• dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    103
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    19 hours ago

    “Kamala Harris is not the perfect progressive candidate in every way. How can I possibly vote for her? I’ll sit this one out. That’ll show 'em!”

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Trump won because the people that voted for him actually like him, they aren’t choosing the lesser of two evils or whatever nonsense. The democrats message of “at least we aren’t as bad” was awfully inspiring.

      Hey democrats, if you win what will you do with that power? Change nothing? Cool!

      Blame the democrats for getting tight lipped about literally anything anyone cared about.

      • thisjustin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        You didn’t listen - they talked about corporations buying houses, the middle class disappearing, being unable to live on minimum wage, expanding medical for people that need it.

        The idea that a political party will change just because they lost because they weren’t exactly where you wanted is also ignorant. That’s never a guarantee. Otherwise we would currently be living in utopia. Maybe it will cycle back, by the time we’re all dead

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          They honestly spent too much time talking about tax credits to start a business. Starting a business? Lady, I’m starting to look seriously at fleeing the country in hopes of finding one that hasn’t lost its collective mind.

    • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      ·
      19 hours ago

      People need to accept that the electoral system in the US is just a trolley problem at the end of the day unfortunately.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Not quite.

        For starters it didn’t use to be a choice of “who would you rather see killed” - or in other words, nothing was forever lost if one side won instead of the other - and beyond that it has always been a cyclical choice, so it made sense for voters who felt insufficiently catered to, to punish a side on one cycle to try and get it to offer a better deal on the next cycle.

        Whether that remains the case - i.e. will Trump make himself dictator for life - is the big question.

        • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          That’s true but I didn’t mean it as a choice of who you’d rather see killed, just that the system is set up in such a way that as a rational voter you are forced into a situation where you must act to prevent the worst outcome rather than voting for your interests and what you believe in.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Basically, and people let ‘the enemy of perfect get in the way of good enough’. Progress is incremental unfortunately. That’s just how it is. We can accept that, or we get this crap.

          • Soulg@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            18 hours ago

            This is exactly the fucking problem, if it’s not perfect enough then people allow it to get worse instead.

            • skibidi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              15 hours ago

              The only way a political party changes is when they stop winning.

              If Democrats think they will win by being Republicans who hate the gays a little bit less, then that is what they’ll do. They were just shown that that isn’t a winning strategy, so we’ll see if the party changes tack or doubles down.

              “You monster, it is your fault you gave us Trump”

              I make my voting preferences known in every primary, state, and federal election. I actively volunteer for candidates I like. The party knows what will earn my vote, if they wanted it. If they make the strategic bet that getting my vote will cost them more from somewhere else, then that is on them.

              “That is so entitled, how could you”

              Have you ever considered that the reason both parties seem so out of touch with mainstream thought is because they have 10s of millions of people who will vote regardless of policy, thereby preventing the parties from understanding what is actually effective in getting them votes?

              Elections are an information gathering mechanism.

      • Apytele@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        At this point the trolley problem is "would you like to vote for killing 1000 per year for the next four years or would you like to vote for killing 4000 people this year with the hope that maybe it’ll cause the whole trolley system to self destruct…? (The numbers are purely illustrative).

        Edit: apparently it’s not obvious that I think these are both horrible options, and I voted for the limping painfully along for an extended period.

        • Bronzebeard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Making things worse based on the idiotic hope that it might somehow magically spark things to get better is the absolute dumbest fucking idea one can have.

        • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          19 hours ago

          If by “trolley system to self-destruct” you mean violent revolution and a new system of government imperfect in a completely different way, yes. Good luck with the wait.

          • Apytele@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            That’s exactly what I mean, and I agree that it sounds awful. It’s like people go into these conversations deciding which side the other person is on based on which they can argue the most with.

    • NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      I voted for her because she was the lesser evil, but describing her as just “not the perfect progressive candidate in every way” is a gross misrepresentation. She was probably the most right leaning Democratic candidate to run in a general election and was openly adopting many of the Republican stances. There were basically two Republicans running.

      • Moineau@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Single issue voters are the reason the USA is now a dictatorship building concentration camps. That’s not an opinion.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Really? She was to the right of the Clintons? Obama? John Kerry, even? I think you have a selective memory.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        18 hours ago

        There were basically two Republicans running.

        Fucking absurd. There is a reason you don’t name one specific