• heavyboots@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    2 years ago

    Slightly OT, but this is also why we absolutely need ranked voting ASAP. How much better would a candidate like Sanders do if people knew that voting for him as first choice and Biden as second was possible?

    • flames5123@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      Ranked choice isn’t that much better. It is better, but very slightly. We need to implement STAR, which is vastly better even at its worst. Essentially, it’s just a 0-5 vote for candidates, and any empty is a 0. It allows you to rank some at the same and then some as “better than nothing” leading to a well rounded choice that most people approve of.

      • Wiz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Or, you could support candidates that support racked choice voting (who are mostly liberals). That sort of thing happens locally and at the state level.

    • blazera@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      People love ranked choice voting but not whats involved with getting it instituted.

          • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Here’s an interesting anecdote. The people of Shelby County, TN elected to enact ranked choice voting in the county (it was a ballot option 2 elections ago). It hasn’t been signed into law yet.

            So at least in this case, I’d say the problem isn’t people not voting, it’s nefarious agents succeeding in subverting the feeble democratic processes in this country to act against the people’s interest.

  • xarexyouxmadx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    This is the same tired line we have to hear every 4 years. It’s been a substitute for concrete policy and it’s gotten all of us nowhere.

    • pingveno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Let’s pour some concrete then

      Did he deliver on everything? Of course not, campaign promises are as much aspirational as anything. But speaking of concrete, he was part of the badly needed infrastructure package, which had reached the point of a joke under the Trump administration (infrastructure week!)

      • Cowbee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The issue with Biden is that he represents the greater issue with having different flavors of Capitalist parties, and nothing else, within American electoralism.

        Leftists will never be able to be satisfied with a lukewarm liberal president, whereas fascists get to gleefully vote republican and have their views validated.

        As such, elections are a matter of harm reduction for leftists, while meaningful change must be done at the grassroots level.

        • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          Actually, as a leftist, I’d say Dark Brandon has been one of the best POTUSes in recent memory. Just like Obama though, Biden has a Senate that actively shuts down most of his bills. People seem to still operate on this assumption that the Executive branch is a dictatorship.

          • Cowbee@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yes and no.

            Better than recent presidents? Yes. Actually a leftist? No, Biden is far from actually being a leftist. This more points to electoralism being harm reduction for leftists, not advocacy.

            The executive isn’t a dictatorship, and that’s another reason why meaningful change must happen at the grassroots level, not via electoralism. The system itself is designed to be extremely stable, and thus slow to change, if at all.

      • gun@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s almost like he already won in 2016 and lo and behold, we can still vote again 4 years later.

        • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          You mustn’t have paid any attention to his barrage of executive orders and insanely corrupt appointments. The Supreme Court nominations alone are more than eyebrow raising.

          • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            This is so dumb. He didn’t try to not let people vote. Every loser every year claims recounts are needed, they just usually don’t use the system to try and prove it. He’s using the system to try and prove it. The system is there for a reason

            Stop trying to claim he’s stopping people from voting.

            • nexguy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              He claimed 3 million illegal votes during an election he won. 3 million… then what did he do once becoming president after an accusation of the largest voter fraud claim for a democracy in history? Nothing. Barely mentioned it. No enormous investigation to arrest the thousands of people that would have needed to be involved to coordinate 3 million illegal votes. Nothing. Why? Because it was just something for him to say off the cuff. He took a page from his hero Roy Cohn to just declare victory even when defeated. Lose a case? Just claim victory. Lose a popular vote count? Just claim victory. He has done it all his life and doesn’t care how easily it is for some people to believe his off-the-cuff lies even when they can threaten democracy itself. He will never concede a loss and doesn’t care who it hurts. He will also never have the evidence for his claims because he doesn’t need any.

    • maeries@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      And then they actually tried to do exactly what the meme predicts. We are just lucky that the magas were too stupid

  • Rosco@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 years ago

    I don’t know much about US politics, but is Biden the only choice you have besides voting for Trump? There’s zero alternatives? I’ve seen in the comments that people prefer Biden to other democrat candidates, because he already beat Trump already, so it has better chances to beat him again. But realistically, it seems like everyone hates Trump with a burning passion, so any Democrat that is not batshit insane and totally incompetent would beat him, right? Seems like an easy win.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      So what you’re talking about is a primary contender from the democratic party, but generally the incumbent party doesn’t have a primary for the president. Your only real options are the Democrat (Biden, unless he dies), or the Republican (looking like Trump, but they will have a primary). You can vote for other people, but it doesn’t do anything. You might as well try to get the better option than choosing not to vote out of spite, and getting whatever happens regardless.

      • pingveno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        looking like Trump, but they will have a primary

        Or unless he dies. He’s basically the same age as Biden and unlike Biden hasn’t taken care of himself.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yeah, totally an option, or he is found guilty of treason or some other disqualifying thing. I was just pointing out that Republicans do have a primary this election for president, so there are more options for them.

          • pingveno@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yeah, there just seems to be this meme of “Biden, old man, about to die” that never gets applied to Trump.

            • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              Probably because of how hard right-wing media has pushed it. Though him being old as fuck perpetuated it after that ofc.

              It’s still ridiculous that it isn’t applied to Trump as often (or more), the dude eats so much Mcdonalds and looks super unhealthy.

    • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      There’s zero alternatives?

      Well, no, but actually yes.

      Legend tells that the primaries are where the vote for your candidate of choice actually counts, but as 2016 showed, they are allowed to and will happpily ignore it in favor of the party’s selected ghoul.

      So, yeah, it’s a pick between the mostly bad and the completely utterly awful.

  • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    2 years ago

    We literally do not live in a democracy according to a bunch of empirical studies, and also according to basic material analysis.

    The opinion of the masses is never reflected in our government.

    Does your politics begin and end at participating in sham elections? Why aren’t you encouraging people to take meaningful political action?

    Imagine being Russian and the extent of your political activism is encouraging people to vote Putin out.

    That’s how ridiculous you are.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        You do realize your comment is just “You’re wrong!” with more flowery language right?

    • pingveno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      We literally do not live in a democracy according to a bunch of empirical studies, and also according to basic material analysis.

      As far as I know, there is one study, and even that is under dispute on secondary analysis of the underlying data.

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Once upon a time that would have been a simple answer, given the concentrated ownership of news that could reach any one person. But now with the Internet, there is less and less control by any one group. Certainly the age of the rich effectively controlling the media is over.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            But now with the Internet, there is less and less control by any one group. Certainly the age of the rich effectively controlling the media is over.

            Pr teams have successfully learned how to use social media, and social media giants promote views that are beneficial to them like fascism while suppressing left wing content.

            I dont think the internet existing makes us a democracy, the parasocial nature of a lot of internet content actually makes it so people are more able to sell their propaganda.

            • pingveno@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              There is plenty of media that exists outside of media giants. Case in point, there is a local blogger here in Portland, OR that runs bikeportland.org to cover bikes and related subjects. His blog posts and discussions on them are a major part of the local discourse around infrastructure in Portland. He’s not rich, but he exercises influence.

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Okay, but you do see how thats pretty boutique compared to the local news channels, let alone the giants, right?

                Small things are allowed to exist that oppose the dominant ideology until they meaningfully threaten it.

                • pingveno@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Any grassroots media is going to be “boutique”. That doesn’t make it not influential, especially when considered as a whole.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            If the bourgeoisie decide elections through lobbying and media it isnt a democracy in a meaningful sense.

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                2 years ago

                They don’t exactly decide, they influence the decision.

                “The didn’t do that, they just did something that will predictably result in that”

                • ForeverComical@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  It doesn’t work perfectly and humanity pushes back over time. The issue is the pace of technology is too fast for our ability to push back. I’m hopeful our good side will win but I’m afraid it will take deaths by the millions again for people to wake up and fight back against the real enemies among us.

    • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      We live in a republic democracy which, yes, differs from an outright democracy.

        • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          You just can’t reconcile the fact people don’t vote how you want, therefore the system must be broken. And spreading voting apathy by telling people it’s all bullshit is one of the most damaging things you could do to your democracy. You’re better for Trump than most Republicans.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            You just can’t reconcile the fact people don’t vote how you want, therefore the system must be broken.

            You just can’t reconcile that your high school civics textbook lied about how the US operates.

  • Drinvictus@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    This was the same promise in 2020. And yet here we are. Democrats should have done better than beg to save democracy one more time.

  • limelight79@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Oh, I’m sure they would still hold elections. But your options would be even more limited. “Sorry, but the other parties just didn’t run any candidates for this election. Imagine that.”

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      That’s why these scare tactics are probably going to backfire. The kinds of people who would consider voting for Trump are largely the kinds of people who will continue to have just as much opportunity to vote.

      Trump’s team would definitely make it harder for black people to vote. His people would find a way to disenfranchise women. His team will probably find a way to block certain candidates, but there will still be Republican primaries, and then people will still get to vote for the Republican and against the token Democrat.

      White rural males would still be allowed to vote. That’s both because they vote for the “right people”, so it’s safe to let them keep voting. The Trump team could also continue to point to them and claim that US democracy is strong. And, it’s important that those people continue to believe that under Trump democracy still exists, because white male urban voters will turn on Trump if they think he’s taking away their rights.

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      News Flash: We are already there in a lot of districts and the entrenched Capitalist parties like it that way. Maybe stop voting for them? It’s the least you can do.

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Man the Democratic Party this election cycle has just been working overtime to invite the conversational wedge between ‘saving american democracy from fascism’ and ‘voting against Trump.’

    I guess that’s what the donor class wants this time: “Do nothing but vote.”

  • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    If Trump wanted to get rid of voting, why didn’t he do so last time? How about we just get better security at the capitol, and eliminate whatever loophole he was trying to use in the insurrection?

    • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      That’s whats the coup attempt was for, as well as the attempts to override or stop polls from counting the votes across the country. Just because he failed this time doesn’t mean it won’t happen again. Hitler was democratically elected after becoming famous for the book he wrote in jail after being arrested during the Nazi’s first failed coup attempt, Mein Kampf. He then consolidated political power into a new position with the support of party members who were elected to key positions, and he then appointed himself to that new position. Same as what has happened in many other countries. A few crazies in the right seats. The Nazi party only made up 13% of the German population at its height. That’s all it takes.

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    More like “It doesn’t matter how you vote, the evil party is going to win because the slightly-less-evil party just lost a large chunk of their voter base because funding a ethnic genocide in the middle east was a hill they were dying on”

    Do your part by voting for the slightly less shit party, but don’t be surprised when it happens anyway, they’re counting on it. They want it. Whenever they need to do something evil they can just throw the election so the republicans can take the hit for them, just like every time.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Trump would love for you to vote 3rd party or not vote.

      The Electoral College is set up to benefit conservatives and no change.

          • CheeseChief@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Ok, the problem I see is that Turtle, Snake, Owl, etc. seem to be only worried about being on the “winning” side regardless if the candidate is against their values. They’ve also been victims of Political Propaganda (Negative ads). Each time they vote for the Lesser of Two Evils they are giving conceding a little more and more each time. Get rid of Gerrymandering and replace it with Ranked Choice Voting to eliminate the “Spoiler Effect.” Vote with you conscious and not your desire to Win.

            • kpw@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              Yes, IF it is a Ranked Choice election great idea to for the party you most align with. If it’s a first past the post election, it’s really bad idea (unless you align most with a party that can win).

            • DrZoidbergYes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              100% agree that ranked voting/proportional representation is a much better option. The problem with FPTP is you have to keep picking the lesser evil or the greater evil wins. It’s a bad system, I’m lucky in a country that doesn’t use FPTP

              • CheeseChief@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                Incorrect, stop worrying about being on the winning side. Vote with your values. Then if it all burns down you can take solace in the fact you voted correctly according to you. Help educate others on voting for a candidate who will get Government out of your house and wallet, Libertarian candidate. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. The only way out is to vote differently. Get enough people to vote differently and change will come. Voters have been brainwashed into thinking there are only two options.

                • DrZoidbergYes@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Libertarian?! Good luck with that. You know what, go ahead. Vote for a third party, I just not sure how you’ll get to a polling station without using the public funded road system, oh well