Maybe the democrats should work on that problem and give someone to vote for instead of against.
But they won’t and then they’ll blame low turnout for their lack of a good candidate
Start lower down.
Just “not voting” is seen as apathy, disinterest. You’re a voter who isn’t going to bother to go vote, so why chase you? Instead, they can try and win over more of the active voters, which just means shifting right.
So you start lower on the totem pole. Presidents are (recent obvious mistakes from 2016 aside) going to be people who have been local, county, and state representatives. They matter a lot too, and it’s easier to get candidates who are more oriented to your ideals.
Expecting change by effectively doing nothing… Well that’s not an idea I can get behind. I’m not looking forward to a civil war, I’m not looking forward to project 2025, so I’m going to vote to prevent that.
I’m also voting for the most left leaning people on the ballot all the way from the bottom up. There are a few progressives who made it through the primary locally for me, and they are getting my vote - they have a good chance of success too, which is great.
What I’m not going to do is stick my head in the sand and say “But that’s not good enough, I’ll just be over here” - because it won’t get good enough until it’s clear they will get the votes to succeed, and with certain people in office, the opportunity for those folks to even make it into local offices will disappear.
