Unfortunately, the US’s winner-takes-all voting system makes it so that your (entirely reasonable and otherwise simply correct) mindset leads to what’s called the Spoiler Effect, where a third party vote actually just ends up helping your least favorites. Because of this, the winner-takes-all system inevitably leads to two dominant parties, and being forced to vote for the shiniest of two turds. To fix this, we just need a different voting system. I’m partial to approval voting, but more likely that’d be ranked choice.
I think the confusion here is that Harris voters, even the reluctant ones, see her as an acceptable alternative to Trump. But I don’t. Both of them are so completely unacceptable options for me.
Imagine the election were between Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani. Or Hitler vs Mussolini. Or whatever match up would finally make you say, ‘I can’t possibly support either of these hideous fucks.’ I’m already there with Harris vs Trump.
I’ve seen so many thousands of images and videos this year of children torn to shreds in Gaza. I just can’t fucking do it.
You get the neoliberal that will be broadly disappointing, and likely perpetuate the situation in Palestine, or you get the open fascist that will make everything far worse - including Palestine, and potentially end US democracy. Both are bad, there’s a yawning chasm of difference between the two.
Your spectacularly priveliged abstaineousness and the false equivalence you’re drawing (even on the single issue you’ve pointed to) in such a critical swing state is cripplingly naiive, and gambles with the lives of who knows how many Palestinians, Ukrainians, and Americans. To sit back and vote for a Russian asset in this context is frankly disgusting.
There are 1,458 days of the election cycle to push for better - there’s only one for keeping the fascists out of power, and you chose not to.
I find this stance wild. Like I none of us are happy with what’s going on in Gaza, but some people are completely blind to the various ways the current US government has been using its political might to try prevent the war from spreading. People can argue that those steps may or may not be working, that’s fine, in glad people have that opinion.
But how can those same people look at Trump and their statements and views on this subject and think “yes that’s better”? Trump has blatantly said that he things Israel is doing a good job, he also thinks that USA should not be invoived in any humanitarian aid in Gaza.
If Trump is elected, the situation in Gaza is going to get substantially worse. If you actually care about Gaza, the strategic vote is Harris. It’s not a perfect vote or even a great vote, but that’s what FPTP forces, when there is a single issue you’re passionate about, you have to vote strategically. That means looking at the candidates and picking the candidate who most closely matches your views and is also most likely to win. Otherwise you’re throwing your vote away (assuming there were an issue you’re supper passionate about, if there are no super important issues then it’s justifiable to vote for a candidate you really like)
The confusion is that you, and others who are spouting off the same nonsense, really seem hellbent on ignoring that you’re getting one of them as your next president if you are a citizen of the US.
“I’m not voting for either” gets you nowhere. Worse, it withholds a vote from a candidate who isn’t a full-blown, mask-off, dangerous fascist.
This is the compass you have to work with:
I presume you want to be somewhere around here:
Or even here:
But you can’t get there from where we are right now, and you sure as hell can’t do it if you end up with the red circle.
The closest you can get to what you want in this election is the blue circle. So the logical thing to do in this election is to hold your nose, get over your “moral authority”, and vote for the one viable option that is even remotely close to your ideal candidate.
Voting third party in FPTP doesn’t benefit any candidate except the viable candidate least aligned with your ideal. You are contributing to a possible Trump victory by refusing to vote for the only other candidate that can win this election.
Everyone I’ve encountered who regurgitates the “Harris isn’t acceptable” line of thinking falls back to “voting for Harris makes you complicit in the ongoing genocide in Gaza” but refuses to acknowledge that, if we apply the same logic, voting for a non-viable candidate makes you complicit in the same genocide, along with every other shit thing that will happen in a second, more disastrous Trump term.
“I didn’t vote for him though,” carries no water, because if you lean left of Harris and vote third party in this election you’ve taken support from the only viable candidate and in doing so made the shift towards fascism easier to enact.
I’ve been holding my nose for decades now. Voting for the blue circle doesn’t get us any closer to the left. In fact, voting for the “lesser evil” is still getting us pulled farther right, to the point that both options openly support genocide.
If luring Dems left is even possible, it has to be done by making them lose. Rewarding them with a win, after they go further right, just encourages them to keep moving right.
All you do by “making them lose” is make shit worse for everyone who isn’t a full-blown right-wing religious nutter.
Voting for the blue circle helps ensure that you can ever have a choice again. Voting for anything else if you’re left of the blue circle provides succor to would-be tyrants.
And that’s on you. That’s your failure of logic helping to pave the way for an even harder shift to the right.
What’s the term for someone who helps fascists get their way?
I’d vote for Stein if she were to made even the smallest effort to earn it. But cozying up to genocidal dictators and not doing jack shit three out of every four years isn’t going to net her any support from me.
Personally, I’d rather vote for someone that may not be perfect, but at least can show their work.
She has no policies. I’ll ask again. What has she DONE.
LIKE, what action has she made that has done anything to earn your vote, besides stating she will do things she has no clear path to realistically be able to do?
I love how y’all say De La Cruz doesn’t have a proven record, and shouldn’t be supported based on her promises. But when I point to Harris’ record, I’m supposed to believe her promises.
Having policy, doesn’t mean what you think it means. I have policy. Why not vote for me? I can make a website and say anything I feel you are wanting to hear. And ant the end of the day, I’m every bit as effective as la Cruz is with regards to reliably getting things done politically.
She’s done absolutely nothing at all to instill any trust whatsoever in her ability to govern. She has zero experience in the field. And by the way, do you remember who else was lauded for “not being a career politician?” Because I do.
Additionally- she’s been absent from any policy making or political influence, and has no track record of doing anything meaningful for anyone on a political level-
Therefore she has not doing anything to earn a single vote. Now, thanks for the discussion- but I’m not going to argue about this.
I voted Stein in Georgia. My vote never belonged to Harris, so me not voting for her has taken nothing away.
Maybe stop assuming people will vote for candidates, and start earning those votes.
Unfortunately, the US’s winner-takes-all voting system makes it so that your (entirely reasonable and otherwise simply correct) mindset leads to what’s called the Spoiler Effect, where a third party vote actually just ends up helping your least favorites. Because of this, the winner-takes-all system inevitably leads to two dominant parties, and being forced to vote for the shiniest of two turds. To fix this, we just need a different voting system. I’m partial to approval voting, but more likely that’d be ranked choice.
I think the confusion here is that Harris voters, even the reluctant ones, see her as an acceptable alternative to Trump. But I don’t. Both of them are so completely unacceptable options for me.
Imagine the election were between Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani. Or Hitler vs Mussolini. Or whatever match up would finally make you say, ‘I can’t possibly support either of these hideous fucks.’ I’m already there with Harris vs Trump.
I’ve seen so many thousands of images and videos this year of children torn to shreds in Gaza. I just can’t fucking do it.
There isn’t a third option.
You get the neoliberal that will be broadly disappointing, and likely perpetuate the situation in Palestine, or you get the open fascist that will make everything far worse - including Palestine, and potentially end US democracy. Both are bad, there’s a yawning chasm of difference between the two.
Your spectacularly priveliged abstaineousness and the false equivalence you’re drawing (even on the single issue you’ve pointed to) in such a critical swing state is cripplingly naiive, and gambles with the lives of who knows how many Palestinians, Ukrainians, and Americans. To sit back and vote for a Russian asset in this context is frankly disgusting.
There are 1,458 days of the election cycle to push for better - there’s only one for keeping the fascists out of power, and you chose not to.
Are we re-using the “we’ll push Biden left” lie again? How’d that work out?
It’s your vote. No one else’s. And Harris didn’t earn it. That’s not your fault. It’s hers, and the Democratic Party.
I find this stance wild. Like I none of us are happy with what’s going on in Gaza, but some people are completely blind to the various ways the current US government has been using its political might to try prevent the war from spreading. People can argue that those steps may or may not be working, that’s fine, in glad people have that opinion.
But how can those same people look at Trump and their statements and views on this subject and think “yes that’s better”? Trump has blatantly said that he things Israel is doing a good job, he also thinks that USA should not be invoived in any humanitarian aid in Gaza.
If Trump is elected, the situation in Gaza is going to get substantially worse. If you actually care about Gaza, the strategic vote is Harris. It’s not a perfect vote or even a great vote, but that’s what FPTP forces, when there is a single issue you’re passionate about, you have to vote strategically. That means looking at the candidates and picking the candidate who most closely matches your views and is also most likely to win. Otherwise you’re throwing your vote away (assuming there were an issue you’re supper passionate about, if there are no super important issues then it’s justifiable to vote for a candidate you really like)
The confusion is that you, and others who are spouting off the same nonsense, really seem hellbent on ignoring that you’re getting one of them as your next president if you are a citizen of the US.
“I’m not voting for either” gets you nowhere. Worse, it withholds a vote from a candidate who isn’t a full-blown, mask-off, dangerous fascist.
This is the compass you have to work with:
I presume you want to be somewhere around here:
Or even here:
But you can’t get there from where we are right now, and you sure as hell can’t do it if you end up with the red circle.
The closest you can get to what you want in this election is the blue circle. So the logical thing to do in this election is to hold your nose, get over your “moral authority”, and vote for the one viable option that is even remotely close to your ideal candidate.
Voting third party in FPTP doesn’t benefit any candidate except the viable candidate least aligned with your ideal. You are contributing to a possible Trump victory by refusing to vote for the only other candidate that can win this election.
Everyone I’ve encountered who regurgitates the “Harris isn’t acceptable” line of thinking falls back to “voting for Harris makes you complicit in the ongoing genocide in Gaza” but refuses to acknowledge that, if we apply the same logic, voting for a non-viable candidate makes you complicit in the same genocide, along with every other shit thing that will happen in a second, more disastrous Trump term.
“I didn’t vote for him though,” carries no water, because if you lean left of Harris and vote third party in this election you’ve taken support from the only viable candidate and in doing so made the shift towards fascism easier to enact.
I’ve been holding my nose for decades now. Voting for the blue circle doesn’t get us any closer to the left. In fact, voting for the “lesser evil” is still getting us pulled farther right, to the point that both options openly support genocide.
If luring Dems left is even possible, it has to be done by making them lose. Rewarding them with a win, after they go further right, just encourages them to keep moving right.
All you do by “making them lose” is make shit worse for everyone who isn’t a full-blown right-wing religious nutter.
Voting for the blue circle helps ensure that you can ever have a choice again. Voting for anything else if you’re left of the blue circle provides succor to would-be tyrants.
And that’s on you. That’s your failure of logic helping to pave the way for an even harder shift to the right.
What’s the term for someone who helps fascists get their way?
Like there will be a next time is Trump wins
I’d vote for Stein if she were to made even the smallest effort to earn it. But cozying up to genocidal dictators and not doing jack shit three out of every four years isn’t going to net her any support from me.
Personally, I’d rather vote for someone that may not be perfect, but at least can show their work.
Genocidal dictators like Netanyahu are acceptable?
I wanted to vote for De La Cruz, but Dems sued her off of the ballot in my state. That cost them my down ballot support, too.
And what exactly has De la Cruz done to earn your vote?
I support her policies.
She has no policies. I’ll ask again. What has she DONE.
LIKE, what action has she made that has done anything to earn your vote, besides stating she will do things she has no clear path to realistically be able to do?
You can see her policies on her website: https://votesocialist2024.com/
I love how y’all say De La Cruz doesn’t have a proven record, and shouldn’t be supported based on her promises. But when I point to Harris’ record, I’m supposed to believe her promises.
Pick one, and be consistent.
Having policy, doesn’t mean what you think it means. I have policy. Why not vote for me? I can make a website and say anything I feel you are wanting to hear. And ant the end of the day, I’m every bit as effective as la Cruz is with regards to reliably getting things done politically.
She’s done absolutely nothing at all to instill any trust whatsoever in her ability to govern. She has zero experience in the field. And by the way, do you remember who else was lauded for “not being a career politician?” Because I do.
Additionally- she’s been absent from any policy making or political influence, and has no track record of doing anything meaningful for anyone on a political level-
Therefore she has not doing anything to earn a single vote. Now, thanks for the discussion- but I’m not going to argue about this.
You have an equal chance as de la Cruz to be elected president this year as well.