So who do we elect this year?

1 Like
5 Likes

I don’t know what to do. Trump needs to go, but any power wielded by the Democratic party is illegitimate as it does not represent the will of the voters.

4 Likes
5 Likes

i know everyone seems to be on board with Kamala, and i know she’d be great, but i really like Duckworth and what an amazing candidate she would be. she speaks to so many groups. I personally want Kamala for AG or something, but i understand why she’s considered Biden’s top contender right now.

5 Likes

I agree. I’m not interested in another prosecutor in the White House. Duckworth holds a lot of positions I don’t agree with, but I respect her a lot personally.

I also remember watching Republican male senators block her from accessing the wheelchair ramp on the senate floor after McCain’s famous No vote on the ACA repeal. She must be made of steel.

5 Likes

4 Likes

Kinda makes you think.

4 Likes

kinda makes me angry.

5 Likes

Me too!

I guess a lot of people have lost faith in the whole country. I know I have but I intend to keep voting.

4 Likes

Yeah. As an old anarchist, I am and have always been one of the Did Not Voters. None of the options are ever good (they’re all politicians), and I’ve always resisted being compelled to publicly support someone that I explicitly don’t want in power. The last 4 years though - It really does make me think.

6 Likes

I voted in 2016, figuring that we needed the strongest possible repudiation of Trumpism at the time. I think we need it even more now. If they get 45% of the vote again, they’re going to take that as a mandate for whatever they want.

5 Likes

You’re old?

I voted for the first time in 2016. I had justified not voting over the years for various reasons, some of which I will attempt to refute now:

  • Neither political party offers me a candidate that sufficiently aligns with my political views.
    • This is less an artifact of the state of politics in the US as it is a side-effect of the first past the post voting mechanism. While simple to understand, it discourages contests with more than two candidates since the winner is determined by simple majority. In other words, don’t hate the player(s), hate the game. Also, even in a race with many party platforms, there will likely never be that perfect fit, so compromise will likely be needed.
  • There are too many politicians/lawyers in politics.
    • I think there’s a specific point here, which is lost due to oversimplification. It would be absurd to suggest that hospitals allow plumbers and auto mechanics to operate on patients. There’s nothing to say that someone who is currently a plumber or auto mechanic couldn’t go to medical school and become a doctor, though. Still, that doesn’t guarantee they’d be any good at it. If you are looking for people who are qualified in the process of creating and interpreting laws, you’d be hard pressed to find people with those skills who aren’t politicians or lawyers. I think the problem is largely two-fold. There are far too many people who are under-qualified to represent the people they were elected to represent, and a long enough career in politics will shift one’s priorities towards preserving that career, which can lead to tactics which do not benefit their constituents fairly.
  • Both of the major political parties are basically the same.
    • Again, this misses the point due to oversimplification There are certain issues where both parties will fall on the same side, even if they differ in magnitude. Corporate welfare and military spending are good examples. Also, from a purely practical standpoint neither side’s policies have much of an immediate and direct impact on myself, a white hetero cisgender male. Not everyone is the same as me, though, and there are some very clear disparities between the parties when it comes to how they treat anyone who doesn’t match that description, and it’s dishonest to claim otherwise. That’s just one of the easy differences, too.
  • I don’t want to be put on a list for Jury Duty.
    • I don’t think this is even how they choose eligible participants where I live any more. Just for the sake of argument, avoiding voting just so you can avoid the relatively minor inconvenience of the possibility of being called for jury duty is just a pretty weak justification all around
  • I live in Kansas, none of my votes will really matter.
    • Kansas hasn’t awarded its electoral votes to a democrat since FDR, and they’re probably not going to any time soon. The only voting schme worse that first past the post is combining it with the electoral college. My vote for president doesn’t matter a whole lot in an immediate sense. My vote is counted, though, and aggregated with other votes from my district, and so on. This can actually provide some interesting data. For example, my district (3) actually had a slight majority vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, which may have helped in electing a democrat to the house for that district in 2018. Additionally, my vote absolutely counts in local and state elections, and those results will absolutely have a more direct impact on myself and those around me.
  • It feels like the world is getting worse, and it seems like the deck is stacked against anyone who genuinely wants to make things better.
    • Nothing is ever helped by doing nothing. Voting is a pretty low bar to clear in an attempt to do something.

None of the above should be interpreted and being targeted at anyone other than my (slightly) younger self. If you find it helpful, excellent.

I’ve mentioned it before, but the catalyst for me finally taking a more active role politically was someone pointing out voting doesn’t just affect the current race, it can also show that there is an audience of people like you that are looking for a candidate they can vote for, so I now try to push left where I can, even in Kansas.

I think it goes without saying, but I’ll say it anyway. If every eligible voter were automatically registered and sent a mail-in ballot, our participation numbers would look significantly better. There are certainly other ways to make voting more accessible, and we should pursue that goal in general. I’m not sure I’d be happy with the all of the results of a near 100% participatory democracy, but it would at least be a more honest assessment of our priorities.

7 Likes

On the subject of voting vs protesting an election, I shall repeat something I wrote on the Other Place back in the summer of 2016:
Your protest is going to cause Trump to get elected, and he’s not going to care what you were standing up for.

6 Likes

Looks at the minority governments in Canadian politics

Looks at current BC government

Uh, no. We are FPTP, too. FPTP in a republican-style governing system plus the electoral college, maybe. But straight up FPTP, no. Parliamentary-style systems regularly end up with multiple parties. There are issues with FPTP, but it does not guarantee a two party system on its own. You need to dig deeper than that.

2 Likes

Yes, it can coexist with multiple regional parties, but it usually has 1 or 2 strong parties competing for each position, rarely 3 parties. Since the presidency is a single position, and the electoral college isn’t organized for multi-party coalitions, you end up with 2 strong parties overall.

2 Likes
2 Likes
1 Like

I want a woman in the White House. But not so much that I’ll decline to run and endorse her, no.

2 Likes