• BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Funny because that’s exactly what I think of these protest non-voters. They’ve tried nothing (literally nothing because they don’t vote) and they’re all out of ideas.

    Is this the point where I point out that the dems have had all 3 (house, senate, presidency) for 4 years of the last 24 years? They need all 3 to actually pass anything progressive. But the non-voters never try to give them any real control.

    • electric_nan
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      What about the ones that vote every single time, and still never get what they wanted?

      • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Edited my comment, so you probably didn’t see. And we are at that point.

        Is this the point where I point out that the dems have had all 3 (house, senate, presidency) for 4 years of the last 24 years? They need all 3 to actually pass anything progressive. But the non-voters never try to give them any real control.

        Want to include Bill Clinton? Then it’s 6 years of the last 32 years. Want to go further? Then it’s 6 years of the last 44 years. Read that again, 6 years of the last 44 fucking years dems have had control of all 3.

        And that can still be filibustered. If you want filibuster proof majority then it’s 4 MONTHS of the last 44 years. Not 4 years, 4 MONTHS out of the least 44 fucking years.

        That’s why it’s tried nothing and all out of ideas.

        • electric_nan
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          So we’re back to the point where the system is hopelessly broken? Because what you just described is the system. You want to fantasize about non-voters just suddenly deciding to vote blue in overwhelming numbers. I fantasize about genuine, inspiring leaders and policies bringing more participation to the process. They’re both just fantasies though.

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            You want to fantasize about non-voters just suddenly deciding to vote blue in overwhelming number.

            What? That’s you.

            I’m the one saying that elections are won from the center, from swing voters that you know vote. And that the center vote is worth double. You are the one waxing poetically about the fringes, and the non-voters, and how the fringes are going to come out in droves to replace the double loss of centre voters. I’m the one saying you need twice as many (more than twice actually) to replace the center votes. But you think these droves and hordes of people are going to magically appear. You’re officially making no sense when you try to pin that on me.

            Winning elections from the center is reality, not fantasy. It’s literally what happens.

            • electric_nan
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              And I’m saying, that it’s a shitty system. You described how this very system has kept the democrats from getting anything done for decades. There are not enough swing voters to give them sustained control over those institutions. You also make an error in assuming that every non-voter you energize would mean losing one swing voter. There are also more than double the non-voters as there are swing voters.

              • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                And what keeps them from power? Besides votes, it’s particularly these people that say “I’m not gong to vote in protest”.

                Not every, but the vast majority of people that don’t vote are the ones on the fringes. That yes would mean losing the centre vote in order to appeal to.

                There are also more than double the non-voters as there are swing voters.

                So you are the one that thinks the hordes and droves of non-voters will come out. You think that. Not me, you. Get that right.

                So I think we’re back to me saying you win elections from center. The people that vote, and not the ones that maybe, possibly, perchance, could, HOPEfully magically show up. You take the guarantee, not the vain hope.

                • electric_nan
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I’m saying we’re both fantasizing. You keep talking about winning elections from the center, but it keeps resulting in gridlock and inability to deliver even on tepid, centrist policies. Yay. Also, there’s no way that most non voters are on the fringes lol. Most of them are absolutely disengaged from politics almost entirely.

                  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    Lol winning elections from the center is not fantasy. It’s literally how elections are won from both sides. That’s how Trump won imo, he appealed to the so-called Middle class manufacturing jobs (and because Hillary no vote protest).

                    Sounds very much like you want to justify your non-voting protest, so you have to denigrate the center win as “fantasy”, when it is in fact reality. Just so you can throw your hands up and say it’s all fantasy. Sounds familiar? This is the “I tried nothing and I’m all out of ideas” non voter which you sure sound like.

                    Also, there’s no way that most non voters are on the fringes lo

                    What are you even on about. Are you missing the entire point that there are central swing voters? These are voters. They are Central voters. They are swing voters. They vote. They are not non-voters. Is that what this whole problem is, you refuse to see the existence of central swing voters? JFC. That does explain things. Yeah it seems you refuse to see the real existence of central swing voters that actually vote. JFC. These voters, that exist, are the ones that decide elections.

                    And for this group that you think will come out when they are presented with some big, I’m going to say extreme left, platform for them to fall in love with are exactly the ones on the fringes. Like by definition. Disengaged people are by definition disengaged. The protest voters in waiting, waiting for some big platform are not the central disengaged ones. They are the fringe ones waiting for some big extreme left platform, and withholding their vote until they get that big extreme platform. They are fringe by definition. To appeal to the fringe ones waiting for some big platform you are going to lose the central voters that exist, that vote, that show up. JFC. I really wonder if you’re trolling at this point.

                    Btw this is the horde (the fringe horde waiting for big extreme platform and until then they’re withholding their vote) that you think will show up. Not me, you You think that this big horde will show up, so big that they will override the central voters that are lost. By definition this big horde of yours will have to be over twice the size of the central voters (the ones that exist) that you will lose.