…yeah, I’m sure Trump will have your back…

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, except for the fact where even THREATENING to do anything but meekly go along with it gets you ridicule if not outright hostility, no matter how noble the goal.

    If you truly think it sucks, why are you vehemently defending it against viewpoints closer to your own than those of the out of touch establishment?

      • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        More Hillary primary voters didnt for for Obama in his general then there were Bernie primary voters that didn’t vote for Hillary in the general. So I don’t think saying ‘we tried that and got Trump’ is truthful at all.

        Sticking to the two party system will not stop the next fascist, it can only delay them. Look at the past 30 years of presidents, flip flop back and forth some 4 years some 8 but a new face meant it was the other parties turn.

        At some point we need to do something different and if you wanna wait for the better smarter fascist that’s learns from Trump’s mistakes, you’re going to have a really bad time.

        • Zorque@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No shit we need to move away from the system we have. Literally no one here is saying otherwise.

          The problem is you’re not proposing a solution, you’re just saying we should piss on a sign post and call it effective action. It does nothing to help, and actively helps those making things worse.

          You want change? Look for something meaningful to do instead of whining that people are rightfully criticizing you for your ineffective actions.

          • Maeve@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            We have proposed the solution and you’re unwilling to try, and this keeping millions of us trapped in the abusive relationship you’re rather happy to be in. BuT bEInG bEaTeN iS sO mUcH bEtTeR tHaN bEiNg StRaNgLeD!

          • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The larger the share of votes third party candidates get the more funding they get from the government to help run candidates that arent already rich or connected or party officials, as well as increasing the incentive for main parties to adopt RCV or IRV to try and get shares those votes. Because as it stands neither party cares enough about third party voters to really do much to court them outside of enforcing two party rule. You’re upset that it may lose one or two elections along the way, but don’t act like theres no strategy involved in growing the number of third party voters, super disingenuous.

            No matter what you think of my plan, it’s more thought out than your plan for RCV which im dying to hear.

            • Zorque@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The problem is that your “couple elections here and there” have massive implications nationwide, while the “progress” it promises is little more than a trickle at best.

              You want to take a couple steps forward toward your own goal? Do it! But don’t espouse everyone else take a massive leap backwards so you can have your token change.

              I think third parties are a good idea… at a state and local level. Where they actual have a chance. But advocating for them on a national level is foolhardy at best, and downright regressive at worst.

              • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You want to take a couple steps forward toward your own goal? Do it! But don’t espouse everyone else take a massive leap backwards so you can have your token change.

                Well if you want to slow walk further into the electoral conditions that give rise to fascism, do it! but Don’t espouse that everyone else has to follow you folly and agree with your absurd notion of changing things by patiently waiting for the people who will always have your vote to do something they’re not already doing.

                The so called “Most progressive president of all time” is a Rail Strike Breaker, which subsequently resulted in the Ohio spill among others, and a financier of far right genocide. If you can’t respect someone to whom literal genocide is their single issue vote then I have little faith in your understanding of US politics and voter demographics. “Trump COULD be worse” isn’t gonna win Biden any votes with them, because only a fool would vote for a genocide under the logic that the other guy may also do a genocide.

                You’re slow walk into American Fascism is no more noble than someone trying to do something actually different in hopes of different results. Still waiting on that plan of yours.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, you tried going along with the neoliberal way of doing things and everything went so shitty for regular people that a lot of those who were already most vulnerable to demagoguery were radicalised to the point of Trump.

    • Last time I acted on a threat like this, we got Bush Jr. I absolutely did not want to see Tipper Fucking Gore in the White House again, so I voted Green Party. Turns out, me and a bunch of other people doing the same thing almost certainly resulted in the resulting 20 years of constant war, and the deaths of countless innocent civilian non-combatants. I really do believe that blood is on my hands.

      Every potential US president with any real chance of winning - all of them - will support Israel. Taking voting action that will lead to a guy who will not only continue to support Israel, but will fan the fires of anti-Islamic rhetoric, and is also a right-wing white supremicist who openly hates poor people… that’s the definition of “cutting off your nose to spite your face.”

      They’re angry. I*m angry. My representatives know I think our support of Israel in this genocide is unconscionable. Threatening to not vote for the lesser of two evils is an understandable statement of frustration, but until there’s a credible alternative candidate who says they’d cut military support for Israel… well, it’s just punching a brick wall.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Last time I acted on a threat like this, we got Bush Jr.

        puts on mechanic outfit that’s your problem right there! You’ve got your intended effect meter on backwards. puts it back to “politician acts on threat from constituents”

        I really do believe that blood is on my hands.

        Blaming yourself for what others do is a classic sign of being in a toxic relationship. You didn’t invent the undemocratuc Electoral College, without which Dubya would never have been president and none of his war crimes were suggested by you.

        Every potential US president with any real chance of winning - all of them - will support Israel.

        Yeah, as long as people like you reinforce the toxic status quo by doing their best to vehemently oppose every attempt to hold them accountable.

        My representatives know I think our support of Israel in this genocide is unconscionable.

        And your representative also knows that they can count on you and others to run interference every time someone tries to effect meaningful change.

        Threatening to not vote for the lesser of two evils is an understandable statement of frustration, but until there’s a credible alternative candidate who says they’d cut military support for Israel… well, it’s just punching a brick wall.

        You would have told Martin Luther King to cut it out with the “brick wall punching” for sure.