You must log in or # to comment.
yeah, didn’t work in brazil, we just opened up for the right to elect their dumbass just before the pandemic started, it was grim, please do vote for the lesser evil.
Yeah, vote if you want, but please do more than that.
deleted by creator
That’s not a counterpoint, that’s just pointing out that both aren’t good signals. The main difference is that not voting or voting third party makes it more likely that the guy you yourself admit you’re more scared of more likely to win.
That’s not how democracy works, like at all
Democracy is about compromise. By definition. Not about demanding exactly what you want and sabotaging the system if you don’t get it. That’s the opposite of democracy.
What if I don’t want to compromise with fascists?
Then you get full fascism
When 40% of the voting population wants fascism those are your options.
If 40% of the voting population wants fascism your democracy is fucked and its time to re-open gulags.
“Don’t like fascism? Lock up your political enemies. Problem solved.”
The answer isn’t even voting. Voting is actually important in this scenario because, yes, you are actually voting to keep fascists from the door.
The actual answer isn’t electoralism at all—even if it’s important to avert the worst case scenario.
The answer is withholding what’s most valuable to them: your labor. General strike with a clearly defined goal and a pissed off populace is literally the most powerful tool we can harness.
Liberals will get people killed before you could organize a general strike. Quit being naive.
lol love it. Every single time without fail, people will find an excuse for why iT WoULd jUsT nEVeR wOrK HErE!
Although I will admit I haven’t heard this one before. Kudos for being original I guess?
And they won’t when you try to open gulags? Lmao what is your actual plan here? Or are you just a defeatist
And now 40% of the population + you wants fascism
Just with different people in charge
Fascism isn’t the opposite of voting. Words have meaning. Open an history book once in a while.
I was referring to the gulags comment.
Ah yes, the horseshoe theory. Hitler came in power because liberals sided with him instead of the communists. Exactly like the current American democratic party would rather side with fascists than mere socialism. They proved it time and time again. Libs and fascists are too face of the same coin lol
Horseshoe theory is more like pointing out the similarities between Hitler and Stalin.
deleted by creator
You know I kind of question that. I think democracy is more about rich people controlling the mechanisms through which everyone votes in order to sort of fool the masses into believing that whatever the oligarchs decide they want, is what they must’ve wanted, while simultaneously also being a good way for the rich to kind of gauge public interests through a periodic census and more easily manipulate them.
No, but I kid. Mostly. I think, democracy, more, in it’s pure forms, is less maybe about compromise, and more about a kind of assumption that the majority of people are reasonable, and can be reasoned with, which I think is kind of a foundational assumption you need to make if you want any non-authoritarian form of society. Which isn’t to really say that democracy can’t be authoritarian, or employ authoritarian methods, because it can.
Most people don’t believe we should get rid of all guns, or that we should be able to freely own machine guns, or even lots of regular guns. A functioning democracy would end up having some level of background checks, and mental health checks, and general procedures that you would have to go through (probably involving hands-on training classes and certifications), in order to own a gun. If you poll people, with a good poll, rather than a stupid binary dynamic single choice poll, you’ll find that’s what most people want. From what I’ve seen, the same is true for abortion, and I haven’t seen the public sentiment on drugs, but I’d imagine most people probably would like most hard drugs to remain more illegal, or harder to access, than most “soft drugs”. You can find this across most different things you’d poll people on. Healthcare, other forms of public infrastructure, including civic infrastructure, military funding, space research, every aspect of government.
This isn’t to necessarily say that most people are moderates, but I think a very underrated aspect of democracy is the fact that people can choose not to vote if they feel like they’re not informed enough on a concept, which will naturally select, if done correctly, for people who are more knowledgeable on a subject. Even the general public is capable of giving you a somewhat nuanced answer on many different political topics, that kind of breaks through two-party dynamics, and might even break through what are thought to be general consistent ideological positions.
None of this is to say that democracy isn’t also about some level of compromise, but I think it’s also up to the reasonable participants of a democracy to decide their level of compromise, what they’re willing to accept and what they’re not okay with. I think, you know, if your democracy was more on the side of my initial, joking answer, than on the side of all of what I’ve laid out, it would be kind of a shame were the whole system NOT sabotaged and taken down. In my view, at least. And, you know, providing something worse didn’t sprout up in it’s place.
I think it’s pretty much a given that something worse would sprout up in its place.
But I do agree that an educated voting base is critical to functioning democracy. That’s why I think the long term solution to our current fascism problem is education, a front we’re failing miserably on
Western democracy originated in ancient Greece. This political system granted democratic citizenship to free men, while excluding slaves, foreigners and women from political participation. In virtually all democratic governments throughout ancient and modern history, this was what democracy meant. An elite class of free men made all the decisions for everyone. Before Athens adopted democracy, aristocrats ruled society, so “rule by the people”, or the idea of a government controlled (in theory) by all its (free) male citizens instead of a few wealthy families seemed like a good deal. But really it was just a new iteration of Aristocracy rule rather than the revolution it’s painted as. The rich still rule society by feeding voters carefully constructed propaganda and keeping everyone poor, overworked and desperate to be granted basic needs by the state.
In democracies today, only legal citizens of a country are granted democracy. In a lot of countries, people who have been convicted of a “crime” are denied the right to vote, regardless of how long ago they served their sentence. In the US, this is used to deny voting rights to minority groups, who make up a large proportion of the prison population.
In some societies only a small minority group are allowed to participate in the democracy. In Apartheid South Africa, the minority group (European settlers) granted themselves democracy and excluded the native majority, using democracy to deprive the native population of the rights granted to European settlers. Anarchy, of course, is an absence of government; of rulers. Democracy aims for the individual to be governed, ruled, controlled by others.
Our rulers use democracy to separate us into in-groups and out-groups, pitting the majority group against the minority groups and giving everyone a false sense of control. We’re made to believe we have a say in how our lives are run because we get to participate in glorious democracy. Of course, all of us outside the ruling class continue to be exploited, living in perpetual servitude, and the only people who really benefit from democracy are the ruling class who use it to keep us alienated and distracted so we don’t rise up and kill them all for the debilitating misery they create.
Democracy grants authority to favored groups to oppress minority groups. Democracy ignores the autonomy of the individual in favor of the collective will of the dominant group. Democracy exists to enable rulers to uphold brutal power hierarchies. It’s really the full embodiment of authority; used to maintain the tyrannical capitalist-statist status quo all over the world today.
Democracy bad?
Now there’s a hot take
Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, however you try to window-dress it. In practice, all forms of democracy have been used by a majority group to control or otherwise dictate to a minority group. All forms of democracy have been used to smother autonomy, to stifle self-determination, and to absolve rulers of responsibility for their actions. How can a ruler be responsible for their atrocities when “the people” elected them and empowered them to commit those atrocities?
Instead of a large group laboring to make democracy work so they can agree on a course of action, it would be far more productive for smaller groups made up of people with shared interests to splinter off and co-operate to follow their own plans that require no compromise because their interests are already aligned.
deleted by creator
yes we made a bunch of noise about the failures of the democrats in an effort to pressure them to fucking do something. whether you think we are stupid for refusing to vote or not, you can’t deny how much discourse there is and how much engagement has occurred.
deleted by creator
Refusing to vote in the general election is actually beyond stupid. None of your arguments will have any merit, and when Trump wins, you can buy some golden shoes to commemorate sticking it to the DNC.
Voting for someone that does not represent you because you are more scared of the other guy is indistinguishable, as a signal, from someone that fully supports them. By voting against your own interests you are actively undermining the democratic process.
See that’s where your argument makes no sense. Unless you want Trump to win, not voting is in effect “against your own interests”. Undermining the democratic process is what Trump WILL DO if he is elected.
This is the reality of our election process, like it or not.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Counter-counter-point : democracy, as a system of government, is pointless because whether you vote, you don’t vote, you protest vote, you vote tactically or you just set your ballot paper on fire it’s not going to make a difference – you still get shafted by corrupt fuckers.
“Voting is pointless because they’re all corrupt fuckers” sure, tell that to the gay people who now have rights because of Democrats, or the trans people who do not have rights because of Republicans. Dumbass
This is where all the “Genocide Joe” folks’ arguments fall apart completely. It shows how incredibly misguided they are. There is literally no scenario where Trump is better than Biden.
Should I also tell that to all the people who voted Democrat and lost their right to abortion because every Democrat failed to pass a Federal abortion law in forty years because it didn’t serve their own interests to do so?
Should I also tell that to all the people who voted Democrat and might lose their right to same-sex marriage because every Democrat as so far failed to pass a federal same-sex marriage law because it didn’t serve their own interests to do so?
Do you want me to carry on about how corrupt the Democrats are? About how – when it comes down to it – they failed the people just as badly as the Republicans have?
Besides, I live in the UK and frankly don’t give a shit about the clusterfuck that the American clownshow of politics is. We have our own problems.
I agree with you in boiling it down to: Democrats have failed the people because they haven’t done enough good things, while Republicans have failed the people by actively doing terrible things.
So my conclusion is that yes, both parties have done terrible things, and I agree that Democrats haven’t gone far enough on most issues I care about, but the GOP is actively going against the things I care about.
It’s an easy decision at the ballot box, and it is an easy decision for me to do more than simply vote. Voting is the lowest bar for participation in a democracy.
Besides, I live in the UK and frankly don’t give a shit about the clusterfuck that the American clownshow of politics is.
Then why in the flying fuck are you out here giving opinions on something you don’t know about and don’t care about?
Hold on – you think we don’t vote in the UK? We don’t have democracy in the UK?
Where does the original image mention the USA?
Where do I mention the USA – aside from this post where do I mention the USA?
Every time I have referred to voting I have been talking about elections in the UK.
Fucks’ sake – the entire world doesn’t revolve around your pitiful excuse for a democracy. And given what I’ve read here, most of your country doesn’t give a shit about your pitiful excuse for democracy.
the entire world doesn’t revolve around your pitiful excuse for a democracy
No, but this post does.
Where does it say that, exactly?
Point out for me where this image mentions America, American democracy, the American election or anything else about your country?
I’ll wait.
Democracy requires participation to be legitimized by the people.
But sure, don’t vote and have the fascists take away those annoying voting rights. Like an idiot.
Stop thinking and start voting!
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
How?
Who do you think is going to read your blank ballot?
My constituency has 250,000+ people in it.
Do you REALLY think that someone is going to sift through over two hundred and fifty THOUSAND ballots, find one that has “abstain” on it and go “oh – we must find this person and find out why they are upset with the process”?
Also – not to put too fine a point on it – voting is supposed to be anonymous. If I write “abstain” on my ballot and they track me down, isn’t that FAR more worrying?
When my mum got called for election-office duty, she found some ballots with crap in it.
Maybe rephrase your other comment then.
Vote early and vote often!
Think AND vote
Putin really love the way you think! <3
My voting strategy is super easy. You don’t need to keep up with politics or policy. Just see who the KKK is voting for and then vote for the other guy.
Got it, should riot instead.
You should.
You won’t though.
A riot on your own is just a tantrum. There’s no point of you’re not organised.
Well that’s the left fucked then.
I’m convinced that the CIA is somehow causing the American left to be unable to organize, because with organization comes power, and the left having power would mean a shift away from corporate rule.
Closest they seemed to get was the Black Panthers. So it was the FBI rather than the CIA that busted that in.
The CIA killed socialist politician in my country.
And I’m not some banana south-american dictature, I’m in western europe.
Like by infiltrating, arresting, and executing them? It’s the FBI. You know about COINTELPRO, right? There are tons of FBI documents talking about how they did exactly that. Or like… The drug war?
This shit is recent and still going on. I have a friend who’s an organizer. The FBI comes and knocks on his door every April just to tell him they’re watching him. This happens to every visible organizer in the Seattle area. I mean, fucking Durkan and Robert Child’s.
The US apparatus of state violence primarily targets the left. We live under a continuous counterinsurgency program and it’s mostly targeted and keeping the left from organizing. Go read Life During Wartime and watch Trouble episode 6.
There’s huge and well documented paper trail. The CIA prevents democracy aborad, the FBI prevents it at home.
Who’s the one that tried to get MLK Jr. to off himself due to him getting a bit too socialist? FBI? Whoever it was was probably also involved in his shooting.
That would be the FBI.
Good thing May is coming ;)
You can hate all the candidates and still vote for the less shitty one.
You can hate the concept of government in it’s entirety and still vote. Even Lysander Spooner, a total anarchist, said as much in his writings. He said government is completely illegitimate, but there’s nothing wrong with voting when you are forced into the system, and doing so does not imply your consent to the system. It’s like a torturer asking you how you’d prefer to be tortured. It’s OK to have an opinion. Over here in the USA, I’d rather suffer Sleepy Genocidal Joe than that fucking orange monster. Since we don’t have ranked choice voting, I have to pick one or else I don’t get any say at all, and that’s exactly how the powers-that-be want it.
Yep. Do you want a festering carbuncle on your ass or do you want AIDS, Ebola, leprosy and testicle cancer combined? Shitty choice but an easy one nonetheless.
If the primaries aren’t complete can’t you vote for another option?
Maybe you can. I can’t.
I cannot because I’m (fortunately) not a US citizen. If you are and you don’t vote, it’s a vote for Trump. If you want Trump to win because you think things will somehow get better after he brings down the system, you’re delusional.
It’s not specific to the US. It’s a matter of having a tiny bit of political culture. Liberals and fascists needs each other. The first needs the last as a scapegoat and the later feeds off poverty and frustration created by neoliberal corporatism. So no I won’t be blackmailed into voting for white-wingers. People voting for fascists are the only responsible for fascism.
A-fucking-men
You can dislike excrement and cyanide and still eat shit.
CGP Grey’s Rules for Rulers spells out power structures in authoritarian and democratic countries really well.
If you vote, you are saying “I can support you, or I can support the other guy, but I will support someone” whereas not voting tells politicians you are politically useless, so they won’t pay any attention to your needs.
It’s a cynical way of looking at it, but if the no. 1 imperative for a politician is reelection, spending time doing things that will get you more votes is better than wasting time pleasing people who probably won’t vote anyway.
Honestly sometimes I think every country should have its own Sinn Féin of sorts. Just a party that never takes its seats. Yeah, try calling it the “same thing” when you can’t pass any legislation or form coalitions or get anything done because a third of the seats in the national legislature are literally left empty on purpose. Don’t like it? Well, it’s your problem that your party is literally less electable than No Representation!
In the US that would almost literally be voting in Republicans. They want the system to crawl to a halt, and critical functions are legislated to frequently sunset so they can hold the system hostage on a regular basis.
This is very superficial.
It’s how the system works with First Past the Post voting. It doesn’t support more than 2 viable candidates. We need to reform our election system.
Well, it’s a short comment on a social media platform, what do you expect. At least it’s less superficial than “This is very superficial.”
I should’ve gone into detail, but I’m just not in the mood to argue sometimes. I’ll get back to you if I do.
Well, good news, US legislature managed to dismantle itself with all the “checks and balances” and
liberum vetofilibuster. Now it’s just a circus to play for the gullible to legitimize this oligarchic empire. It is no representation, one way or another and somebody should openly state it. The best the progressive caucus could do now is to walk out.Yeah, try calling it the “same thing” when you can’t pass any legislation or form coalitions
Isn’t that the Republican strategy?
That’s the Republican strategy when they’re in the minority and the legislation in question is stuff that actually helps people. Real POSIWID hours
That’s a pretty brilliant strategy probably. I’ll run as an empty seat guy.
ITT: people shouting “nuh uh” at the post.
I’m fairly convinced that Lemmy has been compromised with an inordinate amount of Russian propaganda relay bots.
Lemmy’s so small I have my doubts it’s that widespread. We have a good amount of extreme left true believers here.
I mean, why wouldn’t it be? There is nothing stopping bad faith actors from participating. The only reason they wouldn’t is if there was little value in doing so.
What about the people like me who are just tired of liberal astroturfing? One can hate putin and that lesser-evil bullcrap you know
If all else fails, blame Russia lol
Did hexbear and Lemmygrad not tip you off? Except they’re not just bots, there are a lot of real people at it too.
Yup. Anyone who thinks differently than you do is a bot and/or explicitly supportive if Russia.
Sounds like something a bot would say >_>
____________ /____________\ / / _\__/_ \ \ || // \\// \\ || || \\_//\\_//.|| |_\__/_<>_\__/_| / \ / || || \ /// \\\ //| |\\ / \\ Hootbot // \ |U'U|'---____---'|U'U| |____________________| \ / | | | | m1a ____| |____ |\__/| |\__/| | / \ | | / TOMY \ | |/________________\| |__________________|
Gonna be like this every election year from here on out.
Yeah, anyone who doesn’t agree with me is a Russian bot.
Because real, reasonable people can’t disagree with this? Many people would say that this doesn’t go far enough as it doesn’t condemn third party voters for just “throwing their vote away.”
Imagine thinking that the only people who hold a position you don’t like are Russian bots and not real people who actually believe shit.
If you’re really that convinced that everyone who doesnt like genocide joe is a russian bot, then you’re far too immature to be using any website other than reddit.
You call them immature in the same sentence as literally name calling like a school bully.
I mean if the man supports genocide it’s fair to call him that.
Liberals are fine with warcrime when their side is doing it. Meanwhile, under their Biden, American soldiers are setting themselves afire.
If they get trump they will have nobody to blame but themselves.
If somebody tells you not to vote, they know who you would have voted for and rather you didn’t.
Agreed, that’s why the strategy of voting uncommitted and/or third party is superior.
Except it’s a primary where he’s running against himself basically.
That’s the point. It’s a primary, it’s not the general election. They’re showing up and saying “we’re your voters and you know what our message is.”
Oh I’m 100% behind handing in a blank or Mickey Mouse or something in the primary. What’s upsetting is the people who swear up and down they’re going to do it in the general.
Doesn’t help that the US uses first past the post voting instead of ranked choice. You usually have to pick who you hate least, rather than who you like most.
It does not in the slightest help, no. But it is worth noting that even here you can see differences in the parties - one of them keeps trying to strip voting rights from people, put minimal polling places into high density areas, etc.
I tell our kids to turn in an empty ballot if they don’t want to vote. To at least do that is a minimum.
Counts the same as not voting.
Yeah, that’ll show em.
A little different actually
Not voting at all can mean anything. You like them all, you hate them all, you couldn’t care, etc.
Sending in a blank but signed vote means you cared enough to show up and that you didn’t pick anyone. Those ballots are counted. Over time, if enough of them start to pile up, the existing parties might change things up to cash in on the pile of votes sitting around. New parties may also form if there’s a clearly defined group that isn’t being represented.
I’m not pushing for doing this in any particular election. We have users from all over the world here, voting in many different jurisdictions of elections. A blank vote can be an effective strategy in some situations
In the US it’s just a non-vote. No one counts non-votes. Perhaps you live in a country where they do, but not if you’re an American.
I’m in Canada, and I think the term used here is ‘rejected ballots’ or ‘declined ballots’
Some links:
- https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/ontario-votes-2022-declined-ballots-rise-1.6466308
- https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=bkg&document=ec90565&lang=e
The first article is specifically the effect I described, where people report the number of declined ballots, interview people who chose to do that, and talk about why it might be happening. That has an impact, but the magnitude depends on how prolific it is.
Second link quoted:
Ballots must be rejected if they were not supplied by an election officer, were improperly marked (including those voided by the elector), were cast for a person other than a candidate, or if there is any writing or mark by which the elector could be identified.
After the count, the election officer fills out a statement of the vote, recording the number of votes in favour of each candidate and the number of rejected ballots. In this statement, the election officer has to account for all ballots received at that poll.
I’m not as familiar with the US. My point was a blank ballot can have a different outcome from not showing up, and it can be a valid strategy depending on where you are in the world.
You are talking out of your ass. They know who voted, what party they are affiliated with. They don’t know who voted for who.
You’ll have an original thought some day. Not today of course. But some day.
Whilst I’m not in US with it’s Power Duopoly system, were I’ve lived I’ve always made a point of voting in the elections I can vote, and if none of the options appeals to me, I just vote blank.
Abstention out of principle does get mixed with abstention out of laziness, out of disconnect from politics or simply because of not being able to go vote, but a blank vote is a statement of “I did go to the trouble of going to vote just to register my dissatisfaction with all available options”.
I’ve also been on the other side (manning a voting place) and I don’t recommend spoiling your vote (if voting with a paper ballot) as whilst the people talling the votes will indeed see your beautiful artistic depiction of male genitalia or read your strongly worded message of disgust with the selection of candidates available, it won’t go beyond them as in the tally it just gets mixed with people that incorrectly filled-in the ballot (such as multiple marks, marks significantly outside the box or, in the US, hanging chads).
In France you can vote “blank” which is counted separately to absentees.
deleted by creator
France is slowly descending into fascism. Every five years they have the choice between liberals and the far-right, like in the US. Voting liberals is empowering the far-right, since nazis are feeding on poverty brought by liberals.
That’s just stupid with extra steps…
Nope, because of the argument screenshotted by OP. How do you fail so hard at reading?
Sounds very Irish.
Low turnout doesn’t change their minds it makes them think they need to either go further to the center or that Americans are too lazy
Low turnout consistently favors republicans, that’s why they do all they can to make it harder to vote, not going out to vote is basically for the republicans, who are at this point, basically a Fascist party.
The Democrats go further to the center no matter what, but they only win when they run to the left. Obama ran as a radical leftist that was going to deliver universal healthcare and hold the banks accountable, but jettisoned that as quick as he could. The truth is they just want to be in the center, and they’ll justify it no matter the turnout or outcome of the election.
Obama ran as a radical leftist
Do we live in the same reality?
If you can, please go vote. You give the vote up to the person you like the least if you don’t show up. I know this election sucks and the candidates aren’t the best. But is there someone you absolutely don’t want in office no matter what? I have one in mind and you better believe I’m showing up to vote for the only guy who can have a chance to keep him away. These other third party guys have no chance, like always. If you don’t show up to vote or vote third party as a throwaway, then don’t complain for the next four years.
These other third party guys have no chance, like always.
Also they aren’t serious candidates. You can tell because they just crawl out of the woodwork for presidential elections and cause problems. They don’t run for any offices further down the hierarchy and demonstrate that they have good ideas and build up public trust enough to merit their becoming president. They just go on vanity tours and fuck around the serious candidates who are willing to put in the work.
you realize this is talking about not voting in a PRIMARY, for a nomination he can’t lose, right? tlaib is not suggesting that they don’t vote in the general for biden. she is saying write uncommitted in the PRIMARY. personally I don’t think that will pressure them enough. a large number of people denying biden a vote in the general might make them get the picture though.
Yeah, it’s absolutely ridiculous how easily people just accepted that primaries are just a joke, that the DNC can hold them when they want to and just decide on their own when they don’t. Telling people to vote for Biden now, when he is not yet by any stretch an official candidate, is to forfeit a democratic right. They openly say they’re ready to rubber-stamp a decision of party oligarchs.
“People” don’t even have a basic understanding of how our elections or government works. Anyone that refuses to vote in the primaries has absolutely no right to bitch about what candidates are “picked”.
The comments after the 2016 Democratic party primary was equally hilarious and depressing. Hearing “the election was stolen from Bernie!!!11111” from people that didn’t vote in the primary was obnoxious, and the dumb-asses expected me to agree with them. “No, you moron: he lost the primary. He lost because lazy fucks like you couldn’t take 30 minutes out of your day to go vote for him.”
Of the dozen Sanders supporters I knew at the time 3 of us actually went out and cast a ballot for him.
I caucused for him in 2016 and it was pretty depressing how many people wouldn’t vote for him “because he’s so far behind”. First, who gives a fuck? It’s a primary, vote for the candidate you actually want. Second, he wasn’t really behind. He was behind when including the superdelegates who have only gone against the popular vote one time in all of history. Had Bernie had the popular vote at the end of the polling period, all of the supers would have cast votes for Sanders. But you can’t explain this to people. Sure, you can tell them, but they aren’t going to actually listen, hear, and comprehend what you’re saying. All they know is they want to vote for the winning candidate, because of course primaries are a sporting event and only being on the winning team matters. I lost a lot of faith in people in 2016, and I haven’t really regained any of it since. Matter of fact, I’ve lost considerably more faith since.
I can sort of understand their reasoning – I’m with you in that I don’t agree with it and think it’s self defeating, but I can see how they could arrive at that conclusion.
What really killed me is how many of my friends and colleagues that hard-core loved Bernie Sanders didn’t vote because they either “forgot” to, didn’t register to vote after being slammed with reminders to, didn’t bother to look up when/where to vote, or just couldn’t be fucked to make the effort. Even after countless hours talking about how great he is, posting on social media, and even donating to his campaign.
That is devastating. It’ll be a real tragedy if democracy dies to apathy, after so many people literally died to give it to us.
The DNC definitely heavily sways the outcome of the primaries. They use their superdelegates as a cudgel to fool people into thinking any other candidate has no chance of winning, then they use the media to repeatedly report how far ahead their chosen candidate is (including supers). Idk why most people are afraid to vote for someone who’s behind in the polls during a primary, but they are. Apparently the average person wants very badly to be on the winning team. I saw this first hand when I was a delegate for Sanders in 2016.
lmao anyone would be so much better than biden in the dem seat
Yeah, in the last primaries he was the least inspired, least charismatic candidate. He had effectively no platform beyond keeping the status quo. He wasn’t the worst candidate only because the DNC, against its own rules, gave platform to an actual Republican billionaire.
It’s wild for me that people defend him before he even is a candidate.
its north korean style adherence to the “great leader”
