I’ve been seeing a lot of anti-voting sentiment going around. Can’t believe I have to say this, but you need to vote. Not only is there more to the election than just the president. (State policy, Senate, house), but not voting is not an act of protest. C’mon guys
Seriously. I get feeling like you don’t have much of a choice, but not voting is just giving up. Like, you’re actively removing the little choice you have and handing democracy over to an overt fascist.
Literally
Literally, indeed. (An up vote wasn’t enough)
Third party candidates still exist and are legitimate options to vote for despite what everyone wants you to believe.
3rd party is a lost vote. Parties need to start small and build. Everyone knows this.
And how can those small third parties grow if people don’t vote for them?
Start small, at the local level. City, county, school board, or even a state representative. You build up a following starting at a smaller level because there are fewer people to have to convince to vote for you.
Got them into local positions and let them build power in the lower levels before moving up. Voting at the federal level for anyone other than the big two is a wasted vote at this time
“everyone knows” is a thought terminating cliche
>3rd party is a lost vote. Parties need to start small and build.
no, this is all wrong
None of the 3rd party candidates has national support or awareness. If you start small, you build support at a local level. People see what you can do and it instills faith while bringing in donations. As more people join the party, your influence grows. A real 3rd party candidate, who isn’t super rich or funded by rich donors looking to spoil the election, has never shown up.
You know what also helps third parties? Votes.
Without votes what purpose do they have in continuing?
There are no 3rd party conservative candidates. The cult of power (GOP) makes no room for competition. 3rd party candidates only exist to split the progressive/non-fascist and are usually funded by conservative donors for that very reason. If a 3rd party candidate was funded by grassroots support and had actually gained popularity by repressing a large constituency, the votes would mean something.
The Libertarian party is a third party conservative party and they did take votes away from Trump last election
I dunno, I don’t feel like a lot of otherwise dems (or at least not more than gop) would vote for RFK. And historically I don’t think the progressive side was voting for Ross Perot (as an independent) or the libertarians who still run within the gop like Ron or Rand Paul.
>A real 3rd party candidate, who isn’t super rich or funded by rich donors looking to spoil the election, has never shown up.
then how do you know the right method?
Because people smarter than me have done the research and I am merely repeating it for everyone’s benefit.
can you cite any academic studies on this?
In the realities of the US electoral system, a vote for a third party is akin to a vote for Trump. Twist and spin all you want, but that’s reality.
Anyone who argues this is either naive, or a disinformation Russian asset.
deleted by creator
While technically “possible”, the likelihood of Trump supporters switching to vote 3rd party is very low at this point.
Just about everyone talking about voting third party is a progressive that would have voted for Biden. If they weren’t being duped by Russians.
deleted by creator
They are being duped by Russians… into voting for Trump. But anyway, the question is who the third party voter would have voted for otherwise.
Maybe for some local elections. But you really need heavy support, otherwise you’re dividing the vote which can lead to more harm. Some places have rank based voting now though which makes it possible to vote for 3rd parties without dividing the vote. Hopefully that becomes more common.
I get where you’re coming from. I’m definitely in favour of a ranked choice voting approach cause it does a lot more to get rid of the spoiler or dividing vote fallacy.
The entire spoiler or dividing vote hoax is based on this false assumption that the voters carry the responsibility for not voting for a “lesser evil” candidate when that burden of responsibility should instead be on the nominee for not doing enough in their power to win over votes.
With the current election, Biden is being a complete dumbass and is hemorrhaging support from Arab Americans and young people because of his refusal to stop giving weapons and aid to Israel and properly withholding those until a full and permanent ceasefire is reached. He’s also losing support from Hispanics, though the reasons there are more to do with how he hasn’t been doing enough to better the lives of working-class people.
Arab Americans and young people aren’t going to turn around and vote for Trump, or in the off chance he receives a conviction before November, whoever else the Republican nominee will be. They’re more likely to vote third-party or independent or not vote at all, and unfortunately with the latter, that’s when the burden of responsibility becomes shared.
The entire spoiler or dividing vote hoax is based on this false assumption that the voters carry the responsibility for not voting for a “lesser evil” candidate when that burden of responsibility should instead be on the nominee for not doing enough in their power to win over votes
No, that’s just plain incorrect. The spoiler vote phenomenon is an inevitable consequence of our first-past-the-post election system. Whatever you start from, this voting system trends to two parties over time. You can model this and watch it play out. It’s not a hoax. We even saw Ross Perot make a serious run at the presidency in the 90s, and he ended up with zero electoral votes, and 4 years later he did much worse and his Reform party fizzled out and nothing came of it. Because it is absolutely suboptimal in our voting system.
Ah a Trump supporter! Let me know how that works out for you!
Question? How did Trump treat Arabs last time? Did they enjoy the travel ban? The exponential increase in hate towards them in this country?
Once Trump, wins and helps Israel turn Gaza to glass, will helping him win make them feel good? Once Trump puts them in concentration camps in this country, will they be happy?
When, Trump cements his dictatorship so there is no vote in 2028, will they they be satisfied?
I don’t like Biden, but not supporting him now, is supporting a repeat of 1930s Germany…
I’m voting for a 3rd party in the general bc my state is a staunchly blue state (every presidential election since 1972) so my vote counts more that way. If I lived in a swing state like WI, PA, GA, AZ, CO, etc, I would definitely vote Dem.
Doing anything other than voting for Biden is essentially a vote for Trump.
First of all, I will absolutely be voting in the general, for whoever has the backing of the Democrat party, whether that be Biden or someone else if something unforseen happens. However, I think it’s important to recognize a few key key matters.
-
Not voting is an act of protest, but it is a largely ineffective form of protest. Protesting is the way the people voice their concerns, and deliberately not voting is in fact a way of voicing concern. However, this is an emotional, unobjective form.
-
Biden, and the overall US war machine, is complicit in genocide. This fact should not be denied for the sake of an election. Simply voting third party is unobjective, this results in the outward fascists taking power, but at the same time, toeing the line results in further entrenchment of liberalism.
How can we resolve the former 2 statements? Simple. Protest loud, as much as you can, during the primaries. Force Biden’s hand.
Just as we can hold people responsible if they vote third party during the general, or not voting, we can also hold Biden accountable. This isn’t simply a matter like Single Payer Healthcare, which would take tremendous effort with the support of congress to pass, this is something in his hands.
I’ll reiterate: if your goal is to help the Palestinian people, there is only one correct path: protest as much as you can, as early as you can, until Biden caves and ceases the genocide. If you do not protest Biden now, while we still have the chance to change his course, then we risk protests lasting even longer and hurting his chances during the General, backfiring.
The Condition for Victory is a swift, loud, uncontestable wake-up call for Biden, followed by rallied support once genuine, positive change is shown to happen. Biden has already started to feel the pressure, and has begun sending some petty aid. Biden cannot risk losing the general, and we cannot risk Biden losing the general either, nor can we stand by and watch Biden support genocide.
Vote in the Primary against Biden, and vote in the General for Biden.
Thank you. So tired of people who never vote in primaries complaining about how the candidates are bad.
Sucky candidates are not merely the product of failing to vote in the primaries. Both parties have systems that favor money and endorsement by legacy establishment figures over popularity, and additional policies are added when a popular antiestablishment candidate slips into office (like Occasio-Cortez).
It’s telling in 2020 the DNC elected the most right-wing, establishment candidate that wasn’t a far right Billionaire when we had numerous more moderate options.
The US is in the iron grip of boomer conservatives clinging to power as demonstrated by multiple officials succumbing to age and dementia. The people really don’t have much say.
Not voting to protest is as effective as setting yourself on fire in a first world country.
It’s not particularly effective, but is still a form of protest. It’s important to recognize it as such, because:
-
It means that there are people who are attempting to have their voice heard
-
They can be steered towards better forms of getting what they want if they are shown better forms of praxis.
At the end of the day, protestors are people with goals, and if you can convince them that this goal may be met more effectively otherwise, they can be allies.
Unfortunately, lots of folks here on lemmy seem antithetical to the idea that slow or minor progress still counts as progress. Maybe it’s a communication issue inherent to this format, but the crux of the argument I see most often is “Biden did genocide, genocide is bad. Therefore, any support for Biden is support for genocide outright.”
It seems like an inability or unwillingness to recognize degrees of tragedy…it’s the worst case of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. I hope I’m wrong, but I’m getting pretty damn nervous about the number of folks saying outright that they won’t ever vote for Biden because they don’t accept the premise that, as long as we still have FPTP elections and the electoral college, voting anyone other than the mainstream Dem candidate makes a Republican victory more likely, regardless of the candidates either party puts forward. I know that at least some of these folks are just trolls, but we’re on a razor-thin margin, and in a scenario where 100k votes across a handful of states will likely decide the contest, I worry about even a single person being talked out of participating meaningfully in the election.
It’s exasperated by the fact that, for a lot of young voters, every election they’ve been old enough to participate in has been a boring old white person vs a wannabe dictator and so they’ve started feeling like “it’s the most important election ever” is just a scare tactic to make them vote blue.
I think a key issue here is that you’re combining unlike things and trying to make coherent sense of that, rather than analyzing what is driving people to feel this way.
The first part you mentioned, is a key disagreement you have with people opposing reformism. A significant part of leftist history is the conflict between reform and revolution, whether reform is even possible at a large scale or if revolution will ever be more likely to succeed, and so forth. The people opposing reform are not saying that incremental change isn’t good, but that:
-
Incremental change is simply too little, too late, in a modern late-stage Capitalist dystopia
-
Because the course of politics in modern first world Capitalist counties like the US follows whatever the interests of large Capitalists are, any meaningful reform will be hindered or even reversed unless the system is overthrown in its entirety.
The second claim, that Biden doing genocide is bad and voting for Biden is voting for continued genocide, is built off of the prior point. Because voting for a right winger like Biden or a fascist like Trump will both result in more genocide, their conclusion is that voting for either is to continue genocide, though it remains implicit that if Biden stopped the genocide, they would vote for him.
I of course believe it would get worse under Trump, so as I already mentioned, I will vote for Biden. However, I also understand that protesting against Biden is the best way to change his course now, rather than later.
The final disagreement you have with these people is the idea that Biden is a “slow good” rather than a “slow evil.” You’re not talking to liberals, you’re talking to leftists, who wish to see some form of Socialism take place in America. Biden is continuing the Imperialist project of American Liberalism at the expense of Workers both inside and outside of the US, you can’t convince leftists that Biden is good, actually.
The truly best way to get leftists to vote for Biden is to get them to see what is directly more beneficial to the international Proletariat, protest voting for a third party or picking Biden and trying to use that time to organize on the ground, which is easier than under Trump. That’s the real key, not to try to convince them Biden is good but slow.
This is actually very useful framing…I’m gonna chew on this for a bit and try to untangle some of my own implicit premises.
-
Never said it wasn’t a form of protest. I said it’s not effective and I’d like to add that it’s also very dumb. Like setting yourself on fire in a first world country.
That’s why I elaborated, though if you’re only going to read the first sentence then why even bother replying?
-
-
I stand with Palestine, and I’ll be voting in the US. Yes, I’m voting for Biden as the lesser of two evils, but I’m also voting for a whole lot of other really good people who are going up against some truly evil people. I’ve got people attacking my schools and libraries at the local level. Not voting to spite Biden will hurt my town a whole lot more than it would hurt Biden.
That’s what I don’t understand from the don’t vote crowd.
Okay, nobody left leaning voted. Now what?
100% agree with this. All of it.
I’m deeply dissatisfied with Biden. I’m angry with him for not pressuring Israel, and I was already angry at him even before that. And I will likely end up voting against him in the primary because of it. But realistically:
(1) He will be the Democratic nominee for President
(2) He is an infinitely better choice than the fascist who already attempted a coup once
(3) Either he or Trump will be the next president
There really is only one way to go in the general. Especially if you’re here on Blahaj, which means you’re either LGBTQ+ or at least friendly to us.
Cool; I didn’t know Blahaj was a 2SLGBTQ+ instance. I just thought it was a kind and accepting space, like Beehaw.
Not to derail this thread too much, but I assume Allies are welcome to join? If Beehaw ends up leaving Lemmy, I’ll need to make a new account somewhere.
I’m not the authority here, but my understanding is that yes, allies are welcome.
At least, I hope so, since I originally came here as an ally who was also questioning some things about myself.
And I don’t think I should have to remind y’all that while neither candidate has a good outlook on Palestine… at least one won’t end democracy in the US.
Dunno, looks like there’s more than 2 candidates to me
No there really isn’t, not the way US politics work.
Create a pledge to vote for a leftist candidate. If it surpasses ~85 million signatures, everyone who signed it will vote for the leftist candidate. Otherwise, they will all vote for Biden, since a minimum of 85 million votes are required to guarantee an election win.
I’d sign that shit, and I bet just about every leftist around here would, too. There’s literally no downside.
It is immensely difficult to get 85 people to agree to do something—never mind 85 million—but still not impossible. You almost definitely won’t be able to get 85 million signatures, but you’re more than welcome to try. If you don’t succeed, however, I encourage you to consider the realm of possibility when filling out your ballot. Voting for a third-party candidate and voting for Mickey Mouse—or a dead guy, or Vermin Supreme, or yourself—are equally irrelevant if the third-party candidate does not stand a chance of winning.
Americans: do what you want in the primaries. Vote for Biden in the general, because he will be the nominee. I am not stoked about that, but that’s the choice our system gives us.
Non-Americans: please, please do a bit of research on how weird and fucked up and fractious our electoral system is before going off on someone for voting “undecided” in the primaries, which is how I voted myself. Compared to the nationally-organized stuff you guys seem to mostly rely on, ours could charitably be described as “intentionally byzantine”.
it’s almost like the US is running a software written in the 1700s and that stopped receiving regular updates around the 1960s
That’s… actually not a bad way to describe it.
Also note that we stopped updating our BIOS in 1929, which is the direct cause of this.
This is objectively correct and based.
The sentiments in this thread (by large) are objectively correct and based as well. I am impressed with you, 196
o7
And don’t act like voting is a blood oath. You’re not pledging undying loyalty to a candidate - you’re saying you’d prefer them over the other plausible options. Nobody gives a shit if they’re your special favorite. You think we love these people? No. They’re just the best we could do, arguing with thousands of other assholes.
If that’s “the lesser evil,” sure, why the fuck would you want more evil? It’s not like staying home means nobody gets to be president.
Even Geralt of Rivia eventually had to admit the the path of ‘choosing none of the evils’ Just Does Not Work.
Yeah, a moral dilemma doesn’t just go away if you ignore it. An outcome will happen. You are invited to influence it. Have an opinion, dammit.
Oh, I’ll be voting.
For Claudia De La Cruz.
EDIT: People hard mad about this lmao
So basically you won’t be voting.
You will make no measurable impact on the outcome of the election. The election where one of two specific people will take power. And one of them already tried to end American democracy.
She can win if you vote for her 😘
No she fucking can’t.
Grow up.
Grow up and vote for the genocide, sweaty.
Tell me with a straight face The Idiot would do anything better, vis-a-vis Israel. Lie to me good.
Moral dilemmas don’t go away if you smug at them hard enough.
First candidate to not support genocide gets my vote.
GrOw uP!
Yes, idiot child who thinks alternating caps is a counterargument, grow the fuck up.
I am eligible for the US presidency. I am equally likely to win. I am fucking nobody. So is your masturbatory, performative waste of a vote.
Don’t allow fascism to seize a country just so you can feel smug superiority. Asshole.
Third party candidates might have a chance if we convince our political leaders to switch to ranked choice voting, so we’ll be able to write “I’d like her to win, but I’d still prefer Biden to Trump” on our ballots. In that case, even if the rest of the nation didn’t agree with us, we still wouldn’t have someone who calls immigrants vermin in the white house. With first past the post, nobody who doesn’t have a D or R next to their name has a ghost of a chance.
No one knows who Claudia de la Cruz even is. Unless you want to become her campaign manager, that will still be true in November. Even if you did, and even if you managed to convince two thirds of the people who would’ve voted for Biden to vote for her instead, Trump would still win because half the nation voted for him and only a third voted for her.
She doesn’t have a chance. Grow up and don’t waste your vote. Way things are right now, you only get one.
Ranked Choice is a specific use of ranked ballots and it kind of sucks. You want Ranked Pairs.
Or just Approval Voting, where people check every name they like. Same ballots as now. Most votes wins. It is literally that simple and it matches optimal results. There is no good reason it’s not the default. What we’re doing now just plain sucks.
Okay I mean this is marginally better, at least you’re voting, but still until some sort of change happens a vote third party is a vote thrown away
I’m not suggesting voting third party or protest voting, I personally plan on voting for whoever has the Democrat party’s backing come the general. However, I do want to ask, what do you believe is a realistic plan for gaining that change?
The people that are voting third party or not voting are doing so because they believe that’s the best option for change. Even if I disagree with that, how can we show them a better path?
Looked her up. What a legend! Will definitely be using her name in plave of blank “vote third party” from here out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_de_la_Cruz
Ah a Trump supporter! Let me know how that works for you once you get Trump elected!
they clearly said they are supporting de la cruz
2000 was decided by hundreds of votes. 2020 was decided by thousands of votes. Don’t play stupid games with democracy, to risk an outright fascist doing the horrible shit he’s openly said he wants to do.
Only two candidates stand any chance of winning.
One of them tried subverting the 2020 election in at least seven distinct criminal attacks. And he’s even more of an Israel fanboy. You gain absolutely fucking nothing by pretending your no-name no-chance nobody is some kind of statement. Make statements with your mouth. Use your ballot to prevent electing a dictator.
I stand with Israeli and Palestinian civilians, all of whom are victims of Hamas and the Netanyahu regime.
If you are against both dominants in a two-party system, vote for the party more likely to win, so that the margin would become bigger, the winning party would split and the losing party would have unpredictable change.
I’m in the second world, just thinking.
In the US this seems to have already happened once, in the 50s.
Whats the point? To chose between disney fascist and a consevative fascist?
Vote for an independent candidate. People have this wild notion that voting for a third-party candidate means you’re throwing your vote away.
You’re not. You’re voting for the candidate that best represents your values. People who say otherwise have fallen for the brainrot talking point that’s been around since Ross Perot ran in '96.
How is it wise to vote for a candidate that has no discernible chance of winning the election, and is therefore incapable of actually representing my interests in government?
^ this guy wants trump to win the election.
Ah yes, label me as a Trump sympathizer, cause that definitely helps your cause with the average joe.
If only Perot had just won those extra 370 electoral college votes.
Hm, almost as though Democrats should be pressured by voters to abolish the electoral college… wonder what will change their stance on that.
Maybe… if the Democrats saw their support weakening as a result of their terrible policies… hmmmm.
Democrat-leaning states are already working towards that.. The idea is that if they have 270 electoral votes worth of states signed up, they will all agree to change their electoral delegates to follow the national popular vote, effectively ending the electoral college. It’s not really a democratic push, but it’s an idea that would only be popular with the party that aligns with the national majority. They currently have 205 EVs committed.
Huh, thanks for making me aware of this. I’ll look into this more. Genuinely appreciate the insight.
BoTh SiDes ArE ThE SaMe
At what point did they say that? Of course the Republicans are miles worse than the Democrats, but why should people sit there and be like “oh, let me just vote for genocide lite when the other party is genocide standard”
Edit: slight edit since Kbin notifs are weird.
People should not actively vote FOR increasing genocide, which supporting Trump does. Not only there but bringing it here against US Arabs and LGBTQ people. And also opens up the VERY real possibility of this country turning into a dictatorship in which there won’t be more votes.
Yes! It has and always will be about voting for the person you dislike the least. You need to grow up if you think otherwise
You need to do some critical thinking. Vote for the person who best aligns with your beliefs, not which of the two big names you hate less.
You need to do some critical thinking. The reason one would dislike one candidate more is because they align less with beliefs.
Tell that to women and trans people. If Trump wasn’t elected we’d still have roe v Wade and federal judges that would strike down a lot of the anti trans laws being put out, plus those states wouldn’t have been empowered to do so in the first place.
Lol. As if trans people in red states will be any better off with Biden as president again. Or trans people in blue states any worse under Trump. The feds aren’t doing anything about all the states that are doing the most heinous shit to trans people already.
Don’t threaten me with my sister’s death to coerce me to support the genocidal regime currently in power.
They don’t keep us safe. We keep us safe.
The Republican Party is not the party of small government. They are a fascist death cult and they will bring their anti-trans bills from red states to the federal government. Trans people will be erased from public life. Trans people will be discriminated in the work force and undoubtedly find it difficult to pay rent as a result. Trans people are going to end up homeless on the streets if Republicans win in 2024.
The Supreme Court is hearing a case about homeless encampments. Homeless encampments may soon lose the current legal protection they have under the Eight Amendment. The current logic being that chasing away people who have no where left to go is cruel and unusual punishment.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/city-of-grants-pass-oregon-v-johnson/
Even blue states like Oregon and California asked the Supreme Court to review the case.
https://nypost.com/2024/03/09/opinion/the-supreme-court-could-soon-outlaw-homeless-camps/
Multiple prominent Democrats petitioned the Supreme Court to review Grants Pass, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, San Francisco mayor London Breed, and Portland mayor Ted Wheeler.
It is not guaranteed that blue states will be safe havens for anyone. Here is an official statement from Governor Gavin Newsom.
“California has invested billions to address homelessness, but rulings from the bench have tied the hands of state and local governments to address this issue.
“The Supreme Court can now correct course and end the costly delays from lawsuits that have plagued our efforts to clear encampments and deliver services to those in need.”
If Trump wins in 2024, he wants to make homelessness illegal. Homeless people are going to end up in death camps.
Trump said his proposal calls for creating “tent cities” and relocating homeless people to “large parcels of inexpensive land” with access to doctors, psychiatrists, social workers and drug rehab specialists. He claims his plan will once again make cities “livable” and “beautiful.”
A trans homeless person is as least as likely to end up in a death camp as a cis homeless person. And trans people have a good chance of being homeless if they can’t get a job because Republicans allow corporations to discriminate against them in the work place. Trans people will be worse off no matter where they are in America.
If the Democrats are also pushing to make being homeless illegal why is that an incentive to vote for them? I guess I don’t get your point. You think Biden doesn’t feel the same way about Martin v Boise as Newsom?
If the Democrats are also pushing to make being homeless illegal why is that an incentive to vote for them?
My point is Democrats want to overturn the status quo. The blue states assume they are going to get to decide what happens to homeless people next, presumably for the better. Unfortunately for them, a second Trump term would undoubtedly render homelessness illegal at the federal level. Best-laid plans gone awry thanks to Trump.
If the Republicans win in 2024 they will have control of all three branches of the federal government. They will be able reshape America how they see fit, and states rights are not going to stop them. States rights were only ever a justification from Republicans to turn their states into authoritarian christofascist workshops. Now they going to take what they’ve learned and practiced to the federal level and won’t care about state rights whatsoever.
The blue states assume they are going to get to decide what happens to homeless people next, presumably for the better.
The blue states are pushing to be allowed to put homeless people in jail again. Martin v. Boise required you to have enough shelter beds/housing available before you could force homeless people to leave the street. The blue states are joining the SCOTUS case because they will not build shelters. If that doesn’t indicate that they have no intention of doing better, idk what does.
They will be able reshape America how they see fit
They don’t need the other two branches of government to do this. They’ve already got the only one that matters and are doing it now even with a Democrat in the Oval Office.
The blue states are joining the SCOTUS case because they will not build shelters.
Again, here is Governor Gavin Newsom’s official statement. He seems intent on providing services to homeless people. Presumably that would include shelter.
“California has invested billions to address homelessness, but rulings from the bench have tied the hands of state and local governments to address this issue.
“The Supreme Court can now correct course and end the costly delays from lawsuits that have plagued our efforts to clear encampments and deliver services to those in need.”
It’s fair to not trust what someone says. At least with Democrats when they outwardly claim to have homeless people’s interests at heart, since they are neoliberals as opposed to fascists I am inclined to believe them. However, I disagree with the need to remove homeless camps in order to provide services to people. If the services are good and this is effectively communicated to people, I think most people in need of those services will take them voluntarily.
This is opposed to the fascists in the Republican party who want to put homeless people in what will no doubt turn out to be death camps.
They don’t need the other two branches of government to do this. They’ve already got the only one that matters and are doing it now even with a Democrat in the Oval Office.
If Republicans want to make homelessness illegal at the federal level, they will need Congress to pass legislation and the presidency to sign the bill into law. All the Supreme Court can do is remove homeless encampments’ Eighth Amendment protection based on the current question they are trying to answer. They could also assign whether they think the federal or state governments have the authority to write legislation to address homeless encampments. As they did recently with Trump v. Anderson, where they decided not only that states don’t have authority to take Trump off the ballot but only Congress does. However the Supreme Court cannot write or sign into law any such legislation themselves.
I was just going to post this just for fun, but they actually raise a good point. Even with only Trump in office, without a Republican controlled congress, he can do a lot of damage with just executive orders. edit: added clarification to Trump v. Anderson
You can assure me that a Republican triple majority won’t pass a national abortion ban?
Why would they need either the legislature or the presidency?
Because you can’t unilaterally pass federal laws as the minority party?
If you’re the majority party on the Supreme Court I think it’s quite evident that neither of the other two branches really matter.
What laws have the Supreme Court passed, exactly?
unexpected commentary to come from a mod.
based tho. https://www.vote.org/
With some of the rhetoric I was seeing I felt like it was my responsibility to say something.
Love u bae <3
tyyyy
On the other hand, not voting or voting uncommitted in the presidential primary is completely fine. Literally no issue with that
