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 comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 119 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

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"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It is possible to fight for RCV while working within the system we have in the meantime.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Exactly. Strictly voting only means you're complacent in the system, more needs to be done if we ever wanna see any real progress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    thinking realistically about the likelihood of getting ~= 80 million people to vote for any one third party, or thinking realistically about the likelihood of getting those two parties to agree to vote their own power away?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    See, that's the issue, you're thinking within the bounds of voting. There's other stuff you can do, like community outreach, or talking to local politicians, or protesting. Real change in America was never won with a vote, it was fought for on the streets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Who says I'm not doing that too?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    yes, regularly. I'm active in labor organizing, have walked picket lines with people who would go on to be US senators, make and give care packages to homeless people on the street and volunteer at my local food pantry. I've helped organize letter writing campaigns to get the tipped minimum wage raised and to get higher wages from the state for people who work in support services for adults with developmental challenges. I've flyered the parking lots of restaurants that were fighting the unemployment claim of a pregnant woman they fired without cause in an effort to pressure them to drop the case. I've protested outside town halls and other political events like that since 2001. I don't owe you my bona fides at all, but here they are. The idea that you can't be a good progressive unless you abandon the only meaningful resistance available against someone who is openly trying to dismantle democracy is simply horseshit. Trump played this same game against Clinton in 2016 and it worked. He actively campaigned for people who might have voted for her to stay home. "she's not a real progressive", "they're all the same anyway", "she's got this in the bag", etc. I absolutely DO NOT volunteer myself and my family to be sacrificed to some twitter communist's ideological purity test. You do the job that's in front of you, and the job that's in front of us right now is preventing another Trump presidency. Don't be a fucking Republican psyop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    You don't need 80 million people to vote third party.

    What you need is enough votes to show as a big enough blip on the election results to make both the Democrats and Republicans sweat out of fear they may be losing their iron grip.

    Change will soon follow

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

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

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    can you pull it off in under a year? because in a year we're gonna have a presidential election and one of the leading candidates is someone whose already been determined by a court to have engaged in insurrection and has said that he'll have the military suppress protests starting day one and will replace 50,000 government functionaries with people whose only qualification is that they're loyal to him personally. his friends tell me every day that god has commanded them to kill me 😀

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Why do Bernie Bros cite that as if it isn't a bold faced admission that Bernie isn't popular among people who actually turn out?

    "Yeah well Bernie only lost because everyone else started voting for one guy instead of twenty!"

    Also, you shit heads could have beaten that by turning the fuck out!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Apathy is acceptance. Apathy is death.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You need to understand that violent people will kill a pacifist. Quite easily.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Then maybe the Democrats should run candidates who treat Republicans as an existential threat rather than their friends across the aisle. Heck, they could start by refusing campaign donations from the rich assholes who fund both sides of the election.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Some Democrats do. You find them in the primaries. It's how politicians like AOC got to where they are. But it starts with people like you paying attention in primaries.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I do, despite the fact that they rarely ever get past the primaries. The party establishment cares more about preserving the status quo for their financiers than faithfully representing their voting base. The threat to withhold my vote in the general election is the only leverage I have against the party, and I will apply it to the best of my ability.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Vote in the primaries, put in the work in the primaries. And if you don't get it, vote not Hitler.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I refuse to promise my vote, and especially not a year in advance. "Safe" voters can be safely ignored since you'll vote blue no matter who, it's undecided voters control the outcome of the election.

    If you want the party to suck less, then you need to start demanding better and back it up with the threat of withdrawing your support.

    Remind them that they're supposed to represent you, and what the consequences are if they fail to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You're halfway there. But not voting at all is giving a vote to the opposition. And they vote no matter who.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The Democrats certainly see it that way, which is why I'm employing the threat to stay home on election day. I'm not rich enough to wield any other influence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent