politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
If the apathetic voted it’d be over.
If all these leftists that don't vote in protest actually voted, it'd be over. Not just this election, for decades. It would have been a wildly different history.
That too. My buddy is still angry not voting even after 2016. Because he’s still pissed about the two party system. Fair, but you’re not fixing anything.
What a fool. Anyone not voting has no voice and has no right to complain. Nobody will pay attention to them because they offer no action. At that point they may as well be a foreign citizen for the amount of power they hold in the US elections.
Well some foreign powers wield a decent amount of influence on US elections and politics...
He can bemoan the two party system. But if they want to move anything they need to vote. Assuming he wants to move things left, then it's vote for Dems.
Does he at least vote in the Primary? Love it or hate it, that's our version of ranked choice voting. Vote for the preferred candidate (someone who supports actual RCV I assume) and then see if you can stomach the winner of the party.
Not fixing anything indeed.
Https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo
Refreshing that Lemmy seems to understand first past the post.
Which is why it is very important to understand that tankies are not leftists.
They are agents (willing or stupid) of foreign powers who advocate for fascism. And it is in the interests of their masters (mostly Xinnie the pooh and putin) to encourage leftists to disenfranchise themselves.
No, it wouldn't. It's very difficult to quantify how many people don't vote as a protest vs. don't vote out of apathy, but the Green Party, Libertarian Party, and all other third parties combined took home less than 2% of the total vote in the last Presidential election. Even if we assumed that just as many people were staying home in protest, and that they were entirely made up of disgruntled leftists, that would only maybe affect the outcome of some swing states if the numbers are unevenly distributed. It certainly wouldn't remake history.
The internet (and Lemmy especially) might be full of high-minded leftists claiming they stay home on moral principle, but the majority of people who don't vote are just tired, working class people who have to squeeze voting in around work and family on a random Tuesday. If you want them to turn out, you have to give them a candidate that speaks to them enough that they'll take time out of their day vote. (Well, that or a make mail-in voting universal in all 50 states, or make voting day a federal holiday, or a bunch of other things that will never get through Congress.)
I think president Gore would have been a very different (and better) history. Ditto Hilary.
Well, again, it's pretty hard to quantify how many people are not voting on principle, but again, if we use third-party voters as a guide, that's probably not true. For Hillary, analysis shows that even if every single Jill Stien voter had gone to Clinton, she still would have needed to win over 50% of Gary Johnson's voters (who were obviously unlikely to consider themselves leftists) to win..
Bush and Gore is different, since Bush won by 537 votes in Florida, so sure, if the Nader voters had gone to Gore, he would have won. You could probably also assume that there were 537 disgruntled leftists who decided to stay home as well, but with a margin that small, almost anything could have changed the outcome. If all the voters who stayed home with a cold went out and voted Gore might have won.
You're working from a premise that there's a large contingent of leftists who are withholding their vote on principle, and if they just voted, the Democrats would always win. But there's no data to assume that's true, and it's just as likely that there are as many conservatives doing the exact same thing. So what's point here? If only all the leftists who didn't vote on principle came out, but all the conservatives who didn't vote on principle still stayed home, things would be different? You could blame pretty much any group for your candidates' loss with logic like that.
Ever heard the saying conservatives fall in line? So no I don't think conservatives are doing the exact same thing.
Well, if it's a platitude it must be true.
Singer of my band in 2000,
"well if my green party vote gets a Republican elected, the pendulum swings further right which forces the left to activate,"
surprised Pikachu at GOP stealing election,
status quo shifts right in all levels of the courts for quarter century,
leftists learn Gaza exists,
rinse, repeat
Literally accelerationism.
I don't know what that is
Letting the right win, because they'll make things so bad that the revolution has to happen. Doesn't work. What actually happens is that the right squeezes tighter to maintain control until the country is in ruins.
Yeah, that sounds accurate
As a person from country with multiple-party parliamentary system, I have bad news for you. It is not really guarantee of anything.
most of the far left perpetually online leftists are just part of the horseshoe theory.
I've just said this recently (like earlier today), but its not necessarily apathy.
Many people had to work multiple jobs, couldn't get a vote by mail option, their local polling place had too few voting booths relative to the number of voters, etc, etc.
As soon as mail in voting became accessible, the number of voters actually voting jumped massively.
Preventing access to voting is an international act, and dismissing people as just being apathetic for not having the time to wait a few hours to vote (because kids, work, etc) is part of that intention.
Don't just be dismissive. Support a national holiday for election day. Support politicians who want to keep mail in voting for all. And don't look down on people who are put into situations where voting instead of showing up to work could make them lose their jobs.
Exactly. People share articles every week about Republican voter suppression tactics like limiting polling locations and creating voter ID laws, then turn around and whine when voters don't show up for their candidates. Even if you aren't a victim of these laws, if you have to vote in person, you usually have 12 hours on a weekday to vote. If you work 8 hours a day, and you commute an hour each way, that's 2 hours to vote. For a working-class person with a family, that's a big ask. That's time they normally spend making dinner for their kids and getting ready for the next day. Voting is a right, but having the time to do it a luxury.
Your voting experience really needs an upgrade.
We have a holiday to go vote - well, 3 hours off - and our setup is so simple that we have polling stations everywhere. When we get there it's usually a 5-minute process. The whole thing is over by that night.
This whole "standing in line for hours" thing is just weird, y'all.
Agreed.
My polling station is great, I'm in and out in 15 minutes. I work from home, and in the past when I didn't, I just used mail in voting.
Not everyone is lucky enough to have those options.
It's usually a 5 minute process in TX too, people just wait until the very last minute to cast a vote.
We have had a 2 week voting period since 1980, we were actually the first state to allow an early voting period. The polls are Aldo legally required to be open at least 9 hours the first week and at least 12 hours the second week and final day of voting. If there's even a line during the first 2 weeks, it's 10 minutes max. People just drag their feet and then complain to everyone else, which keeps people from voting.
TX has 2 weeks to vote. There's never a line longer than 10 minutes if there's a line at all, except for the final day. It's definitely apathy, waiting until the last day.
This year, polls will be open from Oct 21- Nov 1, with a final day to cast a vote on Nov 5. Polls will be open at least 9 hours the first week and at least 12 hours (typically 7AM-7PM) during the second week and final day of voting. Polling hours and locations can be checked at www.votetexas.gov once they are released in October. Some polls may be open on the weekend as well!
Great info for Texas, thank you. Early voting during that second week is my favorite. The first few days, there may be some small lines (depending on local population, etc). But that's usually a good sign. If Texans voted appropriately, could even demand (gasp) mail-in ballots. For now, just thankful they haven't taken early voting...
If they got rid of early voting, then TX wouldn't be able to brag about being the first state to allow early voting (established 1980).
We could even demand rank-choice voting or flip the State Supreme Court (there are 3 seats up for election this year). Given that all US and TX representatives are up for election, as well as 1 US senator and 15 state senators, we could be close to flipping the legislative branch blue too.
Here's a full list of offices for election this year: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/2024/offices2024.shtml
Ah, who cares about them.