To let Trump win without any plan in place afterwards is extremely reckless, in my opinion. Also my opinion, it’s reckless to be so smug to people who don’t have the means to contribute millions to your campaign for advocacy, and practically have no choice but to vote for you.
I’m sick of people defending the powerful.
When I voted third party, it was because that candidate’s platform and policies seemed superior. It wasn’t a protest vote, but a sincere (if misguided) attempt to vote for the best candidate. I don’t know why this position is so hard to believe. Jill Stein’s positions are all excellent ones, to my mind, though her website is disgracefully thin on the practical details of how she would get any of that done. The Green Party platform is a little more fleshed out, and, again, aligns more closely with my ideals than the Democratic platform.
I am not endorsing her and won’t be voting for her: simply saying that if you look at what she claims to stand for, it’s not unreasonable to support her. People here seem to largely a priori rule out third parties, so it seems like making the choice between choosing to drive to work, choosing to take transit to work, or choosing to take an elephant with a comfortable howdah as if that were actually a realistic option. If you’re ignoring realpolitik and likely outcomes, though, you could easily choose a third-party candidate on their merits per their messaging (though many of them are, of course, loons).
If Trump wins swing states by more than the total of the Stein/West vote, those two will turn out to have been quite powerful. And if Biden loses, it probably will have something to do with those two powerful people. And if playing the blame game, I’d have to blame them.
I had a choice, and, in the Pennsylvania primary, I voted for Dean Phillips. I guess I’m lucky, because, AFAIK no one here has slammed me on it. (And if I missed it, thanks to all for keeping it that way!)
I plan to early vote for Biden this October, and have explained why. But I lean towards thinking it a mistake to tell other people how they should vote (even though I may have done it).
Sorry I missed the multiple mod notes when replying. 
Then vote for her in the primary. Because some protest votes in the actual election that her ticket loses will not encourage her to run. She will be seen as a loser who couldn’t help get her ticket across the finish line, she’ll be done for good.
Votes in the primary would show that she’s getting Democrats interested in making her the next candidate.
I’ll say it again and I hid your post.
When I read about the climate crisis and abortion I have to say my dismay at people who think the most important thing they can do with their every four years vote is to “send someone a lesson.”
Voting is low effort, as I have pointed out before. It’s also a blunt instrument. You have three choices, Biden, Trump, or not-voting or throwaway third party vote which amounts to a half vote for Biden and a half vote for Trump.
Hey fuckers. What do you think is going to happen to climate under Trump? We already know. He’s going to everything he can to reverse the gears, throw it all back to fossil fuels. You wanna roll the dice on four more years of that, possibly more? So you can inflate your own ego and have your own little power trip. Because that’s really what it’s all about.
Hey fuckers, you may not have the time and the opportunity you think you have. Wake the fuck up.
Re: climate change, what do you think is going to happen under Biden? Exactly what is happening now: half-assed mitigation with negligible effects. Trump was and would again be much worse, but exactly none of your options are actually making the difficult decisions that need to be made. Biden at least believes in it and is saying mostly the right things, but like everyone else is too afraid of hurting the economy to take it as seriously as he should.
There is no good choice for many such issues, only the lesser evil.
I agree I come from a place of privilege, and the rights of others are forefront when I’ll be voting for Biden.
My question is, to what degree are current law makers on the D side responsible for what’s happening now?
Or is it just the fault of the people? I mean, we can get into if people grew up with a better education due to better funding, then we may not be in this mess. What about Citizens United? Iraq War? Media Spin? Price Gouging? Stagnant wages? If the voter’s ignorant or apathetic, were they just born that way? It’s not like our Government is a daily fucking soap opera that Jumped the Shak years ago, right? It’s more than the physical act of voting. If it was so inconsequential, we wouldn’t care so much.
As much crap as I give people who don’t want to get a Covid shot, (and I do) it’s not inconceivable that people don’t trust our Government, the Media, or the Pharmaceutical Industry.
I DO NOT want Trump to win, but gaslighting people and making them out to be idiots… not a great look in my opinion.
How persuasive can you possibly be to folks that refuse to notice that a third party candidate has not been a viable option is any election in their lives?
But if Democrats won 2024 in a landslide, THAT is where you would get the most movement. There would be the imperative to pass shit because you’ve got the big majority.
The Democrats got the most stuff passed when they had the big majorities, in the 1930s and the 1960s. Obama had a big majority in 2008 and ACA got passed. Has anything like that gotten passed since? Why is that, why haven’t we seen more? Oh yeah, the Democrats need big majorities to do that.
If you want major action on climate change or anything else you need a big majority in this democracy.
You have to recognize that the other side also exists, and if you keep throwing half of the elections or more to the people who are going to get an F minus on climate change, they won’t change. If they actually lost for 20+ years, you know, they would stop being so extreme, raise their own grades, be better on climate change. Right now they have no incentive to do so, because people keep wanting to “teach the Dems a lesson.”
Honestly, the dynamic is basic civics. You have another side that is extremely shitty on important issues, and priority one needs to be stomping that side into the ground electorally.
Yes, the thought of four more years of conservatives, with clear plans to lots of evil shit, without almost any checks tends to do that. Gotcha?
Are you under the impression that a landslide win for Biden and other Ds would result in meaningful progress combatting climate change? Because if so, it’s not just third-party voters who are deluding themselves a bit.
Our political system has elections every 2–6 years. Although I think that’s a good thing, it means that there is a huge incentive to reward the economy in the short term, and very little push to invest in the long term—whether that’s infrastructure, climate change, education, or what have you. When I’ve seen Biden’s work on infrastructure discussed, it’s almost always in terms of short-term jobs rather than long-term benefits.
The people who should be holding our officials to account for the longer term (media & citizenry) are either to attenuated or too exhausted or too distracted or, most often, too concerned with the short-term themselves.
As I said, the most substantial legislation comes with the biggest majorities. Because you don’t have to appease Joe Manchin. You can tell Joe Manchin to take a hike because you’ve got 65 other votes in the Senate.
But you actually need those votes. Because it doesn’t happen otherwise, maybe you sneak something through that winds up being meaningful, but the odds are a lot longer.
I am well aware of the reality of taking care of the environment in a capitalistic world. The compromised nature of the Democratic party. But it’s either that, or the death cult of stupidity. Trump will do everything he can to exploit and destroy the environment in an already burning world. A voter shouldn’t need to see just the right sound bite from Biden to understand that.
Yes, but that’s what I mean: if climate change is important to you (and it should be), what are your best options?
There are simply no good options. Biden is not a good option: he’s the least bad option. When ALL of your options are bad, not voting seems like a rational choice. In fact, I could argue that not voting, or voting third party, but ALSO putting serious time / money / effort into the cause is more effective than merely voting Biden—unless your inaction here causes a second Trump presidency. Which is why I feel differently about voters’ choices in swing states than those in deep red or deep blue country.
To people who are serious about climate change, Biden is not a motivator.
I support Biden because I can see that’s he actually doing a lot of hard work to shore up the system, which is (to my mind) an essential first step. He knows how to run the country and is actually doing it. A USA that’s completely dysfunctional and / or breaking down is not going to be able to address any global problem. But that’s the argument to make, not the false one of “Biden will be good for climate issues.” No; he’ll be okay. Okay is better than horrific, but promising things that won’t happen is a good way to lose people.
You’re bizarrely and inaccurately injecting emotion where it does not exist. People voting for Biden are doing so because the alternatives (either voting third-party or not voting) will lead to an outcome they do not prefer. *
That’s it.
*(Namely, to giving Donald Trump the levers of power, complete with a new determination to overcome the obstacles that kept him from exercising full power the first time.)
If that were true, why would it matter?
The answer is: it doesn’t.
What matters is the outcome. (In this case: keeping Trump from gaining power.)
It was early in this thread, and so it may have been glossed over since then – but you were clear that you didn’t feel Donald Trump is an existential threat to the republic. Being that is one of your priors, your overall take on Biden in this thread is at minimum self-consistent.
@SyncoSmalls , my apologies. I went back and found the quote I recalled, and it wasn’t yours.
…
SyncoSmalls:
Not seeing how that is inconsistent with any of my positions here. Can you clarify?
Other way around. [Not regarding Trump as an existential threat to the republic] is, indeed, consistent with [SyncoSmall’s posts in this thread].
Tell you what, though – I know you bristle at coercion, but I find the bolded to be a mighty compelling factor in and of itself.
I’ll take your term “coercion” and co-opt it a bit. Forget anyone being sanctimonious to you about supporting Biden. I – and a heckuva lot of others FWIW – are seeing something bigger. A coercion from circumstances (the current state of play in U.S. politics) rather than from specific other people (i.e. holier-than-though Biden supporters).
I might earnestly want to be sold on supporting a presidential candidate. To be prompted to vote for someone who checks all the boxes, and listens, and stirs the emotions. All of that – that’s one thing over there somewhere. Something aspirational, something to come, something we have to set up for and work towards.
Over here – right in front of me right this second – is another situation where I am being prompted to action. Except instead of casting a vote, I am given an eighth of a second to do something to avoid an impending car crash. Given the circumstances, I don’t have to be sold on the idea of performing evasive maneuvers or of hitting the brakes hard. I just do it and worry about whatever else after the emergency has passed.
For me, the 2024 presidential election has a lot in commonality with the latter scenario. I understand that others’ mileage will vary.