.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -5 pts · 5h
literally the initial comment I responded to w/ you. lol. if you can't find a candidate you can say 'hey this is the person you can vote for because of ....' thats a candidates problem. not the voter who has 0 interest in voting for them because they're shitty.
you're entire post is 'vote for this less genocidal candidate' as if its incentive. fuck off.
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 13 pts · 8h
I think you grossly underestimate my understanding.
No, my answer does not change. If you take the time to read it rather than blindly respond to me recommending to vote anyway, you may discover why.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -20 pts · 8h
you think not voting is different from voting for the least shit choice. where is my corporate needs you to find the differences photo.... if you want someones vote you need to find a candidate that has a platform they'll vote for. simple as that.
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 15 pts · 8h
Yes.
It is. And I consider it foolish to pretend otherwise.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -18 pts · 8h
Exactly, I understood your point precisely. The problem is you dont understand human behavior and its why you end up losing. repeatedly. to trump.
You: I dont have to change! You have to change!.
Other person: walks away
You: shocked pikachu
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 15 pts · 8h
No, you clearly did not understand.
"Not voting" is a message of apathy, not discontent.
"Not voting" is being OK with things as they are.
"Not voting" is not taking every avenue possible.
"Not voting" is nothing more than giving up.
You should try reading my comment again.
village604@adultswim.fan · 7 pts · 6h
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -11 pts · 8h
As I said. you're not understanding.
false. I vote every election, I dont vote for everything on the ballot, sometimes i leave the ballot empty. two very different things. all you need to do is look at mandami's results for the distinction. spend some time there and understand that there are many people willing to show up for the right candidate but wont show up for the shitshow that is the dem party currently.
You need to stop putting your values into your distinctions between the tiers.
JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 8h
Lol, then walk away bro. All I see if you here struggling to prove yourself right.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -7 pts · 7h
That sounds like a you problem. ;)
functionally I'm grateful harris lost it woke a lot of people up. sadly not you though. you'll continue trucking on with your 'at least I voted for the least horrible fucking option!' path blindly until the ground falls out below you into fascism.
spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app · 43 pts · 9h
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -32 pts · 9h
No it doesnt. stop telling yourself this lie all you're doing is preventing real solutions being brought to the fore.
Realize that democratic moderates are shit candidates and many people dont support them and move on the faster shit will get fixed. No more - 'they're more electable!' 'X wont win' 'harm reduction' no one cares.
If your shitty candidate is more electable than mine then you dont need my vote. if they're not, then your candidate better have something i support and not things you imagine i should support. heads up libs gavin/peter/etc are not on my 2028 card.
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 9h
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -13 pts · 8h
Man I have a super powerful vote! lol. No primaries are to try to influence the result in the general. The general election is something I'm more than willing to sit out on if the primary decides to put in a shit candidate.
JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 8h
You really ought to just sit down. Was trump/Biden your first general?
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -9 pts · 7h
Ah yes, infantilizing someone who didnt vote for your preferred candidate. but no it wasnt. I stopped voting for dem presidents back in 1992 with a small hiccup in 2008 when it looked like we might get universal healthcare at a minimum.
Gaslov@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 3h
If enough people don't believe in either party, real revolution becomes a possibility.
And most of us won't live through that.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 2h
Best get on removing those shitty dems then now.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 4h
Well, if you're not gonna express your political opinions in any relevant way, kinda sounds like we shouldn't listen to ya at all.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -2 pts · 4h
what are you on about lol. this thread has never been about me. Its literally been about people not listening to what voters want from the get go and demanding votes for nothing.
ContactClosure@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 3h
What's a real solution?
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 2h
falling for db0's click bait isnt effective use of your time. unfortunately if your local area failed on 1 & 2 you're semi stuck for this cycle and do whats in your best interest this cycle. stop looking to others.
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 2h
As if wasting your time is doing any sort of electoralism is going to achieve anything. Hint of your "socialist" candidates are going to just do Capitalism again.
jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 2h
laugh hey bud. =) wondered when you'd check back in to sweep up the fishies.
cloudpersona@lemmy.zip · 23 pts · 10h
It’s always the same. Like dems had power under Biden, no changes made. “Change takes time” ok why can trump do change overnight?
Oh yea, it’s because in general the dems don’t actually want change, they’re happy with the way most of the system works.
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus · 7 pts · 6h
Eh, not really. Kinda for the first 2 years, but that included people like Manchin, Sinema, Golden from Maine (the only one to vote against the Floyd Justice in Policing Act and the Covid19 stimulus), along with Gottheimer, Schrader, Costa, Case, Murphy, Rice, Vela, Bordeaux, and Cueller who were the most right leaning of the bunch in the house, pretty much all members of the shitheels known as the Blue Dog Coalition.
That last group is why the tax hikes for the wealthy and capital gains increases didn't go through. Along with a lot of the infrastructure bill getting yoinked and drug pricing reform bill getting reduced down.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 22 pts · 9h
Eh, they did convict him of dozens of felonies, though. Didn't matter. The supposedly tough on crime party elected a felon.
The people actively making the world a worse place to live in for everyone are the ones who benefit by people not voting out of protest. They aren't going to stop if Americans sit by and leave them in power, so wouldn't the better option be to vote out the jokers who are in and make the powers that be bribe new politicians? At least make them work.
If left in power, the ones not getting voted out will mistake complacency for capitulation and consent and both for support of what they are doing. And, they won't be entirely wrong if the people don't do what's in their power and within the law to do.
Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca · 22 pts · 7h
The trick is you still need to protest against the government you voted for.
WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 10h
They aren't even threatening to imprison Trump or the nazi party for their crimes anymore. They aren't using their power to inspect ICE facilities or making a coordinated, public effort to document all the crimes. There are over 250 Dem reps in Washington and most of them are silent, taking the extended leave the nazi party granted; occasionally virtue signaling on the nazi xitter platform; settling into the kleptocracy and taking part in the corruption, the same as the Dem majority always has.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 10 pts · 4h
We only have two parties, so our choices are limited. Dems are no picnic, but they are still better than MAGAs. All we had in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024 were all the same Corpo-Establishment Dems that helped MAGA rise to power.
But since 2024, things have been changing, and the Progressive/ Socialists have been taking over the Dems, so 2026 will be much different.
If we can get through 2026 and 2028, and establish new leadership in the party and Congress, then we might be able to save our country.
If we just end up with the same Corpo-Establishment losers like Schmuck & Jeffries, then yeah, we might as well burn it all down.
Malica@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 5h
It's crucial that everyone vote because it needs to be a landslide, to overcome whatever rigging they have in store.
AnalogAllamma@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 10h
The two party system is entirely corrupt. Two sides of the same coin. Two faced.
OfCourseNot@fedia.io · 6 pts · 8h
I live in a country with many parties. It's still the same. And I've seen or heard of countries with only one party, even worse. It doesn't matter the number of parties, the rich and powerful will rule over us until the power is kept by the people, within the people, and people alone, without giving any of it away to any 'leader'.
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 4h
Democracies are better places to live because you get to choose the least harmful party
oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 2h
Yes:
"unsoundness of mind or lack of the ability to understand that prevents someone from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or that releases someone from criminal or civil responsibility"
anarchy79@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 27m
No, it is doing something over and over expecting a different result (according to the late great psychologist Alfred Einstein MD who didn't even say that).
That's interesting too though because it's the definition of a factoid, which is an erroneous statement presented as fact because of broad repetition.
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 3 pts · 2h
Looks like another psyop to me, boss
anarchy79@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 32m
Here's the definition of insanity btw since people think that a quip misattributed to Einstein about something unrelated is the actual definition for some reason.
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com MOD · 1 pts · 2h
Please check the rules before commenting. Rule 7 in particular.
too_high_for_this@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 57m
Is there a rule against shaming people for making stupid rules?
AviAdi@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 16m
For a community based on anarchy there sure are a bunch of rules on what you can and cannot say.... 😂
butwhyishischinabook@anarchist.nexus · 1 pts · 6m
Anarchy implies a lack of hierarchy, not a lack of rules.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 4h
Politicians gotta respect their co-workers.
commiunism@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -3 pts · 9h
Even if Democrats did win last election, you'd see them do pretty much the exact same shit as Republicans except in a different form, with barely anyone paying attention because "the good guys are in charge". Turns out that no matter how radical or conservative a bourgeois party is, their job when being in control is growing capital in order to compete with other powers and responding to any domestic crises that might occur
waltersf@bookwyr.me · -6 pts · 10h
tis y i gave up ↓ 4θ Red Scare.
aint way アメコ will revolt, after successful derad #nokings.
no vanguards, no grassroots