I am so so divided on if I should vote for biden or not. I wanna vote third party to at least do something or should I just stay home and protest and advocate where I can? Thoughts?
People have a fucked-up understanding of voting in the US. You are not voting for the person you agree with. You are voting for the person you’d rather negotiate with.
If you actually care beyond the aesthetics of whether you did the cool thing or not, you have to think about the function of what you’re doing and not just whether it feels good.
You are not voting for the person you agree with. You are voting for the person you’d rather negotiate with.
This is really well put, I haven't heard it explained this way before.
Even worse, you're voting for the person who represents the party that, over decades, has the greatest chance of moving the Overton window over near to the place where your policies seem like a moderate idea if their party starts winning every election.
You just have to hope that the Overton window is already at a point where your policies are actually able to be changed in your lifetime.
In Australia we have preferential voting.
Unlike the US you can actually vote for an independent of green candidate without it being a throwaway vote.
When the time comes your independent doesn't have a chance of getting in - they still get funding, but your second third and fourth preferences get taken into account and lesser monies paid out accordingly.
Like, can you imagine being able to vote Bernie without it being a total throwaway?
This is how all voting should work.
We have this in some small pockets in the US and its exciting but doesnt always work all that well, yet, if progressives just dont run. NYC mayor Eric Adams was elected through a ballot like this.
Yeah I'm jealous. Good for you.
Unfortunately, you should vote for the lesser of two evils. Biden is shit, but he isn't a fascist/theocrat.
Locally, look for candidates that want to push for election reformation, push these initiatives yourself, look for activists groups promoting it. Getting rid of first past the post voting is the first step in opening the door for more than 2 parties.
While I wish we had a candidate that wasn't 80. I've actually been pleasantly surprised by Biden's administration.
And yes, the risk on this one is too great for third party. I genuinely do not believe that democracy will survive another term with the orange turd. He's already tried to overthrow our government once. He has made it clear that he plans to succeed through force if reelected.
Agreed. The time to push for third parties is every day except presidential election day. That's just the reality of the system right now.
Change doesn't begin at the top. It begins at the bottom. Many state and local elections across the US already use ranked choice voting, which is the bare minimum we would need to have more than 2 viable candidates in the presidential election. We need to push for ranked choice voting (or something better; it's not the be-all-end-all of voting systems!) in federal elections as well.
We have a generation of voters now who are literally too young to remember the 2000 election. If you're one of them, I urge you to look it up. I heard the same song back then. Look back and tell me if they were right or wrong, if you really believe that Gore would have been the same as Bush.
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
Unfortunately in this election (like last one and probably the next few elections at least), we don't have the luxury of voting for who we most idealistically agree with, or making a protest statement. Fascism and authoritarianism are on the rise here (and in many other places). It has completely taken control of one of the two major parties, the Republican party.
The way our electoral system works, if we don't vote for the only viable opposition, which is the Democrats, we are in danger of allowing an authoritarian regime to take over and toss democracy and our civil rights aside. Once democracy is lost it will take generations to get back, if ever. Trump in spite of everything, is the likely republican nominee (if not, someone just like him). See what would happen if he gets into office again here: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-2024-platform-so-far-1.6961527
That's scary as hell. Despite people being unhappy with Biden or his age, he has accomplished a lot in spite of the odds, with republicans doing all in their power to stop him. See https://navigatorresearch.org/lowering-drug-prices-and-investing-in-infrastructure-are-most-popular-and-known-biden-accomplishments/
But the main point is that electing Biden (or whatever Democrat it may be if he doesn't run for some reason) will prevent the authoritarian regime from taking power.
the main point is that electing Biden (or whatever Democrat it may be if he doesn’t run for some reason) will prevent the authoritarian regime from taking power.
No, it will delay a worse authoritarian regime from taking power. Voting kicks the can down the road, and should not be viewed as a strategy for the basis of political change.
Political power under any system of government comes from actual power, being it social influence, martial capability, economic domination, or labor power. Using energy to promote the theatre of power over building real power is a long-term losing strategy. Corporate news spends so much time covering political debates between politicians and ignores labor struggles, street protests, and activist movements for a reason.
I support activism expanding the right to vote (to incarcerated people for example), and I support people voting for progressive politicians - it is a form of harm reduction, and I am not an accelerationist. But if we don't use the time and energy we have to build the alternative, everyone loses by buying into the premise of electoral politics.
It's a game rigged from the start to favor white land-owning men, and has only marginally been softened. For example, your vote for the United States' executive officer counts less than the demographically republican voters in red states due to shenanigans like the electoral college. A brick in the right place has a lot more political impact than a ballot in the hands of an antifascist.
If voting did nothing, there wouldn't be so much voter suppression and gerrymandering.
Personally, I would say absolutely do not stay home. If you want to abstain from the presidential vote or primaries it might not make a difference, depending on your state, but in the more local ballots you can make a difference for sure. Even better, consider getting involved in local politics, even just in the school board. Showing up to meetings and speaking can change minds. Shifting your town's culture and making local connecions makes a bigger difference than a vote for Biden in most states.
Voting is not enough, but as someone else here said, vote for who you'd rather negotiate with. Additionally, when people like Trump get elected it sends a message to their sympathizers that they're in the right, and it helps the overton window shift to the right. Look at the increase in hate crime after Trump won. Who is in power can cause cultural shifts that also make activism harder or easier, or even literally safer.
vote for who you'd rather negotiate with
I'm not saying don't vote, but is it reasonable to expect that we can negotiate for much of anything?
The structure of how elections in almost all of the US are conducted, with a plurality determining the winner, means that there's a huge advantage to choosing to vote for somebody who has a big coalition and whose views are less far from your own than the other big coalition.
Let's look at three examples:
Example 1:
Democrat wins
Example 2:
Election is a tie, with the winner decided by flipping a coin or other game of chance
Example 3:
Republican wins
So long as plurality-take-all is how US elections are run, it makes sense for anybody left-of-center to vote for Biden in the general election.
Getting better policies means not just doing that though, but taking active steps to volunteer for and donate to candidates during primaries, as well as seeking out close house and close senate races in the general election to support Democrats, thereby shifting the balance of power slightly to the left.
Vote for biden. Anything is better than Trump this year
Not what you want to hear but voting third party or staying home is the opposite of doing something. It might feel like a moral victory but the practical result will be a vote for the right-wing. Third party candidates are not viable until we get rid of First-Past-the-Post, and unfortunately I have no idea what a realistic way to go about changing that is.
Exactly.
Not voting supports the goals of people who want less voting.
And voting third party in a FPTP system for a party that hasn't worked through the lower levels of political power is effectively not voting.
Exactly. A third party that only puts up a candidate for President every four years is not a serious party but a joke. It takes years of work, starting with local and state offices, building support and good candidates, to be a serious alternative party with a wide base of support and chance to actually win national offices.
“If Nixon wins again, we’re in real trouble.” He picked up his drink, then saw it was empty and put it down again. “That’s the real issue this time,” he said. “Beating Nixon. It’s hard to even guess how much damage those bastards will do if they get in for another four years.”
I nodded. The argument was familiar. I had even made it myself, here and there, but I was beginning to sense something very depressing about it. How many more of these goddamn elections are we going to have to write off as lame but “regrettably necessary” holding actions? And how many more of these stinking, double-downer sideshows will we have to go through before we can get ourselves straight enough to put together some kind of national election that will give me and the at least 20 million people I tend to agree with a chance to vote for something, instead of always being faced with that old familiar choice between the lesser of two evils?
. . .
Now, with another one of these big bogus showdowns looming down on us, I can already pick up the stench of another bummer. I understand, along with a lot of other people, that the big thing, this year, is Beating Nixon. But that was also the big thing, as I recall, twelve years ago in 1960—and as far as I can tell, we’ve gone from bad to worse to rotten since then, and the outlook is for more of the same.
— Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail
You can vote for biden or you can vote for the guy that promises to use the doj against his enemies or anyone polling better than he is AND promises to deploy the army across the country to "keep the peace" on his first day in office.
Even a 3rd party vote is a vote FOR trump.
A year is a really long time. Many things could happen between now and the 2024 election, including the natural deaths of either of the front running candidates.
It's an unpopular position, but I think you should vote for the party you believe will do the best job.
The problem with the "a vote for X is really a vote for Y" mentality is that Z then has no motivation to support your interests. More plainly, voting Democrat in the US may well keep Trump out, but Biden will have no reason to support a progressive agenda: he has your vote by default and he knows it.
The Democrats and other "centrist" parties lean on this tactic heavily because it means they never have to worry about doing anything difficult, like getting money out of politics, nationalising health care, or standing up to fossil fuel companies. It's effectively how the Right captures the Left: just run a more extreme candidate on the Right.
The truth is that 3rd parties are incredibly powerful. Just look at UKIP here in the UK, or the NDP and Bloc Québéquois in Canada. They never win (nationally) but the major parties have to adopt their policies to keep voters from bleeding to these smaller parties. It's why Canada is more progressive than the US, why every national project there has special exceptions for Québéc, and why the UK left the EU: none of these parties needed to "win" elections to accomplish their goals. Fear of losing votes to them was enough.
The Democrats could be more progressive. They could have run an actual socialist in the last election and won, but they opted for someone who wouldn't really change anything. The only way they'll ever run a change maker is if they think you and others like you might choose someone else.
If you actually want to do something other than choose between the two options presented by the two major parties on election day, then your ONLY real option is to get involved in the process at a MUCH deeper level.
That starts with voting in primaries...and voting for lesser elections...but it also involves actually getting involved with one of the two major parties at a local level and doing more. Supporting candidates you like from the ground up, perhaps even running as a candidate for some minor office if there's not enough competition, attending meetings and otherwise getting genuinely involved with the political process.
Because voting third party in the US on election day has no more meaning than not voting at all. Third parties are not viable in the US system, and never will be. The choice will always be between two at that point, so the only way to improve is to get into it earlier in the process.
If you don't do that, then all you can do is pick between Republican and Democrat and that's it. Doing anything else is not participating, it's pretending to participate. It's showing up to a game of poker and declaring your 2 aces as blackjack. You're not playing the game that's being played if you do that.
Does your city have ranked choice voting? If not, then there is where to focus. Maine already has it at the state level.
I'd recommend flipping the standard view of elections; federal elections are the least important, then state, and local are the most important.
After your state has ranked choice (e.g. if you're from Maine), then I'd say it's fair to complain about federal level choices.
how is this related to solarpunk?
Was not expecting so much input from so many voices. Thank you all for taking the time of your day to respond to my little dilemma. Means a lot to see comrades helping comrades. :)
Just because you vote for someone doesn't mean you can't protest against their actions or take other political action.
You're choosing the people that you can influence later via political protest and other actions.
While I hope more people can bring their point of view to assist you in your decision-making, I will put my grain of salt. In times like these, I confess I choose anarchy, and a thinker of this position that covers the topic you are talking about is Enrico Malatesta in his text At The Café, which is free for everyone to read at The Anarchist Library.
The way I see it, like many anarchists, is that electoralism is part of the racket. But I understand why some people may see it as an essential part of politics. I'd rather keep working on those grassroots and direct democracy or consensus organizations that require our daily efforts than try to see who we'll put in the decision-making seat and keep taking more power to the people.
This is an attempt to rationalize not voting... a bad one.
If you choose not to participate then you have no grounds to ever complain about the system not working for you. Of course it doesn't work for you, your vote was not submitted.
GO VOTE
Then go vote by all means.
Just be clear about what you want to achieve. As far as I know, no matter who gets to the white house, Cop City in Atlanta is getting built, and USA alignment with Israel and its many interventions in the rest of the world hasn't changed in decades. No matter who is the president.
If something is happening to change, it is thanks to people with conscience who organize to protest and riot. Hence, not asking for the politician to change is making things change.
In South America, there are many conversations about this topic, and as far as I've reflected, I don't want Trump to get to the White House. But I'd rather keep working through direct action to make my community goals become reality, and many times, that happens by not asking but doing.
My goal is not for you to vote or not vote. It is to be reasonable on what you can achieve via voting and what requires more than that.
In the US it's not really feasible to vote 3rd party without throwing your vote away. Something like the parliamentary systems would work better, or perhaps a ranked choice. You are going to have either the R or D candidate as president. Best to choose the one you can stomach the most.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law
It should be changed, but would require a rewrite of a lot of the constitution.
Electoralism won't change anything, correct. It will, however, protect the status quo. You must combine a protection against fascism with proactive, grassroots movement to organize and unify your community. Start a Cooperative garden, a union at your local workplace, start trading with your neighbors. Hold a revolution from the bottom-up, rather than expecting the top-down approach to ever put someone more bottom-up oriented at the top.
I was gonna make this a reply, but I guess it fits as a general comment.
There will always be some excuse to maintain the status quo.
In the USA people say it's because of "first past the post"(*). But in Portugal there is no such thing. We have a parliamentary system (technically semi-presidential, but for practical purposes parliamentary) but somehow people still find an excuse to always maintain the status quo. Since we've been a democracy (49 years), only two parties have ever been in power. Before the last elections, we had 9 parties in parliament. After several decades of incompetence, and everyone complaining about how corrupt the system and politicians are, the same party won the last elections with a majority vote, and now we have 8 parties in parliament. Basically, we're not too far from a two-party system.
This happens because there's always some excuse to compromise; in my country, the excuse/logic to rally behind the centrists and put them in power is something like "look how much the extreme right is growing, we have to keep them at bay! Plus, the other parties are probably as bad and corrupt anyway!", with the expression "useful vote" thrown around a lot. Never mind the fact the far right are growing due to the incompetence of the people currently in power, and that, being a parliamentary system, a vote for any non-right wing party already works to keep the right at bay. And the cherry on top is how everyone gas lits themselves with "the other parties that never had any power are probably as bad and corrupt as the parties that have been in power for decades and which we know for a fact are bad and corrupt".
This isn't very eloquently written, but hopefully the point comes across: some people always expect you to "compromise" with them by doing exactly what they want, while they don't compromise at all; and some people create a self full fulling prophecy by convincing themselves from the start that there are no other options. I can't speak 100% for the USA because I don't understand the system as well, but at least in my country the reality is that if everyone actually voted for the people they most align with, we could still keep the right at bay and not put all the power in the hands of the "moderates".
(*)but, unless I am massively mistaken, if a third party gets enough votes they will still get seats in parliament which should still give them power, or at least still take power away from another.
Portugal has a weird system, which is not quite first past the post and not quite proportional. Basicly it is having election districts with multiple members, which then get elected using de Hondt, which is a proportional system. Some districts only have three seats and that basicly means only the biggest parties can actually win them, as you need a third of the vote for each seat.
Hence two massive parties from all the smaller districts and a few minor ones from the larger ones. As Portual does not have a proportional election system.
Anyway imho the right call is to vote for the party, which is going to deliver the best results for you and that can mean voting taktically. However learn how your elections system works. That really matters.
Voter suppression has been happening since voting was invented. One of the most effective methods of voter disenfranchisement is spreading the message that your vote doesn't matter. Do not believe this message when you hear it. It serves the goals of people who want you to not vote. The fewer active voters there are, the easier it is to manipulate how they vote.
To choose not to vote is to disenfranchise yourself.
GO VOTE
And if you really want to help, become a voter advocate and/or poll worker.
Only thing I have to add to the others is that this can only change once we have Ranked Choice voting. Look up your local nonprofit supporting this goal and volunteer.
The space to discuss Solarpunk itself and Solarpunk related stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere.
Join our chat: Movim or XMPP client.