spujb
Jumuta
GormadtAnd overhauling our voting system to become such a thing requires engagement in our current system
Specifically pushing for candidates that support it and expressing how important it is to people in your locality (yes you have to talk to people IRL) and to the representatives who win
ExcrubulentOh I forgot that nothing ever changes in regards to voting so we shouldn’t even try
Oh wait! Woman’s suffrage, The Civil Rights Act (Ending the Jim Crow Era), various states going for universal mail-in ballots, various states currently passing Ranked Choice voting (and actively having movements for it), etc
Bruh those groups of votes (if there was a positive vote and not a court battle) came at the end of large, vitriolic, sometimes violent movements. Suffrage, civil rights, gay Rights, these things weren’t pleasantly discussed then voted on and passed. There were bricks thrown through windows and buildings burnt down.
And then many times they were based on a supreme Court decision that could be overturned, like Jim Crow and Roe v Wade.
Almost any time civil rights and representation has moved forward, it’s been at the end of a sword. It gets removed the exact opposite way, the slow churn of the political machine being co-opted by bad players. Even when you see a military coup, it was at the end of a movement.
Voting won’t change shit UNLESS you have fought to get what you want on the ballot or else politicians will ignore you to fundraise, that simple imo.
You mean to say they had political engagement?
If the supreme court justices that made those decisions were different because different people won the elections then there’s a chance those decisions would have been different.
Politics takes place at many levels, city, county, state, country, there’s many elections that are important.
If you don’t engage in politics don’t be made when shit doesn’t go your way.
No, they fought, like violently demonstrated, took what was owed.
If you can lose your Rights cause you failed to vote in a Democrat once, you didn’t actually have them to begin with.
By all means, vote the lesser of two evils, we’re basically forced into it in America, but don’t let voting fool you.
You have take what you need from the haves, just like the auto workers union is doing right now.
zarkanianSpecifically pushing for candidates that support it
Yes. Vote Green!
☂️-except the options are:
- going off a cliff
- going off a cliff
Patapon EnjoyerIs this PsyOps to keep people discouraged?
The OP has a point and for some reason you don’t like it. I wonder which of the people you’d be in this analogy.
I understand feeling angry and dejected, but if you act like there’s absolutely no hope, then there won’t be. Votes still matter in this country. Maybe they’re not counted in exactly the way you’d like, but they’re still important, and they make a difference.
Why do you keep insisting that the only race that matters is for the Presidency? You keep hidng behind your superior moral stance based on the Electoral Colleges flaws. The electoral college only pertains to the presidency.
What’s going on in your local school board or city council races? If you can’t answer, then perhaps reconsider who may be falling for a psy-op.
Psychadelligoatthis analogy still applies if the electoral college is in place, it just alters (worsens) the demographics of the situation. not sure why you think it invalidates the whole model; that is simply incorrect. the model still applies it is just more complicated in reality.
harm reduction is a last minute decision. it’s not the strategy for political action. yes i agree the situation is fucked. but at least let’s do our due diligence, and if we find that the explosion has a higher survival rate than the cliff, i’m going to to my damndest to stop the bus before i have to make that decision, but i will always choose the one that has even a marginal chance of saving more lives.
ComradeSharkfuckerSaying that the options are “driving off a cliff or going for ice cream” is just such a stupid way to put it if you’re trying to convince leftists to vote for Biden.
It’s the fact that you think Biden is similar to going for ice cream is what’s most infuriating about liberals. It’s like driving off a cliff that will kill you vs driving off a cliff that will just maim you and possibly kill you later.
Pretending you think of Biden as the lesser of two evils in such a thinly veiled way is the annoying part. This attitude is losing Biden votes, these things are on you. It’s the “hold his feet to the fire” bullshit that you guys are feeding that you totally haven’t done, like at all.
That being said, I would probably vote Biden if I was American right now. Trump does look like shit. But I’m not for one fucking second going to pretend that I’d be sad if all of the democrats suddenly got (redacted) one day.
This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥the post is written from the starter’s perspective of convincing the people who don’t vote at all (or perhaps vote third party) that they have a vested interest in helping their neighbor.
no one is claiming biden is ice cream. biden is currently enabling a genocide.
and please don’t tell me what i have or haven’t done to end that. you don’t know me, and you self admittedly aren’t a part of this election. kindly don’t come in here just to spread disrespect, insults, and thinly veiled violent threats.
This is written from an "I'm right, you're wrong" perspective. In real life, no one is running a drive off a cliff campaign, and the guy promising ice cream may not be able to deliver.
Also, fundamentally both left and right can make the argument the other side wants to run off a cliff.
Yeah, it’s a baby’s understanding of politics.
Like do these people actually think we get to vote on what the bus does? No, we’re voting on the bus driver. We’ve got a screaming maniac and a doddering fool who keeps letting the maniac yank the wheel anyway, and they’re both proven liars.
Pointing out that this situation is bad is not irresponsible. The irresponsible thing is to just vote and cheer on the fool because you’re so afraid of the maniac.
Match!!In real life, no one is running a drive off a cliff campaign
A guide to Project 2025, the extreme right-wing agenda for the next Republican administration
Project 2025, a comprehensive transition plan organized by right-wing think tank The Heritage Foundation to guide the next GOP presidential administration, is the conservative movement’s most robust policy and staffing proposal for a potential second Trump White House — and its extreme agenda represents a threat to democracy, civil rights, the climate, and more. Project 2025 focuses on packing the next GOP administration with extreme loyalists to former President Donald Trump. The plan aims to reinstate Schedule F, a Trump-era executive order that makes federal employees fireable at-will, stripping tens of thousands of employees of civil service protections. Both Trump and others in the conservative movement have said they will clear out the federal government if he is reelected. The project has even set up online trainings and loyalty tests to narrow down potential hires to those who will commit to follow Trump without question. As Project 2025 senior adviser John McEntee has said, “The number one thing you're looking for is people that are aligned with the agenda.” The Heritage Foundation’s nearly 900-page policy book, titled Mandate for Leadership: A Conservative Promise, describes Project 2025’s priorities and how they would be implemented, broken down by departments in the federal bureaucracy and organized around “four pillars that will, collectively, pave the way for an effective conservative administration: a policy agenda, personnel, training, and a 180-day playbook.” Written primarily by former Trump officials and conservative commentators connected to The Heritage Foundation, these proposals would severely inhibit the federal government’s protections around reproductive rights, LGBTQ and civil rights, and immigration, as well as its climate change efforts. The initiative is backed by a coalition of over 100 organizations and individuals, at least two-thirds of which receive funding from the Koch network or conservative philanthropist Leonard Leo. The project is also heavily promoted by MAGA-connected media figures such as Steve Bannon, who has called it the “blueprint” for Trump's second term on his War Room podcast. The Trump campaign has attempted to distance itself from efforts to promote or speculate about “future presidential staffing or policy announcements.” However, Project 2025 is significantly more developed than the Trump campaign’s analog initiative, called Agenda47. And given that the Heritage plan has the backing of virtually the entire conservative movement and links to numerous former Trump officials and advisers, it appears all but inevitable that Trump and his allies will rely on the policies and personnel assembled by Project 2025 if he is reelected in November. This resource outlines the specific policy and personnel priorities of Project 2025 for the next Republican administration. For more of Media Matters' research on Project 2025, click here. Update (7/1/24): This piece has been updated with another policy priority and related examples.
OneWomanCreamTeamAlso, fundamentally both left and right can make the argument the other side wants to run off a cliff.
Which is a great achievement by republicans. They’re excellent at controlling the narrative and making it seam like the Biden admin is actually equally bad.
Disclaimer, I'm Dutch, so my view is an outside view;
I don't know if it's their achievement. It seems to me that in the USA you can choose for the conservatives who want to keep everything as it always was, including Russia as the bad guys and Israel as the ever lasting allie. Or you can chose for the conservatives who want to install a state religion and re-install segregation. The first group wants to be a global power with reach all over the world, the last group doesn't care for the rest of the world. With both groups the rich get richer.
In Australia we only have two options in the lower house. One of them is pretty close to driving off a cliff.
Things could always be better (I personally find with their recent car emissions legislation a bit weak) but our current government is doing OK.
Deceptichum
photonic_sorcererOh because of the violence? Driving off a cliff is also violent behaviour, and with the bus as it is the cliff is inevitable, because the cliff drivers will always gey back in. Also, the other guy isn’t the icecream guy. He’s the guy who promised to stop for icecream but doesn’t want to tell you if or how fast he plans to drive off the cliff. He’s open to debate on the issue, but he has a lot cliff driving friends and they often cast the deciding vote in cliff driving matters.
They’re both getting us off the cliff, just one is being more coy and circumspect than the other.
The only reason to vote for the less-immediate cliff driver is to give you more time to stop the bus.
NeatoCoooool comeback.
Even easier to sit behind your iPhone telling people to vote even though it will never solve our problems.
And my theory of change is not actually violent - you’ll notice I didn’t advocate hurting anyone, just dismantling the machinery of violence. The other person called it equal to fascism, which I assume they equate to the cliff driver, so I took their assumption of violence as given, which I shouldn’t have. Stopping the bus is infinitely preferrable to driving it off the cliff.
LileathI’m the smash the bus person, and I actually would. The truth is he’s only marginally worse than Joe in most of the ways that matter, and assassinations always lead to much worse reactions. Trump isn’t the problem, the apparatus that enables him is.
The solution is to build alternatives that remove people’s dependence on the state and capital, so the president matters less. That’s what I mean by smashing the bus. I never said to kill the driver, because his mates will kill you and stay in control.
I was very careful to avoid actual violence in my language. You were the one that equated it to fascism, which I assume you mean is the cliff driver.
Of course stopping the bus isn’t violent, and is not at all equivalent to the cliff driver.