10 hours
You must log in or register to comment.
- Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.worldEnglish12 minutes
Many of them use “both parties are the same” to rationalize not pausing their dooomscrolling long enough to vote.
- 59 minutes
I think things like voter suppression, access to information also weigh a lot heavier than some might think.
I’m also kind of wondering how they came up with this number of 11 million, if people are not politically motivated and activated but are still politically conscious enough to have priorities, there are systemic issues keeping them from voting. And especially at these large numbers, simply saying ‘well they should vote’ and being angry about them supposedly not voting won’t change a damn thing.
We don’t need to yell at people. We need to fucking strategize.
- 31 minutes
11 million are concerned about it.
11 million are not concerned enough to be inconvenienced by any remedies.
1 hourI see everyone going to blaming parties or whatever but its like no one considers that they are just complacent. If people wanted they could fundamentally change the way they live their lives to make things better for everyone else and remarkably more difficult for themselves. Why they dont is self evident.
- 2 hours
Both candidates were pro war. War is the top polluting activity humans do. People chose not to vote last time because we had absolutely miserable candidate choices, an undemocratic primary, and formal war crimes support from our own party. Anyone who wags a finger after that shenanigans and talks about climate in isolation from the rest of it is missing the forest through the trees.
- 5 hours
Yeah, it’s a good thing both candidates were the same on every single issue, too, so there was literally no difference in picking between the fascist and the non-fascist. Fantastic job recognizing your duty to stick to one single issue where you feel they were the same!
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish4 hours
One thing you’ll eventually have to come to terms with is that it’s the government of the USA that is and has always been fascist and that the two parties aren’t going to stop the fascism that they both manage and benefit from. Biden had the Epstein files and did nothing. You think the voters are gonna stop fascism when the candidates are all fascists and fascist defenders?
- Pratai@piefed.caEnglish2 hours
Americans act on convenience. Nothing more. Most Americans talk shit but won’t follow up with action. Also they won’t protest in any way if it comes at a sacrifice to this convenience.
They’ll shout from the rooftops at everyone about how Meta sucks ass. But will not deactivate their accounts.
They’ll whine and cry about the fascist administration but will not vote against it if they don’t like the person running against it.
They’ll protest in the streets knowing it’ll do nothing, to move the needle, but refuse to do something so simple as not pay their taxes which absolutly WILL move the needle)
Americans won’t sacrifice. They just like to be seen being opposed to the things others stand against. It’s all a show. They’ll say a lot of shit, but they aren’t worth the words they say.
- 2 hours
ah yes. the best place to hear how it is to live in America is from…a Canadian.
it’s always a lemmy.ca user who’s vomiting this shit.
- Pratai@piefed.caEnglish2 hours
Did I say I was a Canadian? I live in Seattle bud. And have lived in America my entire 54 years. I know what I’m talking about. Maybe put away the knee-jerk assumptions and address the actual points I made.
Ad hominem is childish. Don’t be childish.
- 5 hours
if clearly motivated people don’t want to vote for you, it’s not an indication that they should lower their standards, it’s an indication that you should have standards to begin with
it’s cute how liberals here are so resilient to reality. people don’t care for slow, steady, painfully incremental progress (if even that) when every summer is so much hotter than the last one.
- 4 hours
Incremental progress is better than actively working to make things worse, but y’know, stick to your guns and help make SURE things get worse. Good job!
- 2 hours
i think you misunderstand
i’m not saying people shouldn’t vote (truthfully, i don’t care). i’m saying parties who want votes should have policies worth voting for.
y’all keep talking about how the “let’s not vote for the lesser evil because it’s still evil” voter strategy has lead to terrible results. why not talk about how the “let’s be the lesser evil instead of doing anything good that people would want to support” party strategy has lead to the same terrible results?
- 2 hours
The time to make that change is before the general election.
Anytime you’re presented with two choices, take the less bad option. But if that’s the only time you bother to act, or even worse, if you don’t even act THEN to pick the lesser bad option, then you are one less vote against the worse, and therefore by your actions support it. But you already supported it if you weren’t fighting for better options.
“Well, I didn’t pick which restaurant to visit very well, and this restaurant only has moldy fruit or sandwiches made literally from shit. I don’t like either option, so I’m just gonna eat whatever they bring me”. Sure, it’s not a great analogy in the sense that picking a different restaurant is not so easy in the context of politics, but I think it makes the point - always choose the lesser bad option. I’d rather eat the moldy fruit (we’re assuming that we must eat something in this metaphor) than the literal shit. And then work harder to try and prevent us from going to this restaurant next time. But if you are presented with the two bad options and one is worse, not picking an option is fucking stupid.
It seems like you actually believe anyone who thought Harris was a bad candidate voted for Rump?
That’s so simple- Funkt4st1c@lemmy.worldEnglish3 hours
Or they just didnt vote, yes.
2024 was a colossal failure for months before the election. They gave trump legitimacy by backing down “Sleepy Joe” biden, but didnt do it quick enough to hold a primary.
Democrats are fighting on being “the other guy” but thats not an identity. Theres a reason people love mamdani so much, and its because he has values.
But what if they voted for Harris, while thinking she was a terrible candidate? Did that possibly not occur to you?
- 3 hours
It’s a two party system and you have three choices.
Vote A
Vote B
Don’t vote.
Not voting is still an action. It means either option is fine, otherwise you would have voted for a specific candidate
But what if they voted for Harris, while thinking she was a terrible candidate? Did that possibly not occur to you?
- 6 hours
I think a more interesting question would be, regardless of someone’s priorities, why they don’t vote.
- 5 hours
I know for a lot of people it’s A. Didn’t feel like their vote mattered, B. None of the candidates matched their desires, I.e. non of the above earned their vote, whether by not lining up on issues, or being perceived to only give stated values lip service, C. Voter suppression, whether that be inability to go vote because work/schedule, voter roll purges, voter eligibility being repressed due to cost of documents, no transportation access to polling place, etc, D. Being too burnt out to even paying attention to politics/voting; or some combination of the above.
- 5 hours
Probably because both party do not care about climate, they should still at least vote for the green
- 4 hours
Oh yes, you can see by the voting records and what each party does with legislation to see they are exactly the same and both treat environmental issues exactly the same. I mean, if you ignore the voting records and what each party does, that is.
- 4 hours
Yes, I can see that Republicans are honest about not caring about climate and the Democrats pretend to care. You seem to want a one party system like China
- 2 hours
We only have one non-fascist party at the moment, so yeah. But you say that like anyone who prefers one party over another wants a one-party state like they don’t prefer one party over the other.
Find me non-fascist Republicans who are standing up for human rights and I’ll give them a shot, sure.
- 28 minutes
My comment talked about voting for a third party , you completely ignored it and claiming that I support voting for republicans. You basically say yes vote for only one party like China have. You have two terrorists parties who destroyed multiple democracies and countries.
- Manjushri@piefed.socialEnglish7 hours
Check any political thread here or elsewhere and you will hear a regular refrain of “both parties are the same” and “voting doesn’t matter because it’s all rigged!” A huge percentage of Americans have fallen for that line of bullshit and now don’t bother to vote at all no matter what they think is important. It’s a sad fact that propaganda works.
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish7 hours
The problem of low voter turnout precedes the Internet. Low voter turnout is a symptom of the problem, it is not the problem itself.
- 4 hours
Today I learned that propaganda isn’t older than the internet.
- 7 hours
It’s not simple enough to make that statement. You obviously get worse politicians when people don’t vote.
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish7 hours
Yeah, I don’t think that’s obvious at all. Voter turnout has very rarely been a deciding factor in elections, and the current analysis by researchers is that voter turnout doesn’t have partisan benefits. In essence, you get the same politicians regardless of voter turnout.
- 7 hours
An absolutely ridiculous thing for you to expect people to believe. So fucking transparent what you’re doing. Accelerationist bullshit.
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish7 hours
LOL. You have no idea what accelerationism is if you think that what I said is in any way related to accelerationism. You’re just regurgitating things you’ve heard without understanding. Here, do some reading:
https://www.uniteamerica.org/articles/report-most-americans-votes-dont-matter-in-deciding-elections
https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/does-high-voter-turnout-help-one-party
https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/forcing-people-vote-doesnt-change-outcome
- 4 hours
Bro, they’ve been told this many times, you think they care about definitions, lol?
- 52 minutes
Yup, it’s election season, time for every .ml user to make sure DT stays in office
- 7 hours
Yep, spot on. And you got downvoted for saying it so we know your comment struck a nerve with someone who says or believes that bullshit.
- 9 hours
Uno reverse card
If so many people who care about the climate don’t vote, then why don’t politicians take a stronger line on the issue to appeal to them?
- 8 hours
Exactly.
The United States has a problem with voter suppression, and a history of blaming societal problems on individuals to make it look like individual people are responsible instead of the people in charge.
- 7 hours
No one is going to open a restaurant where the target market is “people who don’t go to restaurants”. If you don’t vote you don’t matter to politicians and that’s all there is to it.
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish7 hours
Yeah, that’s not true at all. The hundreds of millions spent on voter mobilization, get out the vote, rock the vote, voter education, voter registration, and all attendant campaigns is such an obvious massive counter to your inispid narrative.
- 7 hours
The purpose of those programs is to increase turnout, not cater to the political leanings of likely non-voters. Dems don’t give a shit what those people want they just want them to vote because statistically they would vote for Dems. The issues important to those voters rarely come up which is exactly my point.
I don’t really expect a well reasoned response from someone going around saying things like “Europe can save Ukraine by disbanding NATO” though. Pull your head out of Putin’s ass and have your own thoughts.
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish7 hours
LOL. You’re fucking amazing. You came to the conclusion that voter turnout programs only exist because they want voters to vote for them but literally won’t do anything that those voters want? That’s your conclusion? You couldn’t reason your way out of a paper bag. Which makes sense because you think an American who has been raised by Americans in America and consumed all the same anti-Russian propaganda you have consumed our whole lives is somehow having someone else’s thoughts when they have thoughts that disagree with the propaganda you and I have both been raised on. You are doing the meme.
- 6 hours
If Dems primary concern is the will of their voters then why are they constantly doing things the majority of their voting base disagrees with? You’re acting like Dems know exactly what the people want when the central political problem in America for the last 15 years is that they either don’t know or don’t care.
Also, if your own thoughts are not Russian propaganda then why is what you’re saying matching Russian propaganda word-for-word? Disbanding NATO doesn’t help anyone but Russia and somewhere in that brain of yours you know that. You’re twisting words to make unreasonable things sound reasonable on both of these issues
- 6 hours
Disbanding NATO doesn’t help anyone but Russia and somewhere in that brain of yours you know that.
Pretty sure it would’ve helped the Libyans if the “defensive” alliance that waged an offensive war on them didn’t exist.
NATO is a tool of neocolonialism and there are countless neocolonies around the world that it harms. Even if it were “defensive” (which it absolutely isn’t) it maintains an oppressive status quo over the global majority and gives member states the ability to attack wantonly, without fear of retaliation.
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish6 hours
Oh, sorry, so you’re saying Dems are constantly doing things their voting base disagrees with? So then why should people vote for them? You’re not making a strong argument for your position there.
You think Russian propaganda is the only source of anti-NATO sentiment in the entire world? Have you heard of Heusinger? Are you aware of the controversial decisions to staff NATO with Nazi officers? Heusinger was never even tried at Nuremberg.
- 7 hours
No one is going to open a restaurant where the target market is “people who don’t go to restaurants”.
???
When you open a restaurant, the only target market is people who don’t go to your restaurant. Looking into how to expand your business to people who don’t already go to restaurants is absolutely a valid line of inquiry that companies persue all the time. Maybe the reason they don’t eat out because it’s too expensive, and you can appeal to them with lower prices. Maybe the reason they don’t eat out is because they don’t know how good your food is, and you can address that with free samples. Maybe they have dietary restrictions and you can appeal to them by adding vegan or gluten free options. Restaurants, like any business, are constantly looking for ways to break into new sections of the market. So your analogy falls completely flat.
Look at, for example, Little Caesars which at least back when I was in school had cheap ass $5 pizzas, they tasted like shit but they were $5 so being a broke ass college student I ate there all the time when I might otherwise have not eaten out at all. And that’s why they focused on keeping the price low instead of making it actually good. Because at $5, even groceries wouldn’t be much cheaper.
Likewise, if a political party is uninterested in appealing to people who don’t already vote for them, it must mean that they’re satisfied with their current level of support. Which, considering the Dems lost the last election, doesn’t exactly seem to be working. And what, do you think you’ll have better luck trying, again, to appeal to “moderate” Republicans? Let me know how that goes, lol.
- 6 hours
People who don’t eat at restaurants at all are obviously not the same as people who don’t eat at a restaurant that doesn’t exist. You said you understood that concept but then spent the rest of your comment describing people who want to eat at restaurants.
- freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish4 hours
This is what your commitment to your narrative has done to you. It has made you believe that there is a category of people who don’t vote because that is what they prefer, and you’re so committed that you are willing to make nonsense arguments that posit the existence of people who eat food but specifically will not and never will eat food if it’s in a restaurant.
Nothing about your narrative is reasonable. Give people something they want and they will pursue it
- 6 hours
People who don’t eat at restaurants at all are obviously not the same as people who don’t eat at a restaurant that doesn’t exist.
Legitimately don’t understand this word salad.
You said you understood that concept but then spent the rest of your comment describing people who want to eat at restaurants.
Someone who doesn’t currently eat at restaurants might start eating at them if the restaurants find a way to appeal to them. That’s not a complicated concept.
If I’m vegan, and no restaurants in my area offer vegan options, then I am someone who doesn’t eat at restaurants at all. If a restaurant opens up that does offer vegan options, or if an existing restaurant adds a vegan option, then I might start eating at restaurants. Do you not understand this concept?
Likewise, someone who doesn’t vote might start voting if they’re appealed to. This is equally uncomplicated.
- 9 hours
Neither party campaign’s on climate policy so the problem is the party, not the voter.
- 8 hours
Yeah but it’s peak lib to blame voters for not voting hard enough, instead of demanding the bare minimum from those in power.
SMH
- 8 hours
Not sure where you saw that but it’s actually central to the DNC platform.
Personally, I think this is more of a media diet issue. Climate policy isn’t very engagement-baitey so the Social media algorithms don’t push it.
- 5 hours
Platforms are not the problem, the problem is that most politicians do not really believe in implementing them
- 5 hours
Biden forced rail-workers - who were striking for safer conditions - back to work. Less than a year later, a train derailment caused a massive chemical spill is Palestine, Ohio.
- 32 minutes
Everyone conveniently leaves out he got them more sick days, etc. weeks later.
Make your point but let’s at least involve all the facts.
- 8 hours
You won’t be seeing much in the way of “climate change” messaging this time around because it’s been rolled into “reducing energy costs” messaging. Since LCOEs for solar and wind have fallen below natural gas plants, which were previously the cheapest if you ignored the SCC, politicians have decided to rebrand. Campaigning on cutting energy costs polls much better when the economy is in poor shape so this is more effective.
It’s also worth noting that the last time that Democrats controlled the legislature and the executive they took substantial action;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_Reduction_Act#Energy_and_climate_change
- 8 hours
Listen, existential threats are important and all, but there’s a trans kid who wants to play soccer, and I vaguely remember something about a tan suit, so… I think I’ll just sit this one out - surely my countrymen can be trusted to make the right decision!
Gotta have standards, ya know?
- 5 hours
The GOP brand is practically solid gold. No matter how shitty their members keep being, the average American voter will still see the party as reasonable and worthy of power. Massachusetts is the bluest of blue states but ask a neolib about a past republican government and they will talk about them like they were the only voice of reason. Complete disregard for the fact all of them left beind a fucking mess in lock step with their parties destructive principles and policy.
- 7 hours
You can really tell it’s election season, every thread on 4chan and reddit is about trans people in sports. Bots heavily pushing it.
