Some people out there seem to be confused, but I always vote in every local and every national election for every office and every ballot initiative since I was 18 years old. Some of my greatest civil rights heroes have fought and died so that we can all vote and I honor their memory in the ballot box every single time.
To some of us, especially those of us like myself who have been scheduling secretaries for US senators, it often seems like a morally reprehensible choice between compromised corporate Democrats and fascist-minded Republicans. Where I live in California, I have the luxury of voting my conscience for president for third-party candidates that better align with my ideas of justice and equality.
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off, but don’t just exercise your right to vote. Exercise your right to fight for, organize for, struggle for, and manifest the kind of world you’d like to really see without compromise and without apologies before, during, and after election day. And let’s stop the fascists every which way we can. Power the people.
You must log in or register to comment.
When your opponent is fascism:
YOU VOTE AGAINST FASCISM.
I thought he was smarter than this, but it seems purity tests don’t leave room for raging against machines.
- 6 days
He votes against fascism every single time.
That all of California’s electoral votes would go against republican fascism was a foregone conclusion. So what he did is use his vote to promote a third solution, one that is not corporate democrat. That’s absolutely fine.
Knowingly throwing away a vote on someone that mathematically and realistically cannot win is the same as not voting at all where the outcome is concerned.
Doing this enabled trump to win as it was a vote not counted toward the one that stood a chance to win.
- 5 days
What? The vote changed nothing, all of California’s electoral votes went to Harris. Do you not know how the US voting system works?
Knowingly throwing away a vote on someone that mathematically and realistically cannot win is the same as not voting at all where the outcome is concerned.
Doing this enabled trump to win as it was a vote not counted toward the one that stood a chance to win.
- 6 days
When your opponent is fascism and you vote for a different fascist, don’t be surprised when this does nothing to combat fascism.
LMAO…. The shit we tell ourselves to justify our ignorance I guess.
You brought us trump. Take your bow.
- 6 days
You are reading what you want to see and not what I wrote.
They are not the same, but they are idealogically aligned and working towards the same goals.
- Reddfugee42@lemmy.worldEnglish4 days
That’s just saying they’re the same with extra steps. It’s willfully ignorant and childish, a way to participate in politics while being uninformed. The Dunning-Kruger of political discussion participants.
7 daysHe looks like he gets down in late night bath house soirees. He’s about as corporate as you can get regardless if he says he’s not corporate. That alone makes him corporate
- 8 days
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off
I think this is reasonable. A “corporate Democrat”, even if bad, can be better than a Republican in many cases. The Democrat might end up being less bad, for lots of disadvantaged people, than a Republican would be. These aren’t ideal choices to make, but you have to deal with reality as it is.
- bedwyr@piefed.caEnglish8 days
What gets lost in that argument is the fact that the battle is already lost when you nominate the corporate democrats. Kamala lost in July 2024.
The non voters were not incorrect all along, far from it. I speak as someone that still votes democratic to keep republicans out, but my vote is not guaranteed. I will not vote for an Israel hawk at this moment.
- 7 days
What gets lost in the debate is that there’s two parts to it:
- If you are voting in a general election, vote for the lesser evil choice
- If you are not working to support better choices BEFORE the general… BEFORE the primary… then you are allowing others to make that choice for you
- bedwyr@piefed.caEnglish7 days
You must be the guardian angel of the establishment dems on lemmy.
Ha ha, don’t let me tell you what I think of you being their bitch.
- 7 days
Obviously ignorant of what the two parties have voted for and done. Fascism appreciates your rabid support.
Even if establishment Dems do suck.
- bedwyr@piefed.caEnglish7 days
I thought I already responded to the uniparty hack, but you did two of them. Piss off. No one, no one of solid mind, agrees with your bullshit. You are the reason we lost in fact.
Vote in primaries if you are happy with the candidates. Primaries on average have about 10% voter turn out.
- bedwyr@piefed.caEnglish7 days
Get the fuck off it. We all know it’s pointless in the general long term. Stop lying and make truthful arguments and maybe you will get somewhere.
- 7 days
Go fucking research what the two parties have voted for and passed and get the fuck off it yourself, fascism supporter - whether you intend to be or not. Which is not to say establishment Dems don’t suck because of course they do. But it still matters.
- bedwyr@piefed.caEnglish7 days
Wtf are you on about? Some Dem establishment talking points.
You saw the dem establishment arguing and took it. Huh. Doesn’t speak well to your understanding though does it? No.
Thanks god former colonized people and people who formally lived in dictatorship didn’t have American mentality and didn’t accept the reality. Americans are bunch of cowards
- 8 days
I’m not American. I get what you’re saying though. But the quote of Tom Morello in the article, after the bit I quoted with “vote your ass off”, then says:
…but don’t just exercise your right to vote. Exercise your right to fight for, organize for, struggle for, and manifest the kind of world you’d like to really see…
Always easy to armchair from a distance with nothing on the line.
Come, show us how it’s done by doing whatever it is you mean.
Where do you live, by the way?
- 8 days
I hate this title - it’s a bit misleading with respect to the point he’s making.
It honestly seems downright disingenuous, as though the author of the article wanted to make a “both sides” article but then realized Tom isn’t a fucking moron.
- 8 days
Dude is my personal hero and he’s showing why again here.
He’s doing exactly the right thing. Voting Democrat when the only alternative is a Repugnican who WILL hurt more people than the Corpocrat, but always, always and with all his power trying to move things to the left of corporate Democrats whenever he can without hurting vulnerable people.
- 8 days
It pains me that the kids these days don’t have similar idols. Like Kneecap is righteous, but they’re not RATM playing a show on wall street despite being told they cannot play a show on wall street.
Icons.
Except he claimed he didn’t vote for Kamala vs Trump. Therefore allowing and be in agreement with the outcome. Any outcome.
- 8 days
This is a pretty good response. I wish there was more focus on that ‘inch of space’ and who gets harmed, and less on the disappointing sock puppet figureheads.
- 8 days
He does have a PhD from Harvard for poli sci. I would be surprised if he couldn’t put together a decent response. I’ve been surprised before though…
- 7 days
Yes, too often that inch is getting ignored on principle and to that I can only say: if your principles are so rigid that you sacrifice vulnerable people and minorities, then your principles are a part of the problem.
- 7 days
Are you talking about sacrificing vulnerable palestinians syrians and lebanese, or vulnerable groups in the US?
- 6 days
Most of the Palestinian holocaust happened on Bidens/Harris’s watch. Did you notice people were mad at the dems for that? So you cant really make a case that rethuglicans are worse. On war crimes, they are the same. Both parties are bought by rich zionists, and neither will willingly change. Ever. The only way to redeem the US system is to take it apart and reform it into something that honors basic human rights. Until we do that we are just wasting our time and continuing to support crimes against humanity by delaying the burning. We need to take a longer term view of where we are going.
- 5 days
On war crimes, they are the same.
Soo… even if I would accept that (and I don’t, but let’s say I would) that means in that one regard they are the same, but Republicans are still worse for many other groups.
So voting democrat, only when necessary to prevent a republican in office, is still preventing that more of harm a republican would do.
The only way to redeem the US system is to take it apart and reform it into something that honors basic human rights.
That is the main objective, I agree. And Tom Morello agrees. And I do not see how preventing worse outcomes as secondary objectives, while actively working for that goal is in conflict.
You can work towards dismantling the system while allowing more harm until that goal is reached by not using what little power you have within the system to prevent harm.
Or you can work towards dismantling the system while also using what little power you have in it to reduce harm until your main objective is reached.
There’s no contradiction in it. Because neither voting 3rd party, nor non-voting brings you closer to your main objective.
- 5 days
I think the fundamental disconnect between you and I is that I look down the road whereas you look for more immediate results. From what I see down the road, I despair and you do not. Our system is captured by people who will submit bribes to do … whatever they want. Genocide , pedophilia, oppression, theft, and war crimes for example-- but it really is whatever the hell they want from here on out. Our laws are a joke and our courts are a joke-- Biden didnt really follow them either. Both parties accept those bribes and act loyally on them. Neither party will change that-- they will just play games with you to keep you busy. As citizens we are accountable for the outcomes of our government commensurate with our ability to change that outcome. So when you have an option to destroy this government, its your moral duty to do it, if thats the lesser harm accumulation to humanity long term. To do otherwise would be to go along with the war-crimininality this country is perpetrating for those bribes. I dont want blood on my hands, and I imagine you dont either. I dont want people oppressed. I want civil rights and universal human rights for everyone-- not just Americans, and an actual rule of law, not this bullshit we have now.
I think we are in a structurally captured state and it cant be cured. So make your choice from there. I’m choosing accelerationism and hoping the system can change before it implodes, but we need to be on the path to implode it either way, until the Dems prove to us that they will get back on track.
Seems reasonable to me. God knows no one in Pennsylvania has been any better off for voting John Fetterman. Play the game as best you can with the cards you have, and fold when that’s the right choice, and then work to make the game function better through organizing and other means.
- 8 days
It’s a ridiculous assertion. Dr. Oz would obviously have been worse. As terrible as Fetterman is, Oz would have been in full lockstep with Trump and the Senate would be under even firmer control of the GOP right now. Trump could have been more successful legislatively if they had another Senator to make winning votes easier. If nothing else, it would have provided another seat they could use to let Senators like Collins and Murkowski do their performative BS on more votes so its easier for them to win re-election.
- 8 days
People don’t realize that Fetterman votes with Democrats 90% of the time. That’s a lot better than having a Trump sycophant in that seat.
This is the answer.
Fetterman makes me want to punch my walls. But still better than something like Oz.
It would not have made a difference. It’s like asking if you’d rather face the firing squad or face the wall and get shot in the back. Same outcome regardless of “choice”, but by choosing Fetterman, the whole democratic party is weakened by the exercise.
- 8 days
Fetterman votes with Democrats 90% of the time. Dr. Oz would have voted with Democrats 0% of the time. That’s a big difference.
- 8 days
The context here being that John fetterman votes against his party more often than any other senator, Democrat or Republican. And he breaks with them on larger issues. He breaks with the party pretty often in big ways when it comes to nominations too.
That 90% is including a lot of procedural votes. But still the point sorta stands and he voted in line with the Democrats more often than my gut reaction expected.
That’s also not to say that I think dr oz would be better than fetterman but the fact is fetterman being in office is a failure of the dnc.
- 7 days
My understanding is people who followed Fetterman’s career judge that he dramatically changed after his stroke, which happened after the primary. The party voters chose his pre-stroke self. The dnc has a lot of failures under their belt, but I don’t think not trying to invalidate the primary voter’s choice because the guy had a stroke was one of them.
Is it? Because they still haven’t passed or blocked anything meaningful. It’s really easy to “Vote with the party” when you know they’re going to lose regardless. Your metric may be true, but it’s ultimately meaningless.
- 8 days
You could say that about anyone in the minority party at any time. You’re assuming Fetterman would change his voting pattern with Democrats in the majority, with no data to back up that assertion.
I don’t like Fetterman either, but the time to fight him is in the primary. In the general election you pick the lesser evil, and the lesser evil is never the Republican.
- 8 days
There is no “folding” in life. There is no walking away. You can abstain from giving specific input, but you are still subject to and share responsibility for the results. What is needed is people that push to have the best possible choice for a given election and will vote for the best choice available. Doing only one is not enough.
- 8 days
No, there’s definitely “folding” in life. Or “logging out”, or whatever euphemism you can think of.
You just don’t get to deal back into the game after you fold.
There is a point at which the “best possible” is not sufficiently distinct from the worst possible that it becomes irrelevant for the individual in question. There was literally no benefit to Fetterman over Oz for most people. The only option was to work to make sure neither of them ever get another chance and to try to mitigate the harm that was going to be done when either one wins. I want to be clear, I don’t think this applies to the party as a whole but this is why (from the perspective of many) it does, because in their specific case the outcome is the same regardless. It’s a perfectly rational choice at the scale of the individual, because their interests, aren’t even on the ballot.
- 8 days
You and anyone else that doesn’t think Oz would have been significantly worse, or thinks it “doesn’t affect them”, is naive or arguing in bad faith. The better option can suck, but both-sidesing the situation to excuse not voting at all serves nobody but the worse option.
To pull from the quote from the OP:
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off…
For one, he says he doesn’t vote for fascists just as much as he says he doesn’t vote for corporate Democrats. But then he goes on to say while he thinks you should vote for third-party candidates who you really would like to see get elected in some elections, sometimes you need to be practical and vote for a candidate that is not ideal, but better, and could actually be elected, for elections where that matters. Which is also what I’ve always said.
- 7 days
It is technically the truth, but skips the lede.
He does vote that way, but clarifies California is a place where he can, and if your situation is more competitive, you need to vote with that inch in mind.
- 5 days
Thank you, it annoys me greatly when people don’t actually say what they mean. I appreciate the effort you took to point out it. Your comment is much better than just saying something happened without explaining it.
Much better comment than the ones I replied to Eric is pretty useless on its own. It took you and me to make it something worth reading
- 7 days
I’ve seen those.
I’m sure I’ve been called those, but my point is two-fold:
- Act BEFORE the general election to support better candidates
- But when the choice is between lesser-evil and greater-evil, NOT voting for lesser-evil IS VOTING FOR GREATER EVIL. That’s not opinion, it’s simple math.
If the only thing someone does with politics is refrain from voting in the general election, they absolutely are supporting fascism. If the only thing someone does is vote in the general election, they are not supporting progressive candidates if their only option is between a fascist and an establishment Democrat.
You must act BEFORE the primary to support who you want to SEE in the primary. Vote for the best option. In the general, vote for the least-bad option. Not doing those things supports the greater evil of fascist.
- 7 days
I see it’s time to purity test Rage Against the Fucking Machine!
This is straight up conservative hit piece propaganda. The dude is a Harvard educated pol sci master, maybe if he says one single thing you disagree with, listen to what the cunt is saying.
They’re trying to just throw whatever little piece of shit they can on him so they can go- “hey, this guy disagrees with you on one point of all the thousand things you are both in FULL agreement of. See? Everything he says is fake.”
GTFO of here with this mainstream media psyop diarrhea.
- 7 days
Anytime a left-wing person talks about being disappointed with their lesser-of-two-evil options, people get all up in arms about the idea that we owe the Democratic Party our fealty.
Nobody owes anyone anything, but when given the choice between a fascist who wouldn’t mind seeing me dead vs. an establishment Democrat who doesn’t mind if I manage to survive just as long as the oligarchs get their tax breaks, I’ll go with the one who doesn’t want to actively take away my human rights every time, if for no other reason that it’s the better choice at that point.
So what the fuck are you doing BEFORE the general election? Or are you blowing the entire process off and then feeling smug about not voting for the lesser-of-two-evil THEREBY HELPING THE GREATER EVIL WIN.
- 8 days
How DARE he not vote Blue no MATTER who!
-People who voted for INDEPENDENT ANDREW CUOMO!
- Ludicrous0251@piefed.zipEnglish8 days
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off
Despite the misleading title, he is saying “vote blue no matter who” just without the (cringe) soundbite. Sure he’s not explicitly specifying what party to vote for but the intent of the two messages is the same - at a certain point in the election process, there are only two people who have any shot at winning. You must vote for one even if you hate them both. Abstaining may as well be a vote for the worst candidate.
Vote with your heart in the primary. Vote with your head in the general.
“ if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch.”
Perfectly put and this is all I have been saying.
I can’t square this with his previous statement that he didn’t vote for Kamala. I don’t care if it’s California. He has a platform and in my personal opinion it is irresponsible to use that platform to provide cover for people who could have helped stop this, and found a reason not to.
Sorry if I blasphemed Lord Tom. I eagerly await my downvotes for having done so.
- 7 days
Well here he is applying nuance. He can vote that way thanks to the realities of California. He is trusting the audience to understand that nuance of that stance.
It’s a tricky one, since on the one hand he may be overestimating the electorate, but on the other folks inclined to listen to him may internalize the nuance and not get alienated by assumptions that he is selling out. I’m leaning towards the latter since he at least is calling people to vote instead of some blindly anti electoral take, which is fairly prominent in the online discourse.
- 7 days
I’ll be honest, most of the people I see critiquing elections or candidates like Kamala have nuance to their views. Which makes sense, because it takes reflection and thought to break with the normal for most people.
On the other hand, I see tons of binary “any criticism is anti-electoralism and literally fascist” takes online that totally lack nuance. Which also makes sense, because when confronted with a break in normality, most people tend to react emotionally, not logically.
- 7 days
I dont see that at all. Every kamala hater ive seen have nothing but genocide on their minds.
Lol just a couple posts down from yours
- 7 days
Sure, that’s a hard line for many people who vote with their conscious, and probably most protest voters agonized over the decision, knowing that in our system it could help Trump (although, as it turns out, even if every single third party vote went to Kamala, it still would not have been enough for her to win — protest voters are a tiny demographic).
That’s still more nuanced than “Blue no matter who” or “nothing but genocide on their minds.” (As if genocide isn’t a huge fucking thing that should break every politician who supports it, but that’s a separate argument.)
- 7 days
I was downvoted to hell for saying this on the original post.
It is a privilege to be able to “vote with your conscience” when you’re life isn’t literally hanging in the balance of that vote.
Whether we like it or not, we are a two party system at the moment and voting third party in a presidential election is a wasted vote. I don’t care what anyone else says.
As cool as Tom is he still has the privilege of voting as white man, which is a very different experience compared to the rest of us.
- 5 days
If Dem candidates support zionist racism they will lose.
Dont harp on the voters as if they are the problem here. Harris could have won that election by not taking aipac money, but she chose the money. She chose to shout down student protestors. She also chose to parade around stages with Liz cheney talking about prayer and her glock. She made a lot of odd choices, and then she lost every single swing state and every demographic of the dem voting base declined.
The reality here is that many Dem voters will just not vote for crimes against humanity, even if you euphamistically call it “strategic” voting. They do not care what you say, and you cant finger wag your way to convincing them to pull the lever for a genocider. I’m afraid thats the reality we live in, so maybe you should concentrate on pressuring Dem candidates to not lose a third of their base to idiocy.
I can’t believe that this era of extreme Trump bullshit, war on Iran, Trump supporting Israel 100, we still have people acting as if being aligned with Israel is the reason to not vote for a Democrat, despite them being far better on three dozen other issues.
