Image Transcription:

A tweet from the George Takei Twitter account which states:

"A Democrat was in the White House when my family was sent to the internment camps in 1941. It was an egregious violation of our human and civil rights.

It would have been understandable if people like me said they’d never vote for a Democrat again, given what had been done to us.

But being a liberal, being a progressive, means being able to look past my own grievances and concerns and think of the greater good. It means working from within the Democratic party to make it better, even when it has betrayed its values.

I went on to campaign for Adlai Stevenson when I became an adult. I marched for civil rights and had the honor of meeting Dr. Martin Luther King. I fought for redress for my community and have spent my life ensuring that America understood that we could not betray our Constitution in such a way ever again.

Bill Clinton broke my heart when he signed DOMA into law. It was a slap in the face to the LGBTQ community. And I knew that we still had much work to do. But I voted for him again in 1996 despite my misgivings, because the alternative was far worse. And my obligation as a citizen was to help choose the best leader for it, not to check out by not voting out of anger or protest.

There is no leader who will make the decision you want her or him to make 100 percent of the time. Your vote is a tool of hope for a better world. Use it wisely, for it is precious. Use it for others, for they are in need of your support, too."

End Transcription.

The last paragraph I find particularly powerful and something more people really should take into account.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
118 points
*

When you roll out the feasible alternative let me know. Until then, I’ll be voting for the candidate whose rallies don’t break out in chants of “kill f*ggots, kill all transgenders”

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

That word “feasible” is doing a lot of work. No doubt the politician I want to vote for won’t be “feasible” for some reason, and the one you want me to vote for is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ok guy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The news media collectively decided to not cover Bernie, while Bernie continued to win primaries every other candidate folded to Biden which torpedoed Bernies chances.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I voted for Bernie. Twice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

In the general election the “feasible” candidate is always the Democratic nominee, so you should never have any argument about it at that stage. Meanwhile in the primary people try to use that sort of “feasibility” / electability argument against farther left Dems, but it is total nonsense and can be completely ignored at that stage.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

which politician do you want to vote for, and what’s their path to victory that doesn’t involve making massive systemic changes to both the electoral system and the electorate in under a year?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

When you figure out a means of political activity that doesn’t involve refining the capitalist regime as it stands, let me know. Until then, I won’t be voting for candidates who help slaughter innocent people around the world.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Apathy is acceptance. Apathy is death.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

You say that like complicity isn’t also both of those things.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Ah, so you are never voting again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

So you won’t use your vote to help less people die?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That is part of the calculus people are making when they express the idea they won’t vote for candidate A for reasons X and candidate B for reasons Y.

It is how voters can express their political will during the primary and electoral process. If a candidate can modify their position on X or Y because of voter concerns, that would be a meaningful part of the democratic process influenced by the voters. They’re trying to forge that alternative.

The real unfeasible alternative is actually just doing nothing and letting the donors buy their selected policies and voting for the lesser evil between them. That is just supporting the status quo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

We need to get RCV passed at the state level in at least 33 states, then we can get rid of FPTP at the federal level, and actually force some change

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

force some change

RCV favors moderates and promotes political stability. That’s kinda the opposite of a revolution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That’s better than the fascism that FPTP favors. It’s not revolutionary, but at least we might start heading in the right direction

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

RCV does the opposite, actually. It exhibits center squeeze, where centrists are often eliminated early even if more people prefer them over the eventual winner.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah that happens most of the time in a PR system

Radicals come to power under fair systems by being able to reach disenchanted voters in a national crisis or uproar.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

What might help to effect this change? If I’m not mistaken, a number of states are almost under single-party rule, particularly those that might benefit most from this kind of change.

Is it something that may be built up from a municipal to county to state level to then establish on a national level?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Back in the day the "Moral Majority’ took over the GOP by taking over the local offices. If the usual attendance at a meeting was twenty folks, the MMs would make sure to show up with 50. It took them a while, but they were persistent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

We tried to pass it at a county level here in California, and it passed in several counties, only for the registrar of voters go to the state legislature to overturn it, so, maybe?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

oh if it’s that simple then lets just do that. surely we can bang it out in a weekend.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Nobody said it was simple, but yes. Let’s do that.

Doing the easy thing is what’s got us to where we are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Thinking like this is the reason the 2 party system is still in place today

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Nice idea, but it isn’t going to happen before the 2024 elections. First things first.

permalink
report
parent
reply