No. Consumer framing is precisely the wrong framing for this. It’s not buying a box of corn flakes.
The franchise exists as a civic right, but moreover, as a responsibility to pick the best leadership for your country. You owe your country that. You owe your fellow citizens that. When you fail to deliver, you’re surrendering that responsibility to those who deserve it least.
People really need to learn to separate the responsibilities of democracy from the invisible hand of the market. They’re not the same, and the misunderstanding leads to, well, Trump.
You know what? I don’t need to count these people to judge them. A wrong, selfish choice is a wrong, selfish choice. Did it swing the last election? Maybe, maybe not, but regardless, this has to be called what it is.
I didn’t use consumer framing. You’ve just chosen to interpret my remarks that way as a jumping off point.
In terms of responsibility to pick the best leadership, some people might see that as spanning multiple elections. That ticking a box on the basis of “not as bad as the other guys” could be strategically worse than giving that party a lower majority, or even a loss, if it means next time they actually campaign on the issues you care about.
I’ll say again, because I know what the responses are likely to be: I told everyone I could to vote democrat. But I understand the reasons why some sat it out.
Or maybe the party will write you off as a non-voter and ignore you.
Think about it - some people don’t vote because they care about issues; other people don’t vote because they’re lazy fucks. How can political parties know which group you belong to?
I’ve already documented that leftist supporters of the Republican Party make up an electorally relevant share. See above discussion of Green Party voting.
Pew says the 4% of the country are members of the progressive left. We’ve already documented that 0.25% - 2.9% of the country supports Republicans by voting Green. On either end, that’s a decent chunk of that 4%. The Left tends to have high voting turnout. But 14% of them didn’t vote in 2020. So add those to the group being pitted in the OP.
.14*.04= 0.56%, not electorally trivial. So pit them!
I’ve pitted Green voters here in the past. There’s at least one former Green voter who is still active here. But he doesn’t need the pitting as he is responsible and intelligent. And let’s not dismiss the topicality of screaming into the void.
More seriously, during my 2024 GOTV activity I encountered a handful of potential leftie nonvoters, but while memorable they were few in number. But 2024 was hardly a landslide, so every tenth of a percentage point counts.
It’s not fair, but yes. If you don’t vote, next time they’ll look for votes in the center, which is bigger and easier to win over. If you do vote, maybe they’ll try not to lose you.
The two parties are not the same. Republican extremists can pull their party to the right, but the best progressives can do is delay the Democrats’ slide to the center. You can’t do that by not voting.
Jesus. Here, I’ll put in the years to help you: …creating the ACA marketplace and extending dependent coverage to 26 (2010), creating Medicare drug price negotiation (2022), adding insulin caps for seniors (2022), expanding the ACA subsidies (2021), adding a child tax credit that reduced poverty by a huge chunk (before the GOP gutted it) (2021), and expanding broadband to rural areas (2021).
Lol silly naive schmuck. You actually think the Weimar Republic wasn’t just as fascist as the Nazis? That’s hilarious. Everyone knowa the so-called Social.Democrats really just “wolf in sheeps clothing” crypto fascists, just like the National Socialists except they were open about it. it made no difference to anyone in Europe when they got elected.
Because you don’t just not vote for them - you also tell them why you’re doing that. Can’t think of anything less indicative of being a “lazy fuck” than writing to your (potential) political representatives.
Even in safely blue state anyone who didn’t want another Trump sh*tshow should have voted for Harris. Trump made a lot of hay out of the fact that he got the most votes of any candidate even though it was only a plurality.
If we have to lose the Electoral College, it’s better to at least achieve a popular vote majority, as this shines a light on the unfairness of the College, and makes it easier to counter Trump’s claims of an “overwhelming mandate”.
Although there is some overlap, more than “leftist purists” it was the “peace purists” who let Trump win. I began dreading this outcome as soon as the 10/7/23 terrorist attacks, because I knew that Israel would retaliate in an enormously asymmetrical manner, and that the United States would be supporting Israel no matter what.
So for the next year, I read again and again where Green Party voters were raging and ranting about the genocide and how they couldn’t vote the Democratic ticket. One person I met on another platform said he was voting Green, and when I looked at his profile I saw that he was a US-UK-EU multiple citizen. It must be fucking nice to have two dozen other countries you can move to. Yeah, I get that genocide is bad, but just maybe world peace is a tiny bit less important than maintaining civil rights and social progress at home.
And the ultimate irony is that now we are at war with Iran, hand in hand with Israel, and we have a president who is quite clearly insane, demented, or both. Or maybe he’s simply been as stupid as a bag of hammers from the get-go.
Okay, but if we’re being fair about rhetoric, then revise yours here:
Because absolutely nobody ever claimed that anybody was “owed a vote”, and despite your protestations to the contrary, this absolutely is part of the consumer-brained idea that a vote is a thing of value that you possess which the candidate has to “earn”.
The beneficiary of the vote is the country. Not you, not the candidate, not some other country, full stop. We’re all downstream of those things, but your obligation is to the country because it’s the thing you have to live with in the long term.
I don’t really care what you did or didn’t tell anyone else to do, I’m addressing the harmful tropes and rhetoric you’re using here and now in this thread, which does support the harmful consumer-minded attitude that many used to rationalize their non-voting.
Then we evaluate that strategy based on (a) the risk assessment, and (b) the expected outcome. If we’re taking 2024 as an example, then the risk assessment was that one might gesture toward a candidate that might crush every cause you care about, in an attempt to coerce your views on the other candidate.
With that candidate being Donald Trump, the tail risk was absurdly destructive relative to the expected gain, which was proved out by the outcome of him getting elected and, as predictably as the sunrise, offering to pave Palestine to build beachfront condos to complete the work that Israel started. It was a stupid strategic gamble, we all said it at the time, and we were right.
It’s a standard turn of phrase with none of the implications that you are suggesting. For example, if someone says “I don’t owe you an explanation” does that entail a “consumer-brained idea”?
Instead of trying to put words in people’s mouths maybe debate what they’re actually saying?
And I think your rhetoric is harmful. Trying to relitigate past elections and beat up on other members of what should a coalition is the path to further defeat. Instead, we should be soberly looking at the mistakes of the campaign and, more importantly, what can do better next time.
You may be right on this point though – since even Trump being elected again has been insufficient for some democrats to think maybe they should reach out to those concerned about genocide.
LOL oh I’m sorry. You actually think the 1933 election of ADOLF HITLER was an elections where both sides were facist. Sorry I called you pro fascist when in fact you are literally pro Nazi and pro Adolf Hitler.
Saying “well akshually both sides are fascists” about ADOLF HITLER some both sideism that even the GOP would shy away from.
