Abstaining is actually voting Republican, because of the voter demographics wherein Republicans have a dedicated chunk of zealots who will vote 100% of the time, and the Democrats having no such thing
Because the third parties in question this time (and most times) were spoiler candidates for the Democrats, a Republican abstaining does not necessarily mean +1 for Dems
Republicans, are by nature, essentially a mono culture. Conservativism demmands conformity. Hate taxes, Hate foreigners, hate “the gays”, hate science and edumacashun.
Democrats, while not Progressive, pick up everyone else, which includes progressives. Progressives, tend to be open and accepting of what is different.
Except increasingly, they are not. Just with the last election, because every Democrat didn’t 100% say “Fuck Israel, Free Palestine”, then now all Democrats are evil and should never be supported.
Ya’ll are single issue voting just as bad as the shitty Republicans will single issue vote on say, No Abortion.
The Democrats aren’t great, but they exist as the compromise based system our Government SHOULD BE.
And maybe they would run more Progressive types and shift back Left but why should they bother right now? They could run some hyper progressive trans candidate who hatees Israel, but that candidate says one “wrong” thing on one issue and the mob turns on them and says “SeE, aLl DeMoCrAts aRe bAd.”
That said, I am still not entirely convinced that a lot of the “All Dems Suck” rhetoric isn’t the Left side version of bad foreign actors that have turned the GOP into the MAGA Nazi party.
Having read their comment, probably “because every Democrat didn’t 100% say “Fuck Israel, Free Palestine”, then now all Democrats are evil and should never be supported.”
That’s them observing progressives disagree with a party stance then refuse to vote for the party over that single issue. The extrapolation is that progressives are more likely to become single issue voters, therefore more difficult to cater to, therefore maybe not worth the effort from the party’s perspective.
Help me understand your comment. Are you suggesting if we voiced disagreement with more than one issue with Democratic politicians then the claim that we “will never be happy anyway” would be unfounded?
No, I saw you ask why RamenJunkie would believe that progressives are single issue voters (as in “will not vote for a candidate because of one issue”) when, in their previous comment, they had already pointed to the support of Israel as an example of progressives not voting for a candidate over one issue. I found it annoying that you either ignored or missed that and asked a question for information sitting in front of you, so I copy and pasted a key piece of that information to hopefully get you considering how the arguments contained in one comment you responded to might relate to your question for a later one. It seems I may have failed at that.
Personally, I don’t know that truly single issue voters exist. I think there’s a lot of frustration with the complacency of the Democrat party and supporting genocide is just the straw that broke the camel’s back for a lot of people.
But my view was not the motivation for my comment, just my frustration with circular questioning.
Democracy means you have the freedom to elect a fascist government if you want to, and that’s exactly what the American people have done. They exercised their freedom to choose Trump over Harris.
American people don’t get very many freedoms. They don’t get the freedom to vote third party. They don’t get the freedom to vote “neither of the above”. They don’t get the freedom to use the popular vote. But they do get the freedom to choose between the two big candidates, and that’s the freedom they exercised.
That’s because you have to show up and show up in numbers. Too many on the left cry about not having a perfect candidate, don’t show up, and then wonder why the Dems keep going right when the left doesn’t show up. Then, surprise, they have no representation and throw away 20 years of progress.
I don’t care for Biden or trump, but I wasn’t dumb enough not to see where we are right now before the vote was cast, so I showed up. So many stayed home that trump got elected with the popular vote despite not getting many more votes than he did last time.
But hey, we didn’t vote in the woman who had some bad policies and could be worked with because one bad policy was worth throwing everything away. So we got the country we collectively voted (or sat out) for
We do though. We’re roughly a third of the voters in primaries.
You don’t show up in the general, so primary participation is a participation trophy. Trump wasn’t on the ballot, so that’s pretty much meaningless in the concept of defensive voting or the actual subject of the conversation. When Trump was in the ballot, the left was comparatively absent. 6.25M fewer people showed up, so objectively they didn’t show up.
I’m not knocking participating in the primary, I do it every time I can. But if that’s the extent of 'showing up, you’re not doing much more than telling yourself you participated so you don’t feel guilty about it.
Okay, sure. You can let the fascists turn America into a monarchy and find out if a communist revolution is easier in a monarchy than a neoliberal capitalist democracy. That’s clearly what you want to happen.
find out if a communist revolution is easier in a monarchy than a neoliberal capitalist democracy
I don’t think it is but people like you set yourself in opposition to any radical change so long as you live in the comfort of a neoliberal capitalist democracy. See the problem?
For example, I was in full favor of the rail strike back in 2022. Sure it’s no revolution, but shutting down railways certainly would have been radical and led to some powerful concessions being made by oligarchs to American workers. And let me guess, you opposed the strike and supported Joe Biden, 44 Democratic senators and 36 Republican senators who decided to block it right?
So it’s not me who’s choosing revolution under monarchy instead of neoliberal capitalist democracy.
I was actually pretty furious with AOC for voting to force an end to the strike.
Hold on.
I haven’t seen you say you were furious with Biden, Schumer or any Democratic Senators.
This is the first time you say you were furious with a Democratic politician and you choose AOC. Seems suspicious you call out a progressive of all people. Where’s your fury at Biden or the 44 Democratic senators who voted to block the rail strike?
Comes off like you’re happy to talk about being furious at a progressive because you don’t care if people vote for her. But you want people to vote for strike blocking, genocide supporting trash like Biden so you conveniently never express your fury at him.
Prove me wrong. Talk about how furious you are at Biden for blocking the rail strike. Talk about how furious you are at Schumer for blocking the rail strike.
Do you understand cause and effect? I’m pointing out there were cracks in the supposed strategy to keep Trump out of office. Some of those cracks were instances where Joe Biden went against the sentiments of his own voters and sabotaged his own chances at reelection.
They went out of their way to express they were furious at AOC for her part in blocking the rail strike but not Joe Biden, the president of the United States. You don’t think that’s odd?
Libertarianism is societal cancer and those Stein voters would have supported Trump over Harris anyway since the MAGA GOP is basically a Libertarian system (the fuck you got mine Government) at its core.
It’s important to note that both Bush and Trump won their initial election by the electoral college and lost the popular vote. So not only do you not have to get >50%, you don’t even have to get a plurality of votes to win.
Also, Roger Stone just happened to participate in both elections, and both had fuckery involved.
It’s funny how well liberals like yourself understand the electoral college in this context. But then if I say a non-voter in a deep blue state didn’t have any bearing on Trump getting elected and suddenly the principle matters.
Abstaining is actually voting Republican, because of the voter demographics wherein Republicans have a dedicated chunk of zealots who will vote 100% of the time, and the Democrats having no such thing
If you’re a republican, abstaining is voting democrat.
It’s not though. The fewer people vote, the more likely it is for Republicans to win
Yes, OP’s point is also that generally speaking Republicans are less likely to abstain.
Not in the same way that the inverse is true, no
Mathematically it’s the exact same situation but flipped.
This isn’t pure math, it’s electoral politics.
Because the third parties in question this time (and most times) were spoiler candidates for the Democrats, a Republican abstaining does not necessarily mean +1 for Dems
And instead of asking yourself why Democratic politicians are failing to inspire loyalty you blame the voters of a democracy?
Hot take bud.
“Loyalty” to a party is not a good thing, for one.
That’s pretty rich coming from someone arguing we are morally obligated to vote for Democratic politicians. You can’t get any more loyal than that.
Did I mention morality? First Past the Post is an enormously flawed voting system. But until we get rid of it, that’s the system we have.
You did.
Republicans, are by nature, essentially a mono culture. Conservativism demmands conformity. Hate taxes, Hate foreigners, hate “the gays”, hate science and edumacashun.
Democrats, while not Progressive, pick up everyone else, which includes progressives. Progressives, tend to be open and accepting of what is different.
Except increasingly, they are not. Just with the last election, because every Democrat didn’t 100% say “Fuck Israel, Free Palestine”, then now all Democrats are evil and should never be supported.
Ya’ll are single issue voting just as bad as the shitty Republicans will single issue vote on say, No Abortion.
The Democrats aren’t great, but they exist as the compromise based system our Government SHOULD BE.
And maybe they would run more Progressive types and shift back Left but why should they bother right now? They could run some hyper progressive trans candidate who hatees Israel, but that candidate says one “wrong” thing on one issue and the mob turns on them and says “SeE, aLl DeMoCrAts aRe bAd.”
That said, I am still not entirely convinced that a lot of the “All Dems Suck” rhetoric isn’t the Left side version of bad foreign actors that have turned the GOP into the MAGA Nazi party.
Because they’re losing without us.
Because you will never be happy anyway. May as well shift right and try to push towards the perfect Nqzi candidates like MAGA.
How do you know?
Having read their comment, probably “because every Democrat didn’t 100% say “Fuck Israel, Free Palestine”, then now all Democrats are evil and should never be supported.”
That’s them observing progressives disagree with a party stance then refuse to vote for the party over that single issue. The extrapolation is that progressives are more likely to become single issue voters, therefore more difficult to cater to, therefore maybe not worth the effort from the party’s perspective.
Help me understand your comment. Are you suggesting if we voiced disagreement with more than one issue with Democratic politicians then the claim that we “will never be happy anyway” would be unfounded?
No, I saw you ask why RamenJunkie would believe that progressives are single issue voters (as in “will not vote for a candidate because of one issue”) when, in their previous comment, they had already pointed to the support of Israel as an example of progressives not voting for a candidate over one issue. I found it annoying that you either ignored or missed that and asked a question for information sitting in front of you, so I copy and pasted a key piece of that information to hopefully get you considering how the arguments contained in one comment you responded to might relate to your question for a later one. It seems I may have failed at that.
Personally, I don’t know that truly single issue voters exist. I think there’s a lot of frustration with the complacency of the Democrat party and supporting genocide is just the straw that broke the camel’s back for a lot of people.
But my view was not the motivation for my comment, just my frustration with circular questioning.
Democracy means you have the freedom to elect a fascist government if you want to, and that’s exactly what the American people have done. They exercised their freedom to choose Trump over Harris.
American people don’t get very many freedoms. They don’t get the freedom to vote third party. They don’t get the freedom to vote “neither of the above”. They don’t get the freedom to use the popular vote. But they do get the freedom to choose between the two big candidates, and that’s the freedom they exercised.
You very much can vote for an alternative party in the United States. I have voted Green in several elections.
If that’s all democracy is then it’s benefits have been vastly overstated and I see no reason to protect it.
Where did they say that’s all it was?
Then tell me what benefits I’m supposed to enjoy. Because representation apparently isn’t on the table.
That’s because you have to show up and show up in numbers. Too many on the left cry about not having a perfect candidate, don’t show up, and then wonder why the Dems keep going right when the left doesn’t show up. Then, surprise, they have no representation and throw away 20 years of progress.
I don’t care for Biden or trump, but I wasn’t dumb enough not to see where we are right now before the vote was cast, so I showed up. So many stayed home that trump got elected with the popular vote despite not getting many more votes than he did last time.
But hey, we didn’t vote in the woman who had some bad policies and could be worked with because one bad policy was worth throwing everything away. So we got the country we collectively voted (or sat out) for
We do though. We were roughly a third of the voters in the 2020 Democratic primaries and that number has probably gone up.
You don’t show up in the general, so primary participation is a participation trophy. Trump wasn’t on the ballot, so that’s pretty much meaningless in the concept of defensive voting or the actual subject of the conversation. When Trump was in the ballot, the left was comparatively absent. 6.25M fewer people showed up, so objectively they didn’t show up.
I’m not knocking participating in the primary, I do it every time I can. But if that’s the extent of 'showing up, you’re not doing much more than telling yourself you participated so you don’t feel guilty about it.
Okay, sure. You can let the fascists turn America into a monarchy and find out if a communist revolution is easier in a monarchy than a neoliberal capitalist democracy. That’s clearly what you want to happen.
I don’t think it is but people like you set yourself in opposition to any radical change so long as you live in the comfort of a neoliberal capitalist democracy. See the problem?
For example, I was in full favor of the rail strike back in 2022. Sure it’s no revolution, but shutting down railways certainly would have been radical and led to some powerful concessions being made by oligarchs to American workers. And let me guess, you opposed the strike and supported Joe Biden, 44 Democratic senators and 36 Republican senators who decided to block it right?
So it’s not me who’s choosing revolution under monarchy instead of neoliberal capitalist democracy.
It’s you.
Nah, you’re way off. I was actually pretty furious with AOC for voting to force an end to the strike.
Your problem is, you see everyone else as an enemy, and assume all kinds of nonsense about them out of fear.
Hold on.
I haven’t seen you say you were furious with Biden, Schumer or any Democratic Senators.
This is the first time you say you were furious with a Democratic politician and you choose AOC. Seems suspicious you call out a progressive of all people. Where’s your fury at Biden or the 44 Democratic senators who voted to block the rail strike?
Comes off like you’re happy to talk about being furious at a progressive because you don’t care if people vote for her. But you want people to vote for strike blocking, genocide supporting trash like Biden so you conveniently never express your fury at him.
Prove me wrong. Talk about how furious you are at Biden for blocking the rail strike. Talk about how furious you are at Schumer for blocking the rail strike.
Are you five? Because you talk like a five year old who thinks throwing a tantrum works.
I mean the rest of us learned that it just makes things worse by eight years old. (Hint: things are much worse now)
Why is that relevant? To the concentration camps and death squads we are dealing with today?
Do you understand cause and effect? I’m pointing out there were cracks in the supposed strategy to keep Trump out of office. Some of those cracks were instances where Joe Biden went against the sentiments of his own voters and sabotaged his own chances at reelection.
Why are you telling me, a voter this? What am I supposed to do with that information?
That information for for democrat electeds and their consultants.
Voters decide among the options presented. They don’t decide how the campaigns are run. Are you suggesting I start a new political party?
Because the other poster wasn’t explicitly furious with Biden over rail workers or some nonsense.
They went out of their way to express they were furious at AOC for her part in blocking the rail strike but not Joe Biden, the president of the United States. You don’t think that’s odd?
Hard to get worked up of this when the competition is trying to enact a new halocaust and only failing due to incompetence.
Also voting 3rd party is voting Republican because it’s akin to abstaining. All those Jill Stein voters are basically Maga.
Libertarianism is societal cancer and those Stein voters would have supported Trump over Harris anyway since the MAGA GOP is basically a Libertarian system (the fuck you got mine Government) at its core.
You’re not wrong, however, Stein was Green Party not libertarian.
You’re thinking of Gary “what is Aleppo” Johnson
Both were spoiler candidates
Thanks for the correction.
And god the fucking Green Party. Inswear those jokers exist only to make Socialists looklike wackjobs.
i always found it weird when people say voting 3rd party is like not voting.
is there no second round for the 2 most voted when the most voted doesn’t reach 50%?
It’s important to note that both Bush and Trump won their initial election by the electoral college and lost the popular vote. So not only do you not have to get >50%, you don’t even have to get a plurality of votes to win.
Also, Roger Stone just happened to participate in both elections, and both had fuckery involved.
No, that’s literally the fucking problem
There is not. Bill Clinton won the presidency with something like 42% of the vote in 1992.
Neither Trump Nor Bush won more than 50% of the vote to secure their first term in office.
Not in America. If you vote third party, your vote doesn’t get counted in the big race.
Those votes do get counted. For example, we know that in 2024 Stein got 862,049 votes.
I mean it doesn’t have any bearing on electing the president
It’s funny how well liberals like yourself understand the electoral college in this context. But then if I say a non-voter in a deep blue state didn’t have any bearing on Trump getting elected and suddenly the principle matters.
It has just as much bearing as voting for any other candidate.
Not in a first-past-the-post system; you’re thinking of a two-round system.
Who’s both siding now?