• chitak166@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    If they have a problem with me doing that, they can nominate someone who represents my interests.

    Or just insult me, that’ll work wonders.

      • chitak166@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Eh, it’s more about choosing to lose slowly vs. choosing to lose quickly.

        Either way we lose, which is what the lesser-evil means. At least with Trump winning, people might change their strategy to prevent similar wins in the future.

        Biden winning means that the lesser-evil is still in style and we have no reason to address the root of society’s problems.

        I’m sorry you need to resort to personal insults, but that just tells me you’re not confident about your point.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          10 months ago

          Accelerationism like that does not work. It makes things worse for everyone and nothing improves in the end.

        • pedalmore@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          10 months ago

          Wen you elect fascists they don’t always allow free and fair elections in the future so this “similar wins int he future” clause is ignorant. Especially when the fascist in question already attempted one coup to stay in power when he lost an election.

          • porcariasagrada@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            voting for a fascist is voting against future elections… just giving power to those who must never, ever, have it.

        • eksb@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          If a third of registered Democrats stopped voting for DNC-backed candidates who do not represent them (by not voting or by voting for the Green Party candidate) and the Democrats lost in a landslide, the DNC would have two options:

          1. move left to regain the voters
          2. move right to keep the corporate bribes coming and try to sway Republican voters.

          I am not at all confident that they would select option 1.

            • Lmaydev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              Not everyone is staunchly one party or the other. The people in the middle are the main target for campaigning.

                • Lmaydev@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  That’s just how it’s portrayed in the media.

                  Plenty of people will always vote one way ofc.

                  But just as many people swing based on how well the current government is doing. They are the voters you need to get on side.

                  • chitak166@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Uhh, no. That’s how most voters actually behave now.

                    Even if the government is doing better under opposition, they will pivot and move goalposts to justify voting for whichever tribe they’ve been voting for.

          • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Except that if Trump wins there wont be any voters to win since we won’t have elections anymore. What part about a dictatorship do you people not understand?