this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
1045 points (95.2% liked)
People Twitter
4850 readers
1715 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a tweet or similar
- No bullying.
- Be excellent to each other.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This just emphasizes to me that every vote matters. Sure, both parties are terrible and the chance of a third party making any headway, nevermind winning an election is, at best, unlikely.
But not voting is being complicit in what comes next. Good or bad, you're okay with whatever happens.
Harm reduction through voting is surreal, but it's required at this point. Don't be a filthy fucking collaborator, go vote.
They are both imperfect but only one is legitimately terrible. I'm actually pretty tired of everyone feeling the need to qualify this sentiment, as if the Democrats haven't been behind basically every bit of progress in the US going back a century or more.
It's like someone who keeps pointing out "Yeah, but we're also running low on food!" on an spacecraft that is almost out of air.
True, these are both problems, but one is a MUCH bigger immediate threat and needs to be solved before we can spend time on the other, and doing nothing simply isn't the correct option.
* 50 years or more
Not that I'm disagreeing with your thesis as applied to the modern day, but pre-Lyndon Johnson, the Democrats were the racist party. There was a massive sea change during the era of Nixon, when the Democrats decided after quite a bit of heated internal debate that they couldn't possibly stomach depending on the support of the segregationists, whatever the cost, and the Southern Strategy scooped all the for real lynch-mob enthusiasts all up for Nixon. Except for Carter's brief flirtation with actual human decency, which the US isn't okay with for some reason, the Democrats got accustomed to losing elections for quite a while, until Clinton decided to make a pact with the neoliberal bastards since all the actual progressives were so ground down into not-voting-land that they weren't even worth appealing to anymore. That worked and that set the tone which has continued to the modern day of slight steady progress under Democrats versus absolute naked fascism under the Republicans (accelerating year by year to its current breakneck pace.)
Side note, if you want to have your heart broke a little bit, read Hubert Humphrey's speech at the DNC in NINETEEN FUCKING FORTY EIGHT, where he calls out the Democratic party for their acceptance of racism:
He was still around in 1968, in the literal bloody battle, inside and outside the convention hall, for what the Democrats were going to be. They never fulfilled their promise completely, and they still haven't, and that year it cost them the presidency, just like it did in 2016.
I say this 1,000% agreeing that Biden has represented a big step forward and accomplished some genuine impressive things, and that voting for him in November is an affirmative good thing and not just a way to prevent Trump's end of the world. But the Democrats had to be dragged kicking and screaming by their progressive wing into doing good things, just as they have to be now on Israel among some other issues.
The difference is that they can be dragged into good things, which is enough. And they've done pretty much all of the progress the country has made since 1976; I'll fully agree with you there.
A hundred years ago the Republicans were still ok and the dems were well, pretty bad. Reminder that by 1924 the last Democratic president was fucking Wilson, ya know the man who showed birth of a nation at the whitehouse. It wouldnt be until FDR that the Democrats started to not be fucken horrible.
Conservatives have always been terrible, no matter the political party.
You need a different voting system for third parties to be viable
I agree. The problem is getting a new voting system to be implemented. Neither of the two parties want third parties to get a decent shot at dethroning them, so the two parties right now, are not going to willingly go for a new voting system since the current one ensures that they only have one rival during elections.
It doesn't benefit either party, so neither is going to agree to change it.
Yes ok but still…
Genuinely not trying to be a dick, but I don't understand what your response means?
The response means, "I agree, but it's not relevant to the topic at hand."
Yes, we need a better system. In the meantime, we need to work with what we have.
OK. The op mentioned voting third parties so my comment was a response to that. Thanks for explaining thou
Wasn't sure at first but you brought me home safe in the second half