912
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
912 points (100.0% liked)
United States | News & Politics
2814 readers
867 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
Post anything related to the United States.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
He might not live that long...
I don't know the future, depends a lot on the environment. But if you're in a general election with two viable choices, one is a pro-corporate pro-democracy candiate and the other a pro-corporate anti-democracy candidate, then objectively speaking, if you want to save democracy you have to vote the first choice.
By "viable" I mean someone you know people will vote enough to be able to take on the candidate who does the most damage. I'm sorry but a Jill Stein like figure who only pops up in election years with the stated goal of siphoning votes from the less horrible candidate, that's not what I'd call viable. They could be if they fought for ranked choice voting — then there would be no concern of siphoning votes.
General elections aren't so much about fixing everything then and there, they're more about maintaining the environment necessary for changes to happen via public pressure, activism, protests, direct action, even future elections (all of which are way more precarious now that the greater evil won).
People make voting in the general seem like such a heroic act of defiance to "reject the duopoly", but that's just an aestheticization of politics, a way for people to say a visceral "fuck you" to the system while fucking themselves too and getting nothing in return except schadenfreude. Making voting into an identity is peak liberal virtue signaling (even when leftists do it, even when MAGA does it), and it's costing us everything.
I don't know how anyone can honestly believe democrats are pro-democracy when they literally locked the people out of the primaries.
It's clear as day that they sabotoged the whole process.
It's either ignorance or willful blindness.
Don't ever expect change when you keep voting for the people who deny it to you.
You're clinging to semantics here, which is very frustrating — and honestly not helpful at all except for edgy leftists who can't stand engaging pragmatically with electoralism because it makes them feel dirty.
When I say pro-democracy, I mean they're not explicitly anti-democracy, that is not explicitly pro-dismantling-democracy-forever-with-high-priority the way the other guys demonstrably are. So yes, given the context, we're grading on a curve here — obviously. That's why we say they're the lesser evil as opposed to "the good guys". Jesus fuck, some people really want to be the smuggest person in the death camp. Right now Bernie's your only shot, but I'm not your boss, keep shitting on him.
And who did they sabotage it against? Jesus Christ!
What's your favorite flavor of paint chip? White or off-white?
Maybe you should go back to reddit and complain about voter shaming or something.
"When I say pro-democracy I mean they aren't explicity anti-democracy like the other people - they are just quiet about it altogether and since they aren't telling me that they hate me directly I can respect and vote for that again."
Brainworms.
Respect? Who said I respect them? But letting nazis win to spite the libs is suicidal. Now not only do you get zero progressive policies through (which will kill people), you also need to spend all your energy fighting for your existing rights (which will kill people) and weathering the storm (which will kill people).
Also, remember my initial objection was to you lumping Bernie in with the corpo Dems, despite you yourself admitting that they rigged the primary (and if you won't say against who, then I'll say it: against Bernie).
PS: I'm done with this conversation.
They conspired against the voters. I don't know to spell it out for you.
Let's use your reasoning:
The democrats conspired against Bernie two times. Why did he not launch his own party immediately in 2016 after Hilary's humiliating loss? If he had 2024 could have been very interesting.
Both times the Independent senator from Vermont turns around and tells you to vote for the corporate democrat.
Many, many people (myself included) gave time and money and energy to Bernie's campaigns to break out from the two-party system. Both times he says, "Nah, actually I can't do this, you are better off voting for the same corporate shit you all hate."
Did anything get better either time?
Why the fuck would anyone support someone who double-crossed them twice?
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.