you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 10 hours ago (4 children)

So people who don't vote actually dont endorse a candidate. This is a bit of an advanced piece of politics, but the way voting in the US works is you vote for a candidate and if you dont vote for someone, then they dont get your vote.
Your logic rests on an assumption that the democrats are owed your vote, which they aren't. Had Harris won, then you wouldnt be saying the people who didnt vote passively endorsed her, but they would have done that just as much.
Those who don't vote are in fact doing the opposite of endorsing anyone, they are signalling apathy with the system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    And yet a candidate still wins so you either contribute to the lessening of evil or you dont. There is no sitting out of reality

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 hours ago* (2 children)

    Because the only political action one can take is vote, alright 🫩
    You dont contribute to "lessening" evil by voting for a genocider.

    You talk about sitting out of reality, yet you exist in some fantasy land where democrats haven't made everything much much worse

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 hours ago (1 child)

    The only one that matters in the current reality. Yes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

    Not really, no. Your ahistoric approach to politics where you only think of the specific immediate moment is how we got here, and that thinking is how we stay here.
    There are plenty of viable alternatives with a decent organisational structure already. One way to help them grow is to vote for them, and that is better use of a vote than wasting it on fascist genociders.

  • source
  • parent