If both parties are the same then why is one party trying to do every possible thing to make it difficult for certain groups of legal US citizens to simply vote, let alone challenge every single outcome where they don’t win?
Well see this guy I know says that its better to not vote because then youre playing into their hand and you should just be an individual, because all campaigns are just a money funnel to see who can make the most money, and the government creates monopolies with corporations so we need to get rid of government and instate a king.
Actual words I heard today. Jfc people be dumb.
They’re only spending like ten dollars of real people money
I’m so tired of having to choose between the lesser of two evils. It’d be nice to vote for someone I’d actually want for a change.
One party sends paramilitary in black vans to kidnap innocent children (because the governor of that city dared to challenge Dear Leader). Oh and their leader is a child rapist.
The other party candidate had a weird laugh. Wow, hard choice isnt it.
Reposting my own comment here:
I live somewhere with 2 Republicans on the ballot for one seat with no write in line.
I could have not voted at all on that item, but that wouldn’t have helped anybody but the worst of the two candidates.
I poured through more interviews and candidate statements from these two trashy people than any other candidate I voted for, just to find the one that was the least evil.
I still hate them both, but I voted for one to try and stem the bleeding because that’s how our Democracy works.
And adding a quote from Rage Against the Machine’s Tom Morello:
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.
If this is your situation and you can’t even vote for the lesser of two evils or tactfully, you can spoil your ballot. It shows that you are not represented by the options given but also still believe in the need for representation and the democratic system. I drew a box that said none of the above.
Remider that voting in a Democracy is the bare minimum.
Everday citizens can protest, attend town halls, call their elected officials (or their opponents) and make their views heard. You can donate money, and if you can’t donate money, you can donate time, and if you can’t donate time, you can bring attention to issues that you want to change in your everyday life.
Voting is the most important thing you can do right now, but don’t forget the other stuff. Behind every politician is a team, behind that team are supporters, and behind the supporters are voters. You get to choose your level of engagement.
No shame on people that only vote. That’s better than 4 out 5 other Americans this year.
You could have shit on your ballot and left it there
Presumably an unopposed seat on a ballot proves some generalized point about elections or America or something.
It’s California. There’s an open primary, I happen to live in one of the few red parts and for one spot the top two vote getters in the primary were Republican.
They didn’t run unopposed, the opposition just all failed to get a consensus. CA’s system isn’t perfect, but realistically a Democrat doesn’t have a chance in this particular district, maybe the less evil Republican has a shot though.
US elections involve some compromise. Vote for your ideal candidate in the primary, but after that there’s generally only 2 people who have any shot at a given seat, and throwing away your vote in protest helps the worst candidates succeed. That’s why elections spend so much money on attack ads - they want you feeling discouraged.
Saved
And I keep saying that if stemming the bleeding is the best we can hope for, then that’s how democracy fails. Vote for the slightly-better candidate, by all means, that’s the best move in the here-and-now. But, unless we change the rules, it’s gonna be the same best move next time, too, and the patient only has so much blood.
Morello makes a very Utilitarian argument. The trouble is that it works equally well when your choice is between Hitler, who wants to murder 5,000,000 people, and Hitler Lite, who wants to murder 4,999,995 people. It makes all the difference for those 5 people, and voting for Hitler Lite is the best move.
This cartoon symbolizes one election cycle. We can argue about how many people should be depicted on the siding, but since there are 16 people on the main line, the Utilitarian argument works even if there are up to 15. And that’s what’s been happening: Labor got tied to the tracks in the '70s with the election of Jimmy Carter. Poor people joined them with the election of Bill Clinton. Palestine as a whole got tied to the tracks next to them in 2024. And now, they’re flirting with adding trans people to the line-up. And, no, that does not obviate the fact that the Republicans are indeed worse.
But that’s beside my point. This cartoon doesn’t depict the erosion of democracy and the crumbling of civil institutions. That can only go on for so long before the whole system fails.
Tankies are bad people. Just to let you know
That’s great, but my comment has nothing whatsoever to do with tankies.
I don’t see a meaningful difference between accelerationist types
If our .ml friends could read, they’d be very upset right now.
I’ve blocked a bunch of election trolls. In threads like these I can almost feel their presence.
Tankies when you mention any democrat
They both bomb the middle east.
They also both breathe air. Wait a minute, do YOU breathe air too??
You’re right.
All people are awful and none of them should be in charge.
The analogy that bombing poors is to the commander in chief as breathing is to normal people is probably a little more based than you meant it to be
Cool. Though I don’t know why you’re telling me since that’s not an analogy I drew.
What a clown-ass comment.
What’s a few wars of aggression between friends? What does it matter how many hundreds of thousands of people you kill, who’s counting?
B-but Trump bulldozed the East Wing of the White House! That’s what really matters!
Millions. They’ve killed millions within the last few decades and hurt many millions more.
There people care more about price of gas and some rose garden than many millions killed in their name.
Fkn deplorables have the nerve to get mad at anyone criticizing the Democrats instead of getting mad at their party for facilitating and funding a fkn genocide in front of our eyes.
I agree that the real number is higher, I only say hundreds of thousands because it is irrefutable that at least that many died, it’s horrific regardless of the exact number, and I want to avoid getting sidetracked by an argument about the details of who to count or what sources are more reliable.
That’s totally what I said, excellent reading comprehension, air breather.
Yes, it is.
“How can you possibly compare Ted Bundy to Jeffery Dahmer? So what if they were both serial killers, they both breathed air too, hEy, DoN’t YoU bReAtHe AiR?”
Dumbest shit I’ve read in a long while.
You accidentally a word there, mate.
are you discriminating against people that breathe oxygenated perflourocarbons?
Not at all. I always failed Chemistry though, should I?
Why are you dismissing the genocide in Palestine as though it’s as benign as breathing?
Because the victims are mostly muslims. The Christian ones aren’t following white European Christianity, they mostly follow the old creeds so they don’t matter. They’re “sand people” and beneath the ubermensch.
Most of the USians and a significant number in the western sphere don’t even acknowledge the genocide. They’re mad at the protesters who bitch and complain about the genocide. They’re okay with zionists murdering every single Palestinian in existence. Gas prices matter more than number of innocents slaughtered.
They can read just fine, the problem is we don’t use the Cyrillic alphabet
Arabic and Chinese are also acceptable to them.
I don’t think the idea that certain wings of the capitalist class coalesce around different capitalist parties and therefore invest in elections heavily is antagonistic to the idea that neither party represents the interests of the working class. Capitalists are not a monolith, so they duke it out electorally, but workers end up getting crumbs at most regardless of who wins at the ballot box. It makes far more of a difference for them than it does for us.
Also think it’s funny that socialists supposedly can’t read, while also reading too much. “The enemy is both weak and strong,” yadda yadda.
And yet .ml has been screeching pretty much non-stop about how elections are pointless and have no effect. And don’t flatter yourself, your silly rabble doesn’t anywhere near rise to a level of “enemy”.
I’m sorry but I’m not a capitalist, whoever wins the election will continue the genocides in Palestine and Cuba, will continue the attacks around the world, will perpetuate a failing capitalist system that does not and cannot meet the needs of the people, that will not respect treaties with indigenous nations, and will not represent the working class. Elections matter most of all to the ruling class, as it picks which wing of the capitalist class will get to rule, not whether workers benefit or not.
As for socialists not rising to the level of enemy, the capitalist state certainly seems to disagree with you.
I was talking about elections in general, not the US midterm elections specifically. I actually agree that the US political system is deeply fucked up and the midterms will not bring any fundamental change. But the US are not the only country on earth and an imperfect democratic system can be improved. The kind of dictatorship you people would replace it with is definitely just going to make everything worse.
Cuba
Doubt, the US was slowly improving relations with Cuba. A lot of that was undone in Trump’s first term. Fixed a bit under Biden, and now it’s absolutely horrible.
Quite literally there was an option last cycle that would have prevented what’s happening in Cuba.
As for respecting Indegious nations perhaps you should talk to some Natives. Biden’s term the Secretary of the Interior was a Native American. Her name was Deb Haaland, absolutely amazing woman. Under her guidance she protected many important indigenous sites, expanded tribal consultants (and made their say matter), and renamed countless places back to their indigenous names. Never before had the Tribal Nations been this respected. Now that Trump won he’s replaced her with an oil guy pushing an “energy dominace” agenda. Which means expanding the exploitation of federal lands for oil, gas, mining, and timber. He’s delisted several protected sites so their resources can be exploited and slashed tribal consultation.
And this is what pisses me off about people spreading the rhetoric you do. You don’t actually care about minorities or oppressed people in the slightest. You use their suffering to justify your own political agenda. Were things perfect? No there’s a long list of issues that we likely would agree on, but many things were clearly better for many marginalized groups before Trump and there was an option to keep those positive changes in place. Yet you threw up your hands declared both sides are the same and allowed the poor and oppressed to become worse off. Minorities shouldn’t be your pawns for political rhetoric. Fake ally
No, relations with Cuba were not improving. The Obama administration was working to undermine the Cuban political project, and both the Obama admin and Biden admin continued the sanctions regime on Cuba. Biden performatively removed Cuba from the state sponsors of terror list right at the end, because he knew it would get struck down. You also clearly have not spoken with indigenous peoples. Making token gestures is not at all the same as respecting prior treaties and decolonizing Turtle Island.
I care deeply about the struggles in Cuba, Palestine, and indigenous struggles here. I devote my time and money to organizing for a better world, because I know these are not problems that can be solved under capitalism. Minority nationalities shouldn’t be your pawns for political rhetoric. Get in the streets, get organized, and stop treating the tokenizing of minorities under democrats that then perpetuate their butchery and oppression as liberation.
Do better. Join an org, and stop defending the capitalist class and their cronies.
Token gestures? I’ve worked closely with several tribal members in my time. They appreciated the work being done under Haaland. It was putting control of Native Lands back in to Native hands and restoring treaty agreements. Real tangible improvements in tribal sovereignty. That was undone instantly by Trump.
I’m sorry about Turtle Island whichever one you’re referring to, but neither candidate would do anything about that. But we had a candidate that was going to continue to expand tribal relations and tribal sovereignty within the US. Anyone that actually cared would have wanted this to continue, but I suppose the sovereignty and rights of Native American tribes isn’t as flashy for your rhetoric
What’s necessary, and what indigenous groups have been demanding for centuries now, is for every treaty to be respected. What they need is the full right of self-determination, up to and including secession. This has been demanded. The reservation system isn’t sovereignty, it’s apartheid. You’re describing these relations the same way Zionists describe relations with the Palestinian Authority.
It isn’t about “flash,” it’s about what’s both necessary and possible. We absolutely can decolonize Turtle Island (the north American continent), but Democrats and Republicans alike perpetuate settler-colonialism. Again, join an org, fight for a better world.
You know Cowbee cooked you good when you resort to calling it “silly rabble” instead of engaging.
Man, I feel so cooked already.
Elon Musk poured an eye-watering amount of money for the Republicans.
More money than Soros ever did which was the Republican boogeyman.
You have to counter that while you have the chance.
Here in Australia one of our wealthiest people, Gina Rinehart, is a very vocal supporter of a party, One Nation, who’s base is predominantly disenfranchised disadvantaged Aussie battlers.
Its nonsensical to me that even an idiot could think that a billionaires interests might align with their own.
Trying to discourage you from voting also counts as “influencing the outcome”
One single dude seriously spent half a billion on this midterm. He expects a return on that investment… Don’t oblige him.
Except…yes they would? Just because it’s a fortune to us, doesn’t mean it’s even remotely close to their definition of a ‘fortune’. It’s probably closer to being perceived as a kind of insurance for their many many lucrative investments
We’re for sale, and they’re buying. Imagine the good we could do with even just what they spend trying to influence us. Imagine the return they’re expecting on that investment. Imagine a better world.
Yeah it’s funny how this isn’t blindingly fucking obvious. Almost like “they’re all the same” bullshit just an excuse not to let real life take up time and effort they could use for gaming and online whining. Excuse me now while I complain about high food prices and order Wendy’s from Doordash.
Why are the billionaires also paying each party to appease them?
PREACH
Edit: For all the shortsighted doomer and tankie posters…
Voting is for more than just the federal level candidates. The ballot is usually packed with local initiatives and candidates. As it turns out, you WILL usually notice these impacts. So stop complaining and apathy posting about your dead horses.
Still vote even if it’s not for someone listed. Politicians aren’t going to capitulate so someone who isn’t willing to get off their ass and vote.
Still vote even if it’s not for someone listed.
No. This is a losing strategy as long as there is more than one person on the ballot. The proper strategy is to vote for the best of the available options that have any chance of winning. That is the nature of the first-past-the-post single-member-district system we have.
If you have the opportunity to pick between the two candidates who have any chance of winning and instead choose any other option, then you have taken the vote that could have gotten you an option you would have preferred over the other option you would not have preferred and wasted it, thus helping the option you prefer less to win.
what about the ones spending billions that don’t even care about the outcome? AIPAC is funding campaigns of both Dems and Reps, so clearly they don’t actually care about which party is in control, as long as their interests are properly represented.
and this isn’t exclusive to AIPAC. Many corpos spend money on both sides of the aisle. That’s because in America, corporate campaigning isn’t just about getting the person they want elected, it’s about making sure their agents are getting paid…
