634
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2024
634 points (73.6% liked)
Political Memes
5579 readers
1252 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is the most horrible way to convince people to vote with you. I, personally, would tell you to go fuck yourself if I weren't already voting for Harris. Please stop that. You need to convince people why they should vote for your candidate by showing them the difference, not this "or else" bullshit. and if they are not convinced, you let it go. People are free with their damn votes.
Trump's track record and intentions for his next term are crystal clear. They are clearly and demonstrably worse than harris'plans or Biden/harris' previous term.
That info is widely available. To ignore it now, and claim to need "convincing" is madness at best, or bad faith at worst.
I already wasn't going to vote for Trump, so threatening me with him doesn't make me want to vote for Democrats, it makes me want both parties to lose.
No offense but taking it as "threatening" and not understanding that I've of them WILL win is comically short sighted.
Folks aren't trying to find someone a date, they're explaining the consequences of a FPTP election with limited possible outcomes.
Needing to be handled with kid gloves is privileged
No offense, but saying "support my candidate or else the bad man will win" and not understanding that people will see this as a threat is comically bad public relations.
Folks aren't looking for someone to vote against, they're looking for someone to vote for.
Needing to be handled with kid gloves so you don't have to face the weakness of your own rhetoric is privileged.
If you don't get being in a constrained system there's nothing else to discuss. Decide for yourself on who of the two candidates you want, and vote to empower either. Even inaction has a consequence.
I work in cybersecurity, finding ways to break out of "constrained systems" is literally my job.
I also already voted, I'm just not pretending that American "democracy" is anything other than a process for legitimizing an Imperial state.
The voters have no agency, the only people who do are those who constrained the available options to "bad" and "worse". But you're trying to hold those people blameless by insisting that voters are answerable to the party rather than the other way around. The Democrats can't fail, they can only be failed by potential voters who are insufficiently terrified of their "opponents".
The Democrats only need a Republican stick so that they don't have to offer us more carrots, the right move is to stop being a donkey and farm our own carrots.
Let the parties die, the Republican party will collapse to infighting after Trump loses anyway.
Do you have a plan to effectively break out of the constrained system in the next 10 days? If not, it's all academic
So "no"
"in the next 10 days to effectively break out"
Edit doesn't sound effective, in the provided time span, so the language carries.
Welcome to the conclusion. Constrained system.
If this is your conclusion, what was your premise?
Well you'd have to read above
I tried, all I'm getting is a vague impression that you think change isn't possible. That the bipartisan death spiral is inevitable. And yet, you still act like people have a moral responsibility to vote for the continuance of the status quo. As if you believe both that voting can save the world and that everyone must vote for a lesser evil.
👍
Way to take the mask off, lol~
Mask off claim when you've driven the conversation to a dead end, sure thing boss
I'm "mask off" in every comment I make. Because I'm not selling, and not tricking. I'm consistent across my comment history that harris is not to be loved but we are in a rough electoral spot. Trump represents chaos and harm, and given 2 choices, I choose not-trump. I'm not so idealistic or myopic to assume I get to pick my perfect person for president of the most influential country on earth. I choose harm reduction. Edit because there are people in this country who don't need it any harder than they already have it, and trump has made clear he'll do just that.
Choosing anything other than competitive not-trump in the next 10 days is academic masturbation hoping to ride a high horse. Edit further it speaks to privilege where there is an assumption that "good things" will come via chaos, and some more ideal system will arrive via teaching the dems a lesson. Oops forgot about the millions of people who will see worse outcomes along the way, and the people of Palestine will have even worse outcomes than now.
If you've got a candidate that can beat trump in 10 days and is not pro netanyahu I'm all ears.
Until they don’t have the right to vote anymore because they threw it away in the final election
Convincing people to vote isnt a goal. Liberals, specifically US liberals have this compulsion to fingerwag at anyone who doesnt listen to their self important wankery. Irregardless of the repeated lies, policy failures, lies, can kicking, goal post moving, lies, etc.
Every election is "This is the most important election of our lives" and "Now is not the time" and "When we win we can do [insert obvious thing that desperately needs to happen]"
People buy the lies, vote for their corporate appointed vanguard candidate. Then realize they were lied to. That "The Right Time" was never going to happen. They get jaded or just check completely out of politics after the Xth election of being lied to. And its always on those people to "Save Democracy" every election. The lies and shit policies are entirely blameless. Its always the fault of those who question.
I for instance according to liberals am an EVIL Trump voter. Even though I haven't voted since 2016 and wont vote until dems make universal healthcare happen. That's my singular demand currently. But its a hard line. A team of wild horses couldn't drag me to the polls until that happens. Now I will never vote for republicans. They're evil. Period. They're a known quantity. They will only ever do the worst possible thing. List of options, they will 100% choose the one that harms the greatest number of people, their own included. I demand the Democrats be better, which makes me a heinous villain of the highest order.
I like your view on this. This is basically how I do and look at it, but this time I had to make an exception, because Trump is actually horrible and I can't just sit it out even though~~t~~ I hate the Democrats just as much as the Republicans. This time, I will have to fall for this fear mongering because, again, Trump is horrible and can't be elected again. Next election when he fucks off, I'm sitting out until my demands are met.
Good on you. That tiniest expression of your own individual agency makes all the difference in the world. Ultimately we on an individual level are powerless in this system. Utterly so. That you can claw back even that much choice is a wonderful thing.
"Or else" isn't bullshit when it comes from the perspective of anyone who actually has something to lose if Trump wins.
Everyone who is on the fence or doesn't feel like they need to vote are just speaking from positions of privilege because they don't personally have as much on the line. I just find it hard to sympathize with that perspective.
But the same thing can be said for the people ignoring the faults of Kamala...
Especially when they're just begging for an end of genocide, or fracking destroying their communities, or any other of multitude issues where Kamala and Trump have the same policies even though the majority of the Dem voting base disagrees with them.
It seems odd to act like the "high road" is the one where genocide is ok, when we could just have someone who was anti-genocide...
There's fall less people willing to hold their noses to vote for genocide and fracking than the other way around. And very few people who are only voting for Kamala because her border, genocide, and fracking policies are the same as Trump's.
The people that want that are still voting trump, if they told you that it would change your mind....
I hate to break it to you, but they lie about this shit all the time so even if they lose they win.
No one is ignoring her faults. She is just less flawed then the alternative. People need to learn how to vote. It is literally the only zero sum game that matters.
It's actually sad that you would talk about privilege. That may apply to some people. What if for example your cousin is living in Palestine? What then? What privilege do you have? If you vote for Harris, you're guaranteed more of the same.
The privilege that you have is that you don't have family members dying from policies that Harris endorses. And I think Trump would be even worse, so there's a practical argument that people should vote for Harris anyway, but that's a tough sell if it's your immediate family or your best friends who are in the literal crosshairs.
I'm just sorry to say, but the situation in Palestine is not up for vote right now. This election will not change that outcome, short of keeping the "finish the job" candidate out of office while maybe the more reasonable of the two can eventually decide to do the right thing.
If none of the "other stuff" that is actually up for vote matters to people, though, then those people aren't allies and apparently don't care if they end up living under a christofascist regime that won't need elections anymore.
I disagree. I think each voter is going to choose what the relevant issues are and then they're going to vote. You can try to tell us what issues matter, but people are going to make up their own mind.
Also, it's quite obvious that who becomes the next president does have an impact on what happens in Palestine.
NEVER AGAIN 🤡
I guess some people's issues are more important than [others]
On the farm all animals are equal! But Palestinian get taken to the shed to make this equality work ;)
Which candidate will make life for Palestinians better?
They are getting genocide either way ...
Weird way to call that "better"
then pressure Kamala to change that one far far right wing policy the progressives cant live with and lets win this thing.
I agree with your first sentence, but honestly your second sentence doesn't matter. No one has the right or ethical high ground to command or threaten another person to vote the way they want, regardless of whether they sympathize with that person's position.
Actual Trump voters, many of whom are voting against their own best interests as well as yours and mine, have the right to make their uninformed/hateful/self-harming/selfish (pick one or more as applicable) vote, and so do folks whose vote we disagree with for other reasons.
We all think our reasons for voting the way we are (including abstaining) are valid, and at the level of the voting booth it seems to me that we have to respect everyone else's as valid even when we don't feel they are.
If we do not do so, I don't see how that doesn't lead to either:
a) commanding another to vote as you desire
or
b) thought policing people
I find either of those to be unacceptable for any purpose.
My perspective is that no one has the right to infringe on the rights of others, and to me any act that facilitates Trump entering the white house creates a greater infringement on human rights than any vote that facilitates Harris.
These are things that shouldn't even need to be decided by an election, they should just be codified and not up for vote at all, but here we are.
Persuade all you want.
Threatening/intimidating/commanding people to vote in a particular way is not OK though. It's not something where the end justifies the means, and it's a pandora's box that should not be opened. OP would be rightly called a threat if a conservative version of it was posted. It's akin to this, minus the power dynamic.
And when I am being threatened myself by their stance?
Hey if you are convinced by the two-wrongs-make-a-right approach, that's your business not mine.