politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Then you'd concede that if they are leading us to different places, lesser of two evils does cut it.
You're playing chess. You have a choice - lose a pawn, or you can keep the pawn and the next move you'll lose by checkmate. I dunno about you, but I'm saying goodbye to that pawn.
That's the choice, except instead of keeping the pawn you lose it anyway because Trump likes Israel even more. Biden wins, there will be a different Democratic nominee in 2028. And if you want it to be someone more in line with your thinking than Biden, well you know what you gotta do in 2028.
But if Trump wins, he's gonna do everything in his power to make sure the choice in 2028 is his and not yours. Not stopping him is game over.
Exactly. OK, we get Biden again. Now use the next 4 years to REALLY push ... for ranked voting, age limits for reps, or anything! Because you still can.
I’d say it needs to be sooner than ‘28, more like as soon as the election is over
No, like chess, at a certain point it becomes clear that you've lost the game you're playing. It doesn't matter if you save your metaphorical pawn or not in this scenario, delaying with the lesser of two evils will not create any further opportunities to turn things around.
It is the end game, and it turns out that the using the lesser of two evils as a strategy for the past 7, 8, 9 election cycles has been a definiteively losing strategy. It has produced no favorable results, instead it has simply allowed fascism to creep in at a pace which the general public will acclimate to it. And once the majority is acclimated, there is nothing that anyone who cares can do.
Instead, you should not be playing a game with rules rigged by two parties, neither of whom actually have an interest or will to preserve democracy. Instead you should be turning the board over and refusing to play
Voting for the lesser of two evils has been the strategy since day 1. In 1860 both Lincoln and his opponent Douglas wanted to keep slavery (Lincoln only wanted to limit its spread), and worse, only some Americans were allowed to vote. Forget the far left, a modern moderate might refuse to vote at all in that election - why vote for Lincoln if you're voting for someone who wants to keep something as abhorrent as slavery?
Yet voting for Lincoln nevertheless did move the needle against slavery and eventually led to its abolition. And voting for people we'd almost certainly see today as the lesser evil eventually would lead also to improvements in worker rights, universal suffrage, social security and medicare, ending segregation, gay rights, and the right to abortion - before refusing to vote for the lesser of two evils took that away.
It's your right not to vote. But what happens - or doesn't - is your responsibility.
What about all the struggle and violence that directly led to those outcomes? The moderates who presided over those changes didn’t enact them out of the love of the game, they were compelled to in order to put a stop to the unrest.
You understand the needle didn't move because of moderates and voting the lesser of two evils, right? Every major shift in progress in this country was accompanied by protest, conflict and refusal to go along with the status quo.
oh great. here come all the shitty yeye ass takes