Every time I see people complaining about 3rd party voters all I can picture is the “Am I so out of touch?” meme. Like, y’all already shot yourselves in the face 3 times in a row and it surprisingly didn’t fail 1/3 times, but you’ll blame literally anyone but yourselves. Run a candidate people want, run policies people want, and support that candidate and those policies instead of throwing everything you can against them because you like money, and we would not be anywhere near where we are now. People vote for trump because they don’t want another fucking “nothing will fundamentally change” politician. The country is already shit. It needs to change. But dems are happy with it how it is. They don’t care about immigrants, or poor people, or social security, or women’s rights, or whatever. They just hold onto those as carrots on a stick. They just want to keep making millions, and would rather trump win so they don’t have to actually embrace populist policy. That’s why people don’t vote. The choice isn’t ice cream or drive off a cliff. Its do we drive into a wall and die now, or drive off a cliff so it takes slightly longer to die, the drive off a cliff people shot the 2 people who asked if they could vote for ice cream and that’s why the others didn’t vote.
We need a “neither” option. If that one wins neither candiate gets to be president and the parties have to pick someone else. Not voting counts as neither.
Honestly, seriously. Would harm reduction have happened if Kamala was elected. Yes. Did I personally core for her? Yes.
Did this get them elected? No? Shut the fuck up and stop blaming voters because the Democrats don’t know how to do politics on purpose so they don’t lose their bribes.
Want a better analogy? There’s a bus driving for a cliff and one group votes to minimize the impact of driving off the cliff while another group says please please drive faster off the cliff and do a backflip. A third group says guys, can we perhaps maybe not drive off the cliffd? And the rest call them insane and drive off the cliff
Honestly, seriously. Would harm reduction have happened if Kamala was elected. Yes. Did I personally core for her? Yes.
Did this get them elected? No?
What’s the relevance of this inane statement, again?
The Democrats aren’t the ice cream party. They are the “drive off the cliff slowly party” and spent most of their efforts on attacking people who didn’t want to drive off the cliff at all. Driving off the cliff is what both the Republicans and Democrats stand for and it is only “harm reduction” in the framework that people have to accept that the oligarchy will harm them and gives them the illusion of choice how they want to be harmed, rather than a democratic choice between being harmed and not being harmed.
Remember, no matter how beautiful, morally righteous, or gratifying your strategy is, you should really look at the results
You’re right. And the results show that the idea that the election was lost because progressives stayed home is a complete historical myth.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/26/2024-election-turnout-trum-00426544
I don’t see how your link supports your assertion.
Well then you need to work on your critical thinking skills, it’s pretty obvious. The election wasn’t lost because people stayed home. If more people had voted, Trump would have one even more. Kamala didn’t lose because progressives stayed home. She lost because she abandoned enough policies that support the working and middle class that many of these voters voted for Trump instead. The online progressives that centrists love to blame thing on held their nose and voted for Kamala anyway, as unlike liberals, progressives will actually vote blue no matter who.
Again, the article does not support your assertion. It seems you have been led on by the suggestion presented in the article. If you consider the statistics the author presented without that suggestion, you’ll realize they’re fairly unrelated data points that add up to… several interesting, but unrelated data points.
Furthermore, it’s a nation wide data set, right? So how does that break down along state lines? For example, did enough people stay home in Michigan to affect the outcome of Michigan? We don’t know based on the data presented in the article.
Now, would you like to discuss my critical thinking skills? If you have more data I’d be happy to consider it.
This one’s much simpler than that; one party will throw people I love into a concentration camp in the next four years, one party will not. I will vote for those who will not. The rest is just bullshit.
The delusion that democrats don’t also put many people in cages is a huge part of how we got here.
You sound like one of those dangerous shitlibs, not wanting people to be thrown into concentration camps. Don’t you know that the lives of the likes of you and me are acceptable sacrifices so that the wannabe revolutionaries can (checks notes) do nothing but feel really smug about how superior they are to The Establishment?
There’s a part of me that thinks these people fell for very well crafted propaganda that kept them away from the voting booth and, like Magats, they keep doubling down instead of admitting they got duped and moving on.
In a binary system where my choices are Nazis or not Nazis, anyone who comes along and tells me not voting is the best option is my fucking enemy.
The ice cream no longer exists. It hasn’t existed for a long time, and no amount of wishing will bring it back.
I want ice cream, too. But before we can have ice cream again, we need to not die.
