this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
1393 points (93.6% liked)
tumblr
3451 readers
350 users here now
Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.
Our Rules:
-
Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.
-
Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.
-
Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
-
No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.
Sister Communities:
-
/c/[email protected] - Star Trek chat, memes and shitposts
-
/c/[email protected] - General memes
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with guaranteeing your vote is that politicians take your vote for granted. They also take it as approval of their policies (like, you know, genocide).
They don't. No vote is taken for granted. We know this because every campaign has to do GOTV every election. If you ever worked a campaign you know that voters leaning your direction are very frustrating because they will agree with everything you say and then just not show up to vote.
People protest to make themselves feel better. If you lean left you can just call up Democrats in Congress and tell them how you feel. They will listen.
Fix your party in the primaries. Support it during the general.
yea the voicemail listened so well and didn't interrupt me at all, except to tell me that there is no more room for messages.
I don't get this "call your reps" take I see everywhere from people arguing that it's the best and only way to be heard when literally I have been doing it for half a decade and no. No it doesn't. Not when elections are guaranteed whether they listen or not.
right, cause the stonewall riots didn't catalyze the dying lgbtq+ movement that was originally only made up of white gay cis men "calling democrats" and trying to be respectable. sure thing bud
And if you think they didn’t overwhelmingly vote dem every time you’re sorely mistaken
The point of guaranteeing your vote in the general election is to make yourself and your interest group an invaluable base of support anyone in the party will need to succeed in a general election. Once the party has been made dependent on your group, you can pressure them via primaries, running and voting for your own candidates, making yourself and your interest group an invaluable base of support to win in a primary election.
We've actually seen this happen in real-time with MAGA, which has virtually taken over the GOP. They vote red in every general election, participate in every primary, and as a result are vastly overrepresented in the GOP. The difference of course, is they're reactionary authoritarian nationalist, and we're not.
This isn't specific to MAGA, they're only special because we've been able to watch their take over of the party, and now slowly burn it down with incompetence and unpopular policy. These changes have happened to both parties in the past, many times, and in parties all over the world.
What's the alternative? Not voting so others will decide for you. Even if you don't like both candidates, you probably hate one more than the other.
Then it's a problem comparison issue. Ethically, you go with the least problematic candidate.
I believe the middle ground is to vote a spoiled ballot. Which is to say, vote but leave the entry for the slots with no good candidate blank. Your participation is registered. Your approval of individual candidates is withheld. The message is loud and clear.
However this primarily works in systems where the elections are already fair and equitable, and it is simply a subset of candidates who suck.
The fundamental problem with the US electoral system - particularly wrt the electoral college - is that volume of participation doesn't really matter. I can vote for Trump. I can vote for Biden. I can vote Third Party. I can leave it blank. I can not-vote. Trump is still going to carry my state of Texas, guaranteed.
My support for the winner of the electoral delegates is implicit in residency, it is not a function of my participation at the ballot.
Volume does matter, though. It enough people vote blue in Texas districts, the result goes the other way and overwhelming turnout can even defeat the bias of gerrymandering.
With the EC, the number of votes in any district boils down into just the winner of that district, which I think is what you're saying, but it doesn't negate the activity behind it. Granted, this simplification is problematic still because districts are not the same and it ignores relative district sizes. Votes still matter because we don't know what will actually happen in each race.
Texas is historically a pretty conservative state demographically, so it would not be a surprise for Trump to win there. That's democracy working as it should (despite flaws) to represent as many people as it can. Democracy needs people to participate and give a coordinated equal push towards our goals, and we might be surprised by how different the results could be if we all believed in it and worked together.
Then we'd be California. But we're not. Republicans still beat Dems on registration alone by a good 10-pts.
Combine that with voter caging in red districts and state harassment of voting officials in blue districts, high profile prosecution of black voters, deceptive robocalls, and straight up old fashion voter intimidation at polls, and you get a state that will remain solidly red into the foreseeable future no matter how bright blue Houston, Austin, and Dallas shine.
Even that is predicated on Texas voters continuing to support Democrats, when Democrat elected reps - from Liz Fletcher to Henry Cuellar to Ryan Guillen - drift increasingly right-wing in their politics even as their districts gain liberal votes.
A state that splits 60/40 on an issue, but represents as 100% homogeneous by way of elected representatives, is not "democracy working as it should". It is a deliberate subversion of democracy, for the purposes of limiting enfranchisement and minimizing the influence of minority voting blocs.
Our version of democracy is flawed, yes, I agree. We can talk all day about what is working against us and how it looks like it won't win.
What I'm advocating for, though, is participating despite that. We need learn to work with the system as it is because there's not much time to change it. Election reform, though, is my top priority going into the next presidency.
The system doesn't value your participation when it is run by people who hate you. Ritually pantomiming democracy is something you do for your own anxiety. It has no impact on the outside world.
We need a system within to work. But the current system is actively harming its community. Working in the system means being this guy
Going to shut down these awful casinos with my winnings, as soon as I hit the jackpot.
Write "genocide" as your write in candidate.