Serious statement: I don't understand the argument that not voting for Harris was the morally correct thing to do, because of Gaza. Why does anyone believe this?
Serious statement: I don't understand the argument that not voting for Harris was the morally correct thing to do, because of Gaza. Why does anyone believe this?
And I'm being serious. I feel like there might be an argument there, I just don't understand it. Can someone please "steelman" that argument for me?
You're viewing a single thread.
I think some people have explained it decently, but as someone who did not vote for Harris, I have a simple explanation:
I do not want the Democratic party to think it's Ok to be slightly better than Trump.
If I'm going to be honest, trans rights and immigration are minor issues compared to inequality and war in Gaza.
The Dems can be better, but they choose not to. Me voting for Dems signals that what Dems are doing is acceptable, but it's not. I supported third party in 2024, and I will continue to do so until the Democrats get serious reform.
(For those who think it would be "less bad" with Harris, that's the problem. I don't care for "less bad" when the duopoly got us here regardless. Represent the people.)
For the love of all that is holy, do not assume that they will figure out everything you just typed above from the fact that you didn't vote for them.
I don't actually agree with your choice, but I do agree with this:
The Dems can be better, but they choose not to.
So please, if you have convinced yourself that withholding one vote out of tens of millions will somehow send them the message you are trying to send, please also convince yourself that it would be even more effective to drop them a line and let them know how you feel in explicit detail.
https://democrats.org/contact-us/
Same message for everyone else who chose a protest vote on Tuesday. It's all great to feel like you did the right thing, but maybe now question whether your message will actually be received, and be sure that it does. Otherwise you put Trump in for literally nothing.
I like your reasoning. I'm a libertarian myself, so I get it.
But I held my nose and voted Democrat the last two Presidential elections because I think Trump is a uniquely dangerous person. I hate the "this time is different" argument, but I actually think it applied this time.
That's fair and I respect your decision.
I was excited about Obama. For whatever reason I thought he'd be a lot more progressive than he ended up being.
I phone banked for Clinton. Was never a fan, but I agree that Trump was/is uniquely dangerous.
I voted for Biden. He was explicitly picked to be the conservative balance to the liberal firebrand, Obama (😬), but hey vote Blue no matter who, right?
The counterpoint to this thinking, for me: Where does this end? Do I stick it out until the next "unimportant" Presidential election? At what point am I just enabling the Dems to run rightward to pick up imaginary centrist Republicans while ignoring the left and the working class?
I doubt the DNC will learn their lesson from this election. I hoped they'd learn from a win, but I pray they take this loss to heart. The idea that Republicans somehow convinced people that they're the party of unions and the working class is laughable, but if they could do that, that says Dems aren't making the difference in people's lives that they should be.
So, instead of selecting the better of two bad options (according to you), you chose the worse of two bad options. And that's supposed to make some sort of point?
Do I shoot myself in the foot or the head? The head, that'll show em!
X to doubt.
I voted for the Unity party largely to make this point. I live in Colorado. That's "shooting myself in the head"?
I heard someone say "Well what if so many voters vote third party that they lose the state?" In this scenario...if Colorado is even close...it's a fantasy to think they'd still have Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, or Texas. There is no path to 270 that doesn't involve Colorado being firmly blue enough that vote won't change anything.
I respect the right of people in swing states to vote their conscience as well, but that's obviously a different consideration. But the vitriol a lot of Dems have without even asking where someone lives is just weird.
Good for you, you helped get Trump elected! 👍
Ok. Sure. Myself and millions of others helped get Trump elected. Hopefully you can figure out how to appeal to us next election.
If avoiding the coming hate didn’t appeal to you then why bother?
"Not bothering" means more people not supporting Democrats, which means Republicans getting elected more.
See? I can do DNC logic too. It's actually your fault Trump got elected.
Right. Need to support everyone, universal healthcare, universal basic income, without religion, no with religion, with feminism, with support for men's rights, with support for immigration, not too much support for immigration, with support for small businesses, without enabling corporate America, and ranked choice voting, and younger people, more minorities, elect a woman, with more communism, no, more socialism, with consequences for the right, with unity for all and put the past behind us etc etc etc.
We get Trump because some entitled fuckers from every. single. camp. (often with conflicting interests) say "earn MY vote" or go to hell. The straight white cis bible thumping camp is voting as a bloc all the time. This is why D can't get anything done: there is no sparkling unicorn candidate. Sometimes a little better is all you get. Lefties complain about people on the right being single issue voters, then turn around and single issue don't vote.
Thanks for the nut punch of a president.
I know you're memeing, but to be honest, yes, I want a President whose platform is somewhat like what you described. Obviously I disagree with some random parts (i.e. "with more communism, no, more socialism, with consequences for the right"), but for heavens sake, at least the theoretical person running for President above is trying something new. They would get my vote.
This is what the Right is doing with Trump after all, and clearly people like it.
Wouldn't that be great, and I hope you get the chance to vote for it if such a candidate emerges. The extra gerrymandering and crippling of voter rights or just, you know, suspension of elections between now and then may have something to say about it though.
Trump is not doing anything but saying "I'll do this! And I'll do that! And I'm the best at this!" And as long as he says enough bullshit all the voters say "of course he lies and says what he needs to say to get elected, but not about my thing!" Even if every week he contradicts the last thing he says.
Short memories, unsophisticated voters, and single issue voting mean this strategy will basically always work. Remember, they have voters with single issue in, and you (or at least many in this thread or on Lemmy) are single issue out. Maybe well meaning, but functionally not a particularly smarter approach to getting the best available leader. It's all "Fuck you, me!" and take the rest of us with you.
You are unreachable
Thanks for enabling Trump you ginormous ass hat. I will remember your entitled self righteous indignation when Ukraine falls. When Trump talks about eradicating the Palestinian people. And when Russia starts taking small bites of NATO countries, while Trump refuses to respond to article 5 requests.
Sending a message to the democratic party was something you could have done before the election. By getting involved. But noooo let's send the message by handing the US to a fascist and convicted felon, that's far easier.
Edit: I just saw the .ml now. Good one tankie, you got me all riled up. I believe you can now collect a kopek from your boss for your trouble.
You can disagree with that guy. That's fine. But you need to understand that your attitude mirrors the attitude of the democratic party, and it literally just cost them the election.
Ignore the people who want change, assuming they'll vote for you anyway is a great way to get them to vote for someone else.
Reform or fail.
Democrats are alright with failure, they're gonna make serious bank anyway. Their voters, though? Idk why they act like they are part of this campaign, when they might as well have been cardboard cutouts as far as the DNC is concerned. They're the worst kind of politicucked.
What's so weird to me is how Americans can just be "oh bother! The not fascist prodemocracy party lost. If only I would care enough to do something, oh well better luck next time." why aren't you guys screaming?
Trump's relationship with Putin is going to change the current world order. You know the world? It's where the US is?
If that's too abstract, then look at the remaining SCOTUS judges. With Trump in the Whitehouse then Alito and Thomas can step down and be replaced with more Gen Xers ensuring right-wing dominance for the next 30 years. Repealing Roe v Wade is going to be dwarfed by the what's coming now.
Harris wasn't ideal. Harris was as interesting as a corporate newsletter. But at least she wasn't a threat to democracies worldwide. Harris would have meant less injustice, but not "no injustice". But because people couldn't get no injustice, they stayed home and got 20x the injustice they would have gotten otherwise. And now they're justifying that? GTFO!
The US political system is broken. But it's broken deliberately by one side to suit them, while the other side is too busy blaming each other for their own common failures to do anything.
why aren't you guys screaming?
I screamed when Bush won a second term. I screamed when Trump won his first term. The American people can't really let me down any further than they already have.
Do you mean rioting? The guy even won the popular vote, possibly fair and square. Are you under the impression that there is some action we can take at this point to improve the situation?
because people couldn't get no injustice, they stayed home
That's not a valid interpretation of the situation. Millions of people who voted for Biden did not come out for Kamala. There'll be a lot of people trying to discern why and you probably won't like my guess, but it's too early to really have good information. Exit polls said only about 10 percent of people cared about Gaza at all. This idea of progressives not voting, sending the election to Trump doesn't hold water at all. Dems first instinct is to punch left. I hope they learn a better lesson from this loss.
People who don't vote aren't hanging out on Lemmy talking about politics. All of the vitriol from Democrats is even more misplaced than usual. This outcome was pretty much what I thought would happen, but when I talk about how Dem decisions aren't exciting voters, the response is to admonish me to vote, missing the point entirely.
it's broken deliberately by one side to suit them,
Refusing to admit the part the Dems play is part of the problem as well. We can't keep doing the same thing we've always done, and if we don't learn from this we are truly doomed.
Ok, so I'll be straight with you. I want to respond to your whole comment, but I need to stop engaging in these discussions. So know that I read all that you wrote, and I want to respond to everything. But I need to limit myself.
Do you mean rioting? [...]
I don't know. I don't think so. But something has to be done, and it can't wait until the next election. I'm not advocating violence. Part of me wants to say "eat the rich" and "if enough people shows up with torches and pitchforks, what is Musk going to do?"
But violence isn't solving anything, and besides it would play right into the MAGA dream of a civil war. What has to happen is to copy what MAGA has been doing. Go after local positions. Put prodemocracy persons on school boards, town councils, election boards. Vote in prodemocracy officials like prosecutors, judges, and sheriffs (if any of them aren't just appointed by now)
The guy even won the popular vote, possibly fair and square. Are you under the impression that there is some action we can take at this point to improve the situation?
He only won the popular vote because of the inactions of good people. Prodemocracy movements need an inspiring leader and a cause. Apparently "save the US, save the world" wasn't inspiring enough. IDK what would be, but getting the non fascist Americans motivated and organized is imperative.
Refusing to admit the part the Dems play is part of the problem as well. We can't keep doing the same thing we've always done, and if we don't learn from this we are truly doomed.
I agree, and the part of that paragraph you didn't quote says pretty much the same thing.
Yeah people just care about bread on the table and the roof over their head. Telling 150 million voting Americans to care about the world is falling on early 100 million deaf ears.
75 million don't care, or actively dislike anybody outside the US.
Another 38 million only care as long as it's convenient. And right now it's not convenient.
Maybe 10-15 million are anti Republican because they're lgbtq+.
Of the 150 million voters, 80 million are voting on a single issue. And for many of them, it's either for or against abortion.
We've been supplying the West with a military for decades. We put more in to our ministry, and by extension every NATO member country's military than the rest of NATO combined. We don't have social programs, no healthcare, no child care, under funded education, no paid sick leave, no parental leave. We have a big shiney military.
People can't afford to take a day off for the flu and they're supposed to care about Europe?
Big ask mate. People here care about how they're doing today and tomorrow. Not Ukraine 6 months from now.
I get it, I do. Far removed consequences, in either time or distance, are hard to get motivated by, especially if you have issues closer to yourself. All the things you list are not exactly stuff Trump's going to provide. I mean he wanted to get rid of the ACA in his first term.
Problem is that being a superpower requires maintenance. It would seem that Trump doesn't want to maintain that status https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/01/trump-2024-reelection-pull-out-of-nato-membership/676120/
I don't want Europe's security policies to be dependent on the US. What my country's governments have been doing since the 80s is nothing short of irresponsible. FFS in the Danish navy the largest vessels are our two frigates, crewed by 100 personnel each. One isn't seaworthy and the other can't fire its main gun, because we only have one targeting system, and it's on the other ship. Luckily it seems that my government has been awakened. And it would seem that a lot of other countries have been too.
But in the end, if Russia can get a seize fire in Ukraine, if Trump can get the Ukrainians to stop defending themselves. Then Putin will be able to regroup, and be able to rebuild his armed forces to be able to attack NATO countries, while Trump's still president. And if NATO falls, because the US doesn't get involved, then what's stopping China from sinking some American boats to secure the South China Sea? While Iran goes full force on Isreal and North Korea invades the south?
I'm not saying that it's a given, but this scenario is far more likely with Trump at the wheel than almost anyone else.
So while world peace isn't the sole responsibility of the US, it kind of depends on the US at the moment.
It wouldn't have mattered anyway. Third party votes didn't total up enough to make a difference if Harris got them all or not. I can't blame people for acting in accordance with their conscience whether I agree with it or not. What's done is done. Let's move on and figure out the next steps we need to take.