#i know people have a lot of opinions about third-party voters and i understand. i really do

[frommybedroom]

(this post is explicitly about those who didn’t vote for kamala/voted third party. if you voted for trump, fuck off. i have no grace for you.)

i know right now it feels easy to point fingers and place the blame on people for not voting for kamala/voting third party. it’s natural to want to look for a scapegoat. but the truth is, even if third-party voters voted for harris, that still wouldn’t have been enough. for example, at the time of writing (11/6), the total amount third-party votes in georgia adds up to only 0.7%. the margin is currently 2.2%.

the reality is that our system is deeply flawed. the democratic party kept insisting that biden was fit to run for a second term, and when they finally admitted he wasn’t capable, they left kamala just over 100 days to build a campaign. during those 100 days, she made choices that alienated voters who were looking to her to say simple things like “ceasefire now” or to not support fracking. she wasn’t able to do that, and any attempts at meaningful conversation—conversations that could’ve helped the democratic party’s positions accurately reflect its voters—was shut down.

i want to end with this: in-fighting will not help us. pointing fingers will not help us. what we need to do is come together as a united front. be allies to marginalized communities, protest, vote in local elections. most importantly, keep your empathy.

[ot3]

pretty long meandering post here just talking through some thoughts about the late game arizona progressive endorsement for kamala

i find it really fascinatingly racist the way certain people took the letter from local arab/muslim leaders in arizona endorsing kamala's campaign and decided that mean they now had 'palestinians want you to vote for kamala' as a hammer they could deploy in a world full of nails. to be clear i don't think this endorsement was meaningless at all and the opinions of these people are certainly worth considering. especially for swing state voters, who were the target audience here.

but i saw people responding to fucking bisan's on-the-ground video of people in gaza saying the election results made no difference to them with sentiment along the lines of 'don't believe this video,, its disinformation, palestinians want you to vote for harris' and i can only assume it's because none of them actually read the letter. they just saw headlines like this one and decided that absolved them of any need to own their own decisionmaking at this time

now clearly the palestinian people are not a monolith, and palestinians currently living in gaza and suffering through a genocide vs those living in the US in a swing state are going to have different priorities vis a vis this election. i don't think acknowledging that in any way diminishes the validity of either group's opinion, and it's absolutely not my place to critique the way these various communities are choosing to respond to kamala's stance on israel. so it really disgusts me to watch mainly white liberals act like this specific group of people discussing the specific political context they currently exist in represents the complete and collective will of the palestinian people, just because doing so happens to support their political goals. i don't know man i think the second you start talking about an entire nationality of people as if they have the same political opinions you've already lost!

the reason i say i don't think most of these people read the letter, beyond the fact that i've yet to see anyone discuss the specifics of it, is because the letter does go out of its way to acknowledge potential strategic benefits of 3rd party votes in the 43 other states that aren't going to be the deciding factor. i know this is not sentiment that the average voteblue liberal agrees with.

anyway. there's not really a conclusion to be had here other than i think we're going to see a lot of vitriol directed towards third party votes in the immediate future. we saw similar sentiment after the 2016 election; people were INCREDIBLY quick to say that the reason donald trump won was because not enough people showed up for hillary. people are still saying that, as a matter of fact.

as i and many other people have been pointing out for the past eight years, hillary won the popular vote by a margin of several million, and still lost. at that scale you simply can not blame things on voter turnout. i don't really know what to say at that point. trump's 2016 victory really just pitch perfectly illustrated in a way too blatant to ignore that the US presidential election does not represent the will of the public. but people will do literally anything to keep viewing the state of US politics as a result of people Voting Wrong and Being Too Stupid To Understand What's At Stake

as always, we are not allowed to hold the democrats accountable for delivering nothing to their constituents, but we can hold the constituents responsible for not showing up like loyal dogs to beg for whatever table scraps harris's campaign vaguely pretended to offer us. surely this strategy will work in 2028! see you all then.

[thearoacespark]

voting (a balanced take? hopefully)

disclaimer: I don’t usually do this. I’m still very young and learning about the world and this is all pretty surface level observation— but I wanted to try and say something anyways—it’s likely imperfect and there is probably nuance I’ve missed. Also, this is mostly geared towards my fellow USAmericans.

I have been guilty of sharing sentiment with “vote blue no matter who, VOTE VOTE” posts, and being gripped with a sense of fear and urgency like no other. I understand. Project 2025, the ideals of Trump’s platform (lots of the immigration ideas eerily close to Proposition 187…) are very scary.

But let’s slow down. Others have said if we’re voting out of fear and as if we have no other choice, then it’s no better than having no choice as all. I have to agree.

In my opinion, while emotion does push people to act and is a good motivator, I feel much better choosing on my own rather than being pressured or guilted by others.

After all, no one can truly force another to do something they don’t want to—but we can discuss, debate, and change minds.

Instead of saying it’s impossible, let’s consider a third party candidate, specifically one that is explicitly pro-Palestine. In my opinion, it’s tough, especially for these reasons:

- No matter how you look at it four months is a short period of time. We might have less than four months, some ballots are printed and solidified early, according to AOC’s Instagram Live Talk. (link: https://www.instagram.com/reel/C9l41vgOAGj/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link)

- Many people have not heard of these third party candidates— I had not been familiar with Jill Stein or Claudia de la Cruz before today. Do many people know of the members of Congress who have already called for ceasefire? (https://workingfamilies.org/ceasefire-tracker/) Tumblr endorsements help and I appreciate the information on other platforms regardless, but what about people who are mostly offline?

- There’d need to be a robust and wide-spreading social media, news, TV and more campaign to get enough people informed in such a short time, much less get them on board and overcome the substantial opposition already faced by the pro-Palestine movement in general. Campaign managers need to be paid salaries. Transportation, advertising, food, gas… it costs a lot of money. A lot of people are already struggling financially and donating what they can— and donations to Gaza E-SIMs and evacuation funds help people right now. (By the way, plugging Operation Olive Branch: https://linktr.ee/opolivebranch)

- Even if they do get elected, it can’t be just the president— they will face extreme pushback, likely from all sides, and they need House and Congress and Court members on their side to make not only foreign policy shifts but also other systemic changes to society that are dearly needed.

For now, I’m voting blue because I think it’s our best shot at something better… but if someone has a detailed plan on how to turn a third-party candidate from improbable to possible that addresses these issues in concrete ways, then maybe the conversation can change. The time crunch, however, is extremely tough.

What now?

- Vote. Even if nothing about this post changes your opinion on the presidential election, I’d encourage you to vote, just for voter turnout and to exercise that political power! There are still nonpresedential and local elections that will directly impact your community. (https://www.usa.gov/confirm-voter-registration)

- Continue to advocate for causes you believe in and educate others, and learn about issues outside just the US.

- Being confident in the best action to take and trying to convince others to vote blue shouldn’t mean dismissing criticism of our current institutions and the current Democratic candidate, or attacking people who bring up these criticisms (of course, check for sources and records first!) These conversations should be ongoing.

- Try to fact-check everything you hear and dispel misinformation as much as possible!

- Continue to consider pushing alternative voting methods such as Ranked Choice Voting—I haven’t read into it enough to say more concrete details, but something has got to change 😭

- Share resources whenever you can, and take care of yourself and others :)

[ladyluscinia]

I cannot emphasize enough that if you want the ability to pressure (or punish!) a candidate that you mostly agree with at the polls, you need to make

Ranked Choice Voting

into one of your biggest and most consistent political priorities.

Pressuring Democrats on Palestine is what most of tumblr is going to connect with here, but crucially this applies to any candidate from any party, and you should learn how to pitch this to conservative leaning people as well. Because this matters. A lot. Like, understand this:

If you vote for a third party or withhold your vote from a Democrat because they don't support Palestine, almost inevitably one of two things happens. They win, or their Republican opponent who also doesn't support Palestine wins. Now maybe you sent emails telling their campaign that Palestine was why you couldn't vote for them, or specifically picked a pro-Palestine third party, but the actual result is going to muddy the message. They'll take note, but there's no way for them to tell who actually would have changed their vote (or come to the polls) and why. Maybe they decide the third party voters are a lost cause and they won anyway. Maybe the Republican won and they decide his anti-immigration rhetoric was the real vote decider. Pro-Palestine protests are doing a lot to get our anger across, but it gets undermined at the polls when the winner doesn't support Palestine either way 🤷‍♀️ and then they base what the voters "want" on the winner's platform.

Primaries are better, because it's easier to find a primary where you mostly agree with both Democrats but only one supports Palestine. That's what primaries are for. But also, as this last week has shown, incumbents often don't get meaningful primaries where you can make that opinion clear. And less people vote in primaries as a rule. And they are assumed to be more extreme than the general electorate which can hurt your cause.

Ranked Choice Voting (RCV, or sometimes IRV for "instant runoff voting") gives you more tools.

It makes candidates compete to be your second choice as well, and gives them more data to see who you really preferred. It lets people challenge incumbents without getting shut down by party leadership for splitting votes, lets you have more general election options who you can pick from (which emphasizes their differences), and lets people prevent a split vote if there's someone they see as a greater threat. They will notice if they aren't first choice. They will be far more afraid of not being any choice.

What can you do this year?

Depending on which states you / your friends / your family are in...? Possibly a lot.

Here's a list of states with something related to RCV on the ballot in 2024, or at least something trying to be: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, and Oregon. And here's a resource post I put together with a bit more information on what exactly you should be looking up. I can't be sure this is comprehensive, so check to be sure.

If you live in any of those states, or know anyone there, please do some research on these proposals and make some noise about them. If not, check your own ballots and candidates for their voting reform leanings.

Your vote can count.

[rolandkaros]

election thoughts

calling trump voters 'dumb' is ignorant. some of these people are dumb but a lot of them are just selfish.

blaming third-party voters is ignoring the issue re: over half the country was willing to vote for trump anyway. likewise, pointing out that trump won the popular vote and that third-party votes wouldn't have made a difference is ignoring the voting system. conversations about third-party voters in general are not fruitful. some people are just going to vote third-party and expecting them to suddenly not do so is naïve. there is no scenario where third-party voters should have been the 'tie-breaker' to begin with.

a lot of people (americans and non-americans) don't understand how the electoral college system works and in general i'd advise you to do some research before you share your take. americans you should know this anyway and don't use the excuse of "i wasn't taught" if you have tumblr then you have the internet so look it up and start reading. i don't expect non-americans to know a foreign country's voting system but if you want to share an opinion please take a bit of time to learn about it before you do. i'm tired of seeing the same dialogues by people who clearly just don't understand the actual structure of the voting system.

pointing fingers at different demographics you think are to blame is useless. if you're going to find a group to blame, then blame the majority, i.e. white men and white women. otherwise your blame is completely unhelpful and misplaced.

saying she only lost because she's a woman or a poc (or both) is also misguided. its not entirely wrong but once again you are misunderstanding some fundamentals of how extremist politicians find success, and likewise are ignoring some obvious issues re: the democratic party and their campaign strategies.

equating education to intelligence to voting preferences in general is ignorant. you are forgetting how many factors go into someone actually receiving formal education. you are forgetting how many factors go into someone's state of residence. i was going to explain this further but i think no one cares so i'm not going to bother because the explanation got too long. also, see point 1. there are plenty of very smart people who vote for trump anyway.

talking about abandoning the south or red states is pointless and if i hear or see anybody suggest such measure i am automatically assuming you are a foul person. equating democratic states to morally or inherently good and republican states to morally or inherently bad is such an unbelievably superficial and foolhardy judgement and goes against all principles of unity and community that we should be fostering at a time like this.

americans ignorant to the effect that us politics has on the world need to wake up.

i don't blame non-americans for their resentment against the sphere of influence of us politics but i wish they would be less dismissive of the genuine effects this election will also have within america.

acting as though anybody doesn't have the right to be scared about the implications of this result is shortsighted at best. my concern goes beyond my own afflictions – how can you say that concern is misplaced?

i have more but i think that's it for now bc its kind of exhausting to talk about. and i guess what's done is done. idk. i'm not hopeless at all. but i'm fearing more and more than the hope i insist on having is childish. but the alternative is complete self-destruction and i have no intention of going down that road again. so childish hope it is.

[rotating-hyperfixations]

Not to bring up politics on my fandom blog, but I gotta let out somewhere so I’m yelling into the void on tumblr so bear with me.

I truly think the U.S needs to go back to teaching civics in schools at a higher level then they currently are; because the amount of people who seemingly can’t grasp how elections and general politics run is astounding. Like, I totally get being frustrated with the state of American politics and the amount of corruption and private equity in what’s supposed be a public entity, but yall are really starting to test my patience when it comes to election season. Because yall are being dumb with this whole “don’t vote for Biden”/vote third period campaign you’re trying to put out there.

Unfortunately America is a two party system and a lot of people fall somewhere within the political spectrum. And generally throughout history, even if you didn’t agree with a candidate you vote for the one that more aligns with your values in the hopes that you can get them to change their opinion on important matters through congress and the senate (aka state reps). However in the last three election cycles a lot of people have become one policy voters (meaning one issue makes or breaks who they’ll vote for) and now we’re on the brink of rolling back a centuries worth of progress because a bunch of far right christofacists were able to come into power by people not voting. And rather then recognize that we are legitimately headed down a very dangerous path if Trump gets elected for a second term; people have just decided to not vote or mobilize a third party candidate. Both of which unfortunately just leads to a Trump victory because republicans are far more likely to vote as a party than democrats.

While think that at some point a real effort has to be made to try and get some more younger and progressive politicians in power, the year on election is not the time to start. and that is simply because America at this point it not capable of coming to together to recognize anyone who is not a democrat or a republican and it’s not a change you can implement at the national level immediately. For these changes to occur people need to start showing up at non Presidential elections and voting progressive and third party candidates locally, so it gets on the radar and they start to take it seriously and adopt that ideology within their own parties. However, yelling on the internet that you’re not going to vote with seemingly no alternative plan isn’t going to do anything. Not to mention no politician is ever going to cater to every base within a party, it’s simply not feasible. I’m sure that there are moderates who disagree with certain aspects of Bidens politics, but they understand that Biden is a far better alternative to Trump.

And ultimately that’s what all of this boils down to, the Trump of it all. If Biden was facing back Republicans of old like Mitt Romney or John McCain, I’d say sure not voting and making a statement on the democrats not accurately representing your beliefs will make you not vote for them would be ok. Unfortunately a second term of Trump is going to have far more reaching implications than I think people realize, and don’t realize how serious it is. Out side of the fact that Trump has basically already demonstrated that if he can, he won’t peacefully transfer power to whoever succeeds him. But he will roll back a ton of civil liberties and probably do irreparable damage to certain parts of the country and branches of government. Like do you really want to get an even more conservative Supreme Court or for things like abortion bans to become national law. And I know that people think that’s fear mongering or that they don’t care about the damage it does to their community, which is fine and all I suppose. But there are a ton of kids who are powerless in this matter who don’t get a say, who may not feel the same way and saying “you don’t care” even as a minority group is still an insanely privilege take and a very short term thinking.

And finally, if you’re not voting for Biden because of his handling of the Hamas Israel war, allowing Trump into office is not going to help anyone over there. Because Trump and republicans have already stated that they are pretty much on the side of Israel and are going to probably aid them even in more in bombing the shit out of Gaza. So if that’s the hill your will to die on, don’t dilute yourself into thinking that not voting for Biden will do anything to help anyone or desecrate the situation because Trump will make it far worse and then America will be complicit and all the activism in the world won’t help.

[sleepyfangirl18]

I have some thoughts about US elections...

Every US election is the most important election. Yes, Project 2025 is terrifying. However, I'm not posting to tell people they should or should not vote. What I do want to do is encourage people to do more because we have been stuck in this cycle for US elections.

Every election Americans are told to "vote blue no matter who" and to "vote like your life depends on it." We are told to "vote for the lesser of two evils" and "it's not that you're voting for Person X, so much as you're voting against Person Y." "We just have to make sure Person Y doesn't win and then we can address the other stuff and push Person X to the left and we'll hold them accountable." Then if Person X loses it's "because of the nonvoters and the third party voters." But it's not the system or even the candidates put forth by the democratic party? "That's also the problem but..." Then a new election cycle comes and it's the same thing all over again.

During our current president who was "the lesser of two evils", Roe v Wade has been overturned, student loan debt repayments have restarted with not even a little forgiveness, the US has sent billions of dollars to other countries for war, migrants are still being held in cages at the border (remember the Haitian migrants being whipped by border patrol on horses? I know. I know. "But that wasn't B*den's fault!"), and more terrible things. The only difference is people who were vocal about these issues under Tr*mp are now silent or explaining things away. "Congress is stopping him! The Supreme Court is blocking him! What do you expect him to do?"

This strategy isn't working, y'all. Because it's not intended to. The American electoral system isn't meant for change. Change has never happened through voting. Meaningful gains that have been achieved in the US were through activism, real activism. Not posting on social media and not voting. Activists have created change, not politicians. Politicians take part in the system and help preserve it. On paper they represent the people, but one need only listen to what they say and look at their actions to see that the elected officials make decisions based on their own interests and the interests of whoever is giving them bribes. That along with the electoral college, voter suppression, etc. guarantee that real change doesn't happen through voting.

I'm not telling anyone they should or should not vote. What I am saying is we are told the same thing every election cycle. I see the same hostility towards individuals for their voting choice rather than the system itself. The stakes are always the highest they've ever been. The real way to fight fascism is through activism. And there's a lot of forms of activism. Protesting is effective but it's not the only way to be an activist. Form connections through community. Create mutual aid groups. Educate yourself and others, not just about what's happening currently but also the past. Understanding history is essential to understanding the present. Read political theory. Don't rely on social media or blogs. Those can be a good starting place, but don't let that be the only way you learn. Besides, it's important you form your own opinions about this stuff. Get informed and find out what is needed in your community. You can even use your art for activism.

Everyone can do their part. It seems like more effort is put into getting people to vote blue than getting people active in the community. Voting for "the lesser of two evils" is still voting for evil. Harm reduction does not occur through the political system. Also, that's about public health anyway. We need real material change. And that happens in our every day lives, not the voting booth. So if you are going to vote that's your choice. I just hope that's not where your action ends.

[ultimatebottom69]

Oh please I am not even American and I am not voting. Also it's so funny to see the USA people just sayinga nd screaming and thrlwing up about how both are bad meanwhile the whole world is watching you all with the batted breath of a parent watching their child once more trying to eat the fucking paint that contains lead. You know the paint that made the child go to the hospital which ruined the world's economic.

Like please. The USA has and always has been in a two major parties election debate. The one time you all whatever you are decided to go "Nooo Imma vote for the third option wawa" well Bush happened. So. The last 50% of all voters went "Hey I don't need to vote" Trump happened.

And see I love seeing post like this who are like "Hey convince me" and then when you pull out actual facts over feelings (a sentence a lot of you like by the way until we use it against you) suddenly it's "Waa No here is a false rule I invented to feel better about myself. You are a dirty dity cootie infested liberaaaal" .

It never fucking stops. Every election. Every comment under a presidential debate tag.

So your weak "I never said Trump" is absolutely hilarious. To me who knows the USA only has to fucking choices since no one seems to worry about the election system in the country until their is an election. It's like knowing there is a fucking gas leak in the building but you worry over it only when your two guns and a single metal pin who has no relevancy whatsoever start to talk everyone goes "Oh yeah I had that shit going on."

Like don't get me wrong. This is the USA website. And I did study you all very long and hard and frankly except between Magas who would vote for Trump even if....Well the only thing so far he hasn't done on camera is kill a fucking baby at this point. Like a living baby not a mere pile of flesh stuck in a woman's uterus because yeah in europe we don't even have that debate so I don't understand the struggle at all but whatever helps them sleep at night. Knowing that babies will be birted just to srink water infected with lead. Like sure fight for babies rights yea...It would be nice that the spirit follows when the fucker is out of the womb too but I disgress.

And now we have people like you. Who are on the fence about how both sides are bad that pretend they need convincing to vote for her. Well let's be clear honey. We both know you are not even going to go vote. Like you don't want to vote for Trump or Harris cool for you. Unfortunately everytime I meet someone like you I feel like explaining to a child how the world works because UNFORTUNATELY due to how your country is built. There is only these two options. Other votes are a waste of space since the one time it worked in 2000 where the child decided he didn't want either Mcdonald or Lûnchables. He wanted spaghetti...well the jury decided that yoi all would get lunchables anyway. Hi Bush.

And everytime. At every election i hear the fated "It will be only 4 years. Don't be such piss babies."

Well brenda. How did it work out so far ?

So sincerely OP. You can debate with me or whatever I don't mind I like hearing people's opinions and things but calling me a "filthy clotie filled liberaaaal" is so funny to me since I am a filthy European and I am just tired of watching the USA's people cry and whimper over the only real freedom they ever had which has no taxes unless I am wrong.

So anyway. What were you saying again ?

It's a simple request liberals.

"Who do I vote for that won't actively fund and participate in a genocide?"

Answer that without mentioning trump, and I'll consider voting harris.

[sadsongsandwaltzes]

Fox News and CNN and Twitter don't get to decide who the President is. YOU do. Don't let them take your power away.

I’m not entirely sure how to respond to this because I don’t know what prompted it. Is this about me not voting? Pal.... even my own dad couldnt convince me. Some rando on the internet surely ain’t gonna convince me. Or is this some sort of attempt to rally me behind trump? Okay, then we come back to.... I didn’t vote. You’re looking at the wrong person if you’re expecting me to get riled up about the election.

Look, republicans definitely have reason to be suspicious right now. There’s a lot that doesn’t add up. There’s a lot of “typos” that have happened conveniently in Biden’s favor. They’ve been prematurely calling states in Biden’s favor. All this talk about stopping counting and boarding up windows at polling places and stuff.... it’s definitely reason to look into fraud, in my opinion. But republicans (specifically the die hard trumpers) are no better than the left in a lot of ways. I still keep seeing the registration vs voter numbers floating around on twitter, even though it’s already been disproven. Most of those registration numbers are from previous elections. Those are also states that have same day registration. I also saw trumpers sharing a video of a guy unloading something by a polling place, claiming they were tampering with ballots... turned out, it was just camera equipment. But trumpers jumped on that video and assumed the worst. They want the worst. They want this to be fraud. They care more about trump winning than they do about honesty or integrity.

I’m a political junkie. Analyzing trends and human interaction and how people respond to certain events is my thing. I live for it. Back when I was in high school, I knew I wasn’t going to college. But if someone somehow had the capability of forcing me to go, there were three subjects I would have considered, and political science was one of them (the other two were criminal justice and history). I love this stuff. And why this election is going this way currently is a whole rant I could do, but I’ll spare you. Regardless, Congress is more important than the presidency anyways. And there are way worse and/or more important things in life than who wins this election. There are far greater evils people face every day. This ain’t something to get work up over.

I’m sorry this kind of went off on a tangent, but I deeply annoyed right now. By everyone. Just sit tight. Vote your conscience. Approach all information with a critical mind. Don’t cling to false information without verification just because it’s convenient for you. And, if your guy loses, accept it like an adult and understand that things could be worse.

I’m not sure if you’re a Biden or trump supporter or third party. I guess I assumed trump just based on the attitude of the message and the implication behind it. That, plus I have mostly trump supporters following me. Regardless, all this information applies.

[hardytoms]

Hi! I do have a question about politics and Biden/Harris. I want to preface this by saying that I am not American and all I know about the elections is from the internet & Philip DeFranco. I recently started following a youtuber who, when Bernie dropped off the race (i lov him sm), she told everyone to STILL VOTE GREEN in the elections in november, that she couldn't respect people who voted for Biden because they thought he was the lesser of two evils (1/?)

she said that if you were from a swing state and you voted for Biden, that you didn't really care about people, that you just wanted to get Trump out of office, and that it'd be better if you voted green. I felt like this was a little... harsh? extreme? because of course you (i was about to say we as if my voice counted LMAO) want to get Trump out of office. is that not the point? I really am trying to understand, I swear. I know Biden/Harris are not great, but definitely better than Trump (2/?)

and i feel like ultimately, any votes that don't go to Biden right now, are going to Trump. I don't know. I'm sorry, I'm mexican and I don't know much, but... it does worry me that, for example the last elections, the people who voted for Harambe or third party ultimately helped get Trump elected. EVERYONE would have to agree to vote third party to not get Biden or Trump elected. right? she has a pretty big following and it scares me a little that she could be influencing them. (3/3)

Ahhh yes this is such a good question!!! Thank you for asking!!! And honestly your thoughts here are really the root of the struggle with this election (at least in my opinion). I totally don’t speak for everyone so I want to make sure that’s said. I also wanna say I 1000% understand why American voters are feeling disenfranchised and not wanting to vote at all so I want to make sure I approach this with empathy because so many people’s lives are going to be affected negatively no matter who wins. My answer might be all over the place because it totally is a complex and really nuanced issue so if anything is confusing at all please lmk!! 

In terms of a Biden vote meaning you don’t care about people, I think for most rational Americans, and those of us who are leftist/socialist (at least those of of us who, at the minimum would have voted for Bernie and even to a lesser extent, Warren), the point is to get Trump out of office but many people who don’t want to vote for either aren’t voting because they truly don’t feel that Biden is the better option. For a lot of people who aren’t wanting to vote at all, it’s because they feel they’re voting for just sliding scales of morality and both Trump’s and Biden’s morals (and therefore the policies they’ll choose to support) are corrupt. Trump is the obvious and outspoken fascist, but Biden is just wrapped in a veneer of progressivism because he doesn’t explicitly say he wants to disenfranchise voters, he’ll just do it by picking a VP that has a long and icky history of turning Black people into felons and therefore excising them of their right to vote ever again. (For what it’s worth, people with a felony record in CA where Kamala Harris was DA and senator can vote with some qualifiers, unlike many other states). For a lot of people, especially BIPOC, their lives are threatened under both candidates so why vote for either if neither will make them feel safe or care about their basic human rights?

It’s hard too because we do know what a Trump 2nd term will bring and it’s fascism and the removal of everyone’s rights/healthcare/access/etc. as much as he possibly can manage. With Biden those particular risks are just not at the same level. The way he is damaging is in different ways and people are unfortunately being forced to choose whether he as a president will be more harmful or less harmful than Trump, so it’s really about what each individual person is willing to sacrifice and “put up with” because clearly all of us are going to sacrifice in very painful ways (to put it lightly) no matter which candidate is picked. I do think part of it too is playing into Republican hands to make Biden look as bad as Trump, which I feel is what they did in 2016, as well, and it worked. If we’re talking about the basic, will Biden put children in cages, will he build a border wall, will he refuse to leave office if he gets elected and loses re-election, will he xyz - no, I personally do not feel he will. And if that, for me, is the bar I’m voting at, then he’s getting my vote, if that makes sense. (For me personally, it just doesn’t track that the right can get a spray-tanned used sock into power and all unite behind him in unison, but the moderate to liberal left can’t unite behind one fucking person to keep a fascist from exercising his dictator inclinations.)

One of the other big things people feel is that centrism is the death of progressivism. Malcolm X and MLK both talked a lot about this with respect to being Black and in general, a person of colour, and I’m REALLY going paraphrase it here but basically, lots of people feel that voting for Biden will make Democrats/centrists/liberals complacent. The republicans and conservative party are getting more and more extreme and far-right with every new candidate so the fear is that to be a “moderate” democrat and to be successful, you have to bend to the will of Republicans to even casually get both sides to agree, which inches each “moderate” Democrat further from being left-leaning and more toward being right-leaning because the demands of the GOP are such fucking thinly veiled fascist demands at this point, if that makes sense.

With respect to the idea of not voting for Biden meaning a vote goes to Trump, it’s sort of true and not true at the same time (in my opinion). If someone doesn’t vote for Biden, it’s not *literally* a vote for Trump because you *literally* voted for a third party candidate, but in the nuance of how electoral politics work, the American two-party and electoral system does feel like it turns it into “if you don’t vote for one of the major candidates, your vote won’t count at all.” It’s easy to say “well if everyone voted for the Green Party then they’d win”, but as we saw in 2016, the person who wins the most votes doesn’t necessarily win the presidency, so even if most of us did vote for a third party candidate, we’d all have to do so in EVERY state enough to outvote not only Biden but Trump as well. And it ABSOLUTELY would mean the states with a lot of electoral votes (in particular Florida because historically whoever wins FL’s electoral votes generally wins the presidency) would have to go toward the Green Party candidate.

I do feel that telling people if they don’t vote for a third party candidate that they don’t really care about people is harsh because a vote for Biden isn’t just a vote for the president, it’s a vote for a supreme court judge (who rules for their ENTIRE life or until they actively choose to step down - this person WILL be as disgusting as Kavanaugh under a Trump 2nd term at best and at worst, a 2nd Trump presidency will get to choose two more SCOTUS judges), it’s a vote for hundreds and hundreds of political offices approved by the President and confirmed by the Senate, it’s a vote to kick DeVos and Barr the fuck out, it’s a vote for climate change and for abortion access and LGBTQ+ healthcare, it’s a vote for someone who won’t tweet his presidency (the bar is so low), it’s a vote for representatives of the US who won’t act like fools in front of foreign powers, etc. etc. Lots of people are being forced to vote for him even when they don’t want to (like me) the same way lots of people are feeling forced to note vote at all because both of them feel dangerous to themselves in different ways. 

For me, it feels like a MASSIVE gamble to say I’m not gonna vote for either because I think that we as a country need a revolution. I said this on Twitter but feeling like the revolution needs to happen before you’ll vote hinges a lot on that revolution actually happening and if we’re gonna be honest, I don’t think it will happen. Will I be a part of it? Yes. Will I attempt to dismantle the system we have? Without a doubt. But I’m also going to vote for the candidate that will keep my rights to be able to do that even if I think he’s kind of a sentient sock puppet.

Here is another post that talks about it that I agree with.

This was SO LONG and I’m super sorry!!!! I hope this at least sort of answered what you were getting at?? It’s a complicated question that people understandably have a lot of mixed feelings about so I hope my answer made sense!!

[ssuppiger21ahsgov]

Political Party Action

Party Standpoints: Gentrification and Police Brutality

Republican:

 - Police should always be respected. They work hard and are given difficult work to deal with. The divide the country is making by disrespecting and distrusting the police is unneeded and harmful.

 - Didn’t touch on the topic of gentrification

My guess as to why it wasn’t included is because to solve gentrification and displacement, federal funding and a plan to regulate companies has to be involved. A lot of the republican party (that has power to influence the laws and legislation) doesn’t like when more federal funds go towards helping the lower class.

I don’t agree with their stances on how we should just appreciate the police’s work because the police system is corrupt. I think instead of just appreciating that a lot of people are protected by the police, we should look at why so many people are not protected by the police and make reforms to the criminal justice system to stop the police brutality. Part of the reason why gentrification is a big issue too is because once people become displaced because rent is too expensive and the homeless people have to either go somewhere else or stay in the streets. The homeless are not treated well by the police and neither are people in low-income neighborhoods because it gets over-policed and more poor people go to prison. Once they get released, they go back to being homeless or in a low-income neighborhood, get over-policed again, and then end up in prison again. This creates an endless cycle.

Democrat:

 - Police Brutality is a real and prevalent issue in the US and it disproportionately affects Black and Latino communities. “Evidence based investments in education, jobs, health care, and housing are proven to keep communities safe and prevent crime from occurring in the first place” and the US system has “criminalized poverty, overpolices and underserved Black and Latino communities and cut public services”. 

 - Police are expected to do way too much for their jobs and deal with crises they are not trained for. Reform needs to be made.

I agree completely. It is true a lot of reform needs to happen to the police system and that starts with funding social services that help low-income communities and re-training the police so that they can deal with situations differently. The funding will help the police because people won’t be doing as much crime if they are getting the basic essentials to live like healthcare, a place to live, an education, and a job. 

Libertarian:

 - Favor repealing all laws creating “crimes without victims” such as gambling, the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, and consensual transactions involving sexual services.

 - The constitutional rights of the criminally accused, including due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must be preserved. 

 - They reject the idea that a natural right can ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that “right.” They condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should neither deny nor abridge any individual’s human right based upon sex, wealth, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference, or sexual orientation.

I agree with them on the front that racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. should not be tolerated. I agree that “crimes without victims” should be repealed. I wish they covered more about gentrification because I don't know what their opinion on it is. I would think they would be against it because they don’t agree with racial discrimination and gentrification disproportionately affects oppressed racial groups in this country.

Green:

 - Negative effects of imprisonment are far-reaching and unjust

 - They recognize how our criminal justice reform is racist and founded from ideas from Jim Crow

 - Increased affordable housing can help alleviate the problem of homelessness but the homeless also have additional needs that go far beyond housing that need to be addressed

They basically have the same standpoint as the Democrats and the Independents. Police brutality is real, criminal justice reform needs to be made, and to help with homelessness, we need to fund more social services. I agree with all of this.

Peace and Freedom:

 - Big fans of socialism

 - Want to end all forms of racial discrimination

 - Want to prosecute and punish police and prison officials who brutalize and murder.

 - Minority families are  disproportionately victimized by cutbacks in health care, education, child care, welfare, food stamps and jobs

I agree with these as well. Again, I feel like all of the parties agree that reform needs to be made to our criminal justice system and funds need to be spent on the poor people in this country. I also like this party because it pushes the idea of socialism which I think is a good thing and would solve a lot more of our issues.

Reflection:

I most identify with all of the parties except the republicans. All of the other parties held the same idea for my topics. I am surprised that pretty much everyone else agreed because I thought more people would not want to spend federal money on homelessness but I guess a lot more people are in agreeance than are represented in the White house. 

I would still vote for the Democratic nominee for president because voting for a third party in this election won’t do anything except take votes away from the democratic party and essentially give a vote to Trump, the Republican nominee. Trump is very strongly against police reform and fixing homelessness in this country by doing anything besides more over-policing.

Presidential Debate Assessment:

Police brutality was brought up during the debate, however, it was tough to understand a lot of what was being said because Trump wouldn’t let his opponent get his opinion out before interrupting him. Joe Biden stated he didn’t want to abolish the police and Trump kept interrupting him saying that Joe has contradicted himself in the past few weeks on this subject. Joe also brought up how Trump only created civil unrest by trying to put down the Black Lives Matter protests in major cities by sending federal militia to violently put down the protests which only created more unrest. Besides that, Trump also did not condemn white supremacists in that same debate which shows how he wants to appeal to his racist voters and supporters. I do not want a president in power who won’t condemn racists.

[alexsmitposts]

UK: Everyone Now Drowning in Enoch’s Rivers of Blood The Prophet Enoch is a well-known figure in the Old Testament. Consequently his name has been popular as a personal name at certain periods, with parents of Jewish and Christian backgrounds naming their sons after him. The name never used to have any significance, except in reference to the biblical figure, other family members or some minor celebrity used to be the fictional character “Aynuk”, who features in comic dialogues with his mate “Ayli” (Eli) in local humour from the Black Country, the industrial area to the west of Birmingham – if you can understand the dialect. But nowadays it is a very brave person who dares give their child the name Enoch. It has developed connotations so disturbing that no one wants to be associated with it. “Enoch” is an insult you give to a particularly nasty, bigoted, narrow minded racist who is happy to be that way, regardless of the harm it causes. Call someone that, and you expect a violent or verbally aggressive reaction, a lot of other people joining in, and probably several trips to the hospital. So why has the man who destroyed the reputation of this name come back into the news? In the UK, where he did his evil deeds, there was no story. But the rest of the world has noticed his resurgence for the same reason they do when former Communists gain votes in Eastern bloc countries, and the German and Italian far right make comebacks. These countries are supposed to have got over all that nonsense, but here they are, backsliding into the bad old days. For over fifty years, British political life has tried to move beyond Enoch Powell. Now he is being looked back on with fondness by the most extraordinary constituency. What he represents has gained a new respectability – and this is as frightening as any nuclear bomb, or deranged US president, when you realise why this has happened, and how easily it can happen anywhere else. Beyond fame One of many ironies in this story is that he wasn’t even supposed to be an Enoch. The notorious former Conservative and then Ulster Unionist MP was christened John Enoch Powell, and therefore not expected to use his middle name in everyday life. Powell was always known to be intellectually brilliant. He was a classical scholar who university contemporaries remembered being very much a loner, simply because he couldn’t find anyone of his own level to talk to. Even near the end of his life, when accused of agreeing with something outrageous in conversation at a dinner, a witness to the event commented: “He wouldn’t remember because he is always in the clouds above us. He was probably speaking Aramaic at the time.” Yet despite his many gifts and accomplishments, Powell lives in history as a result of a speech he made in Birmingham in 1968 in which he attacked mass immigration from the British Commonwealth. This is known as the “Rivers of Blood” speech, because although he didn’t actually use those words, he quoted this line from Virgil’s Aeneid: “As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see ‘the River Tiber foaming with much blood’”. This astonishing attack on people of colour by a senior politician got Powell sacked from the Shadow Cabinet (the opposition party’s alternative ministerial team). But they struck a chord with many people who felt that the UK was being overrun by “foreigners” (non-white people), and they were becoming strangers in their own land. Though hardly anyone in a public position wanted to be associated with Powell thereafter, his views were shared by many voters, who thus considered themselves a persecuted underclass, being robbed of what was rightfully theirs by a liberal elite incapable of representing them. Exactly the same arguments used by the Brexit cult and its supporters today. Down the pub, in safe environments, you could admit to agreeing with Enoch Powell. In places regarded as “respectable” and “establishment,” his views and supporters were beyond the pale. Yet now, in a poll by the radio station of The Times newspaper, the most “establishment” journal of all, 16% of respondents have stated that Enoch Powell, out of a long list of historical figures, would have made a good Prime Minister. That is the third highest number. Just imagine how loved someone must be to be the third most desired leaderin any country’s history. Powell died over twenty years ago. But his racist rhetoric, and general outspokenness on other subjects, are still part of the UK’s political legacy. Everyone still knows who Enoch was, and why he’s famous, and has an opinion on him. Far from softening his reputation, time has magnified it beyond the many failures Powell endured after his notorious speech. So have the many attempts, at every official level, to declare him and his views unacceptable., because these are so obviously political in nature, dictates from above. When consulted by people in authority about other issues, people who agree with Powell think they are being spoken to as fellow human beings. If they mention race issues,they feel they are talking to a dictated opinion, imposed upon the people who repeat it as much as them. This sends them running to anyone who can treat them with respect, but still hold these abhorrent views. But Brexit has taken the sad rehabilitation of Enoch Powell to another level. Leaving the EU remains as it always was: the mantra of those who feel dispossessed because they have the “wrong views” on immigration and many other matters. Winning that argument has made the “Enochs” feel they are now in charge, and can behave however they like. BoJo the Clown and his circus have made this acceptable, and they pride themselves on doing what no other government has dared to say or do, because that in itself makes them heroes to people who just want someone to listen to them. All this has made Enoch a Prophet once again. For some he is a martyr to political correctness, the forerunner of Farage who suffered for being on the side the Brexit referendum has now proved right, in its own eyes. But most of us never deal with anyone like Enoch Powell. We don’t have a framework to see him within. This isn’t because it doesn’t exist, but because it does – and makes us all look so stupid, we wish it didn’t. Beyond point Powell has had several biographers. Each one has soon discovered that Powell had very clear positions on a wide range of topics, each meticulously argued, often in the face of intellectual disapproval. For example, it is generally agreed that although Saint Matthew’s Gospel is placed first in the New Testament, Saint Mark’s Gospel was written earlier. Powell spent decades trying to prove the contrary, with a supreme belief in his own understanding backed by wide and deep scholarship few can ever have equalled in this field. The big task for a biographer is to work out how all Powell’s different positions fitted together, and what this tells us about the man. Each one has made a point of saying they have done this. But by the act of doing so, they make clear that there isn’t a definitive understanding, and that what they think may be their personal conclusion, but there is room for argument. As a result of the horrible views he expressed, no one wants to bracket Powell with other great geniuses. But he was undoubtedly a major figure in the political life of his day, even when he no longer had any chance of office, or even a party he could call his own. Major figures do have one thing in common. Everyone who is good at a particular thing is very different from all the others who are good at it. Think of artists, car makers, sportspersons, newsreaders – if they are good, they are distinct, and do what only they can do. Brilliant people have the next dimension up. They can only function by being not only different, but the opposite. They cannot accept the arguments everyone else finds persuasive. They can only exercise their brains by arguing the opposite of what everyone else accepts, simply because only people of their intellectual level can do that successfully. Enoch Powell was an early exponent of what later became known as monetarism. He developed his views at a time when Keynesianism was the accepted logic, backed by powerful political and social forces which declared all non-accepters to be morally maladjusted, unable to grasp the rightness of the new, post World War Two classless society. In time, professional economists started drawing the same conclusions as Powell. Most of these probably never knew that Powell had had the same ideas first, and wouldn’t have wanted to admit it if they had, because he was a layman in economic terms. But when Keynesianism ran its course, politicians such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, like Powell conservatives who gloried in seeming extreme, adopted a lot of Powell’s own economic thinking as if it were their own. Most thinkers in such circumstances would be glad to be proved right. But Powell was rather upset, insisting that these people didn’t really understand his arguments. What he meant was, if his arguments were so poor that his inferiors could understand them, they weren’t as good as he thought they were. The mere fact that his views had been accepted meant he had to reject them as unworthy of his superior intelligence. This is the one common thread in Enoch Powell’s outrageous and contrary bucketful of opinions. They were so wrong that only a brilliant man would be able to think and argue them. Powell needed the power of his own argument, which was always more important to him than believing a word he said. Maybe Enoch Powell really did believe his evil rhetoric. But that wasn’t important. The point was to gain intellectual stimulus by trying to make the impossible true. It’s the way brilliant people operate. But doesn’t it remind you of anyone else? Beyond acceptance Donald Trump and Boris Johnson are in broadly the same part of the political spectrum Powell was. Neither is regarded as anywhere near as brilliant as Enoch. But they attract the same sort of visceral adoration from the same type of people: those who feel excluded for having the “wrong views,” who feel these wilful outsiders represent their interests and no one else does. Both Trump and Johnson are regarded by many as pathological liars, and with considerable justification. This is often considered, rightly or wrongly, to be par for the course for politicians. What makes these two different is that they don’t seem to care, or understand why anyone else should. Trump is so associated with lying to his back teeth that people began counting his lies even before he had been elected. Since then, this has become a cottage industry, and has produced disturbing data. But Donald doesn’t care, and neither do his supporters. All that matters is that he makes the argument he wants to make, no matter how wrong and downright dangerous it is. He doesn’t feel any need to believe a word he says, or have anyone else believe it, it is all about how he says it. BoJo was sacked for lying when he was a newspaper columnist, and has made a long string of offensive statements about every segment of the population, in print and in person. Thousands of these are also well-documented. When this was brought to his attention, he told everyone to ignore whatever he might have written or said. It was all show, people shouldn’t conclude that he actually believed anything he’d ever said or done in his whole life. Those who buy into the racist rhetoric and wilful contrariness of Enoch Powell, Donald Trump and Boris Johnson do so because they believe in what these men say. It matters to them, it’s important. But those who say it are only interested in advancing an argument to convince themselves they can get away with it. They don’t have to believe it themselves, and aren’t interested in whether they do. Maybe we want someone to con us so we don’t have to admit we’ve conned ourselves. We all know, deep down, that conning ourselves leads to nowhere good. We don’t want to put ourselves in that place, or our friends and family. So we let Enoch and Donald and Boris do it for us, in public, and let them take the blame for what we have chosen to become. This is what these people represent, and as Enoch isn’t alive to disappoint anyone, he always will – if we let him, by continuing to let his successors get away with it.

[lhs3020b]

Just one more thought, while we still have an hour or so left.

And this is a slightly different tone from the rest of what I’ve written in this series. But I think it needs saying. Basically, memento mori.

Don’t assume that something like this can’t happen to you.

If you’d asked me about the likelihood of Brexit even five years ago, I’d have dismissed it. At that point, everyone was still talking about Grexit (anyone else remember that?). Hell, even as recently as referendum night itself I still assumed that it would go our way, albeit maybe by only a small margin. It was only really as late as 2 AM in the morning when it became obvious that the votes just weren’t there when I finally got the sick feeling in my stomach that “oh shit, this is real”.

Pre-referendum Britain was a long way from perfect. Honestly, the Coalition years (2010-2015) were one punch in the face after another. (I suspect that a subtle factor in the recent Tory landslide might be that our two recent experiences of not-one-party rule - the Coalition and Theresa May’s DUP-deal nonsense - were both entirely-disagreeable.) I’m the last person to say that I think there were no problems. There is a streak of thought in British centrism who have this weird idea that everything was fine until the referendum, often with the 2012 Olympics as a sort of fabled “last glorious summer before the War”. (Chuka Umuna was particularly-associated with this sort of complacency.)

Still, that aside, the descent into outright xenophobia was bewilderingly-fast. I really don’t recognise the place where I live anymore - superficially, the individual people still seem nice enough, but something ugly seems to happen at the collective level. I still don’t feel like I understand it. Frustration over poor living conditions, toxic propaganda pushed by our collection of unhinged newspapers, opportunistic politicians willing to pander for votes (funny how people only pander to public opinion, but no-one ever tries leading it) - all of these things are factors, but none of them are unique to us. Lots of countries have biased media, shitty pols and angry voters.

Whatever the underlying problem is (and I have my own theory), the pathology is certainly more advanced in the UK. But it’s not unique to us. It could erupt somewhere else. (Let’s not forget that a literal fascist recently took a third of the vote in the last presidential election in France, or that AfD are now the third-largest party in the Bundestag, or even that Austria had a near-miss on getting a neo-fascist as president in 2016.)

When this stuff erupts, it can sprout faster than you expect, and before you know it, the madness has taken root everywhere. Sadly, I don’t think that Brexit will be the end of this. Until such a time as the centrists come to their senses and realise that they keep opening up political space for the extreme Right, there will be more of this.

Memento mori. Please learn from what happened here. Because if you don’t, it could be you next.

[tkrr]

The Left isn’t as progressive as it thinks it is

So Taylor Swift is a fan of Kamala Harris, who, let’s hope, will be our next Vice President. I just wanted to acknowledge that, and it really does show that Taylor’s serious about her feminism, because Harris is an absolutely fantastic choice for VP. She was my favorite choice out of the gate for president, but she dropped out before primary season... but here we are. 

I didn’t come here to talk about Taylor though. 

One of the most disillusioning things in my life was working as director on a public access talk show where a bunch of old New Lefties from the 60s sat around and discussed issues of the day. I did this for a couple of years until the producer and I drifted apart, at which point the 2016 campaign was in full swing and I was getting sick and tired of the constant Hillary-bashing. (She was “ambitious”, you know.) They rarely discussed social issues, and when they did it was usually related to some kind of international relief operation (like the one in Haiti a few years back) or castigating Democrats for turning away from the labor vote. (I don’t think I ever heard the phrase “identity politics”, but...) When Obergefell v Hodges came down from the Supreme Court in 2015, their first show after it happened was yet another rehash of the Israel/Palestine issue. As I was in the early stages of planning my transition, this didn’t go over well with me, but I kept my mouth shut and put up with it for another year. They were of course very concerned with corporate influence, with a regular set decoration being an American flag with the stars replaced by corporate logos. This was not the left I thought I’d be working for.

See, I’d done a lot of work with another producer on a show covering issues relevant to the homeless in our area. That felt good. That was, and is, how I see progressivism -- my contribution might have bordered on slacktivism from the outside, but I was providing a link in a chain for people who actually needed help. Similarly, the producer of the show I was talking about before had used me as director on a show about local public school issues; progressivism to me involves listening to people at risk and helping them reduce that risk. That was what the Civil Rights Movement did, and what groups like the Black Panthers tried to do. Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, Amnesty international -- this is stuff that matters to people in their immediate, daily lives. I had kept the populist left -- call them Bernouts, fire baggers, the Green Tea Party, whatever -- at arm’s length, but I kind of assumed that these things were priorities for everybody claiming to be on the left. This... did not turn out to be the case. 

What I’ve learned, from that experience and from the last few election cycles, is that the populist left is not on the same page as the activists who are actually putting effort towards directly taking care of people. They talk about labor rights, which falls into that category, but they put other issues, especially civil rights issues, on the back burner. There’s a lot of emphasis on foreign policy, but usually in a very simplistic way that’s clearly still stuck in the Reagan era. (Which is jarring when you hear it from someone who was born after Reagan left office.) When Euromaidan happened in Ukraine in 2014, they bought the Russian government’s side of the story hook, line, and sinker, despite the people noting that the rhetoric came straight out of the USSR’s propaganda playbook. They treated Noam Chomsky, Glenn Greenwald, Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden as gospel, but oddly enough I don’t remember them talking about Chelsea Manning much. (I wonder why. 🏳️‍🌈? Nah, can’t be...) The supposedly “progressive” populist left overall has this kind of tunnel vision, and I can’t help but notice they’ve been replaying the same scripts since the 1960s. The last time I looked at the Green Party USA’s platform, it was such a bizarre mix of things that actually make sense combined with things that were either wrong or outright insane that I realized I could probably never vote for a Green candidate. (That in and of itself is fodder for an article I do not have the time or the energy to write.) On top of all that, there’s the sheer self-destructiveness -- I can’t understand how someone can say that their conscience is clear for voting for third-party if the simple math means their vote made it harder to advance the agenda they say they want.

What it comes down to is that there are two “left”s, and they’re only just barely compatible. I wish I didn’t have to concede the word “progressive” to the populist side, because fundamentally, no matter to what extent they manage to diversify their own base, they wind up sidelining the concerns of marginalized people (particularly black and Jewish people; there’s a link at the bottom of the article written by a black writer for a Jewish audience that I found very enlightening) in favor of centering a “generic” narrative that ultimately comes down to “things white people worry about”. The scary part of this is that because they’re basically reactionary, they don’t realize that the economically-centered message they’re pointing out is not actually as helpful for all citizens as they think it is, and will never admit it. One particular point I’ve made occasionally -- the class narrative is irrelevant for most African Americans. Shows like “The Jeffersons”, “The C*sb* Show”, and “Fresh Prince of Bel Air” were all about wealthy, successful black families; there were working class black sitcoms as well (I wish “227″ had the same staying power as “Golden Girls”), but the ones we remember were all about black families that made it, and one of the stinger lines from the pilot of “The Jeffersons” was Marla Gibbs’ character Florence saying “How come we overcame and nobody told me?” Yes, I’m white. But this is stuff that other white people could find out if they bothered to look into it.

In the end, though, the worst aspect of all of this is the reductionism. It becomes an argument over who’s lefting better than all the other lefties, to the point where “liberal” has somehow become synonymous in some circles with “anyone right of Bernie Sanders”. (Which is really ironic given Kamala Harris’ voting record in Congress, running left of Bernie.) I don’t see too much of the crowd doing that going out and trying to do the things that make people’s lives better directly; it all amounts to telling people how much better things will be Come The Revolution™, but any efforts that fall short of total societal reform *right fucking now* are seen as worse than failure. Once in a great while, some will admit that they think that these are just bribes to the proletariat to stave off the revolution, but to be honest, I don’t think most of them have put that much thought into it. This isn’t the left I want to represent. If your plans don’t start with “first do no harm”, they’re going to have an opportunity cost far too high to be morally acceptable. And if standing on principle means giving up your opportunity to advance a progressive agenda, your “progressive” principles are worthless. 

(I had some other points to make involving cancel culture, but it’s 2:30 AM and this is already a rather long post. Maybe I’ll do a second one that includes it.)

The link I mentioned above: https://forward.com/opinion/435826/why-the-left-has-failed-with-black-voters/

[mrtroy]

America Needs Both

I've been reading a lot of opinions of my friends, pundits and others over the last few weeks.  Corona virus.  Racial injustice. Police brutality.  The coming presidential election. 

I feel like with each passing issue, the divide gets deeper.  The differing sides seemingly getting further apart.  Some of these opinions I agree with. Some I don't.  But the more I think about it, the more I realize as a nation, we need both sides of most of our issues.  No, we don't need racism.  We don't need looting.  Or police brutality.    But we do need the ability for people with different opinions and viewpoints to be able to have those viewpoints without vilifying them.  We need a nation where we understand that black lives matter. But we also need a nation where our public servants (police, teachers, government officials) matter too.  You may be angered by one side of that paradigm right now, but in order for our nation to truly live up to its ideal, we need both.  We need a nation where people in cities feel represented.  And we also need to provide opportunities to those who live in rural America.  We need corporations.  And small businesses.  We need non-profits.  And agencies that watch out for at risk portions of the community.  Right now, there's a good chance that the idea of voting for the candidate opposite your preferred political party seems like an outrageous thought, but lest not forget that whoever our next president is will again be governing our entire nation.  Forget who wins, how beneficial will it be to our nation to have roughly half of our citizens enraged?  Say what you want about Donald Trump, but he realized in 2016 that a large subsection of our population felt like the policies that Barack Obama's administration had enacted didn't appeal to them.  Pause.  Whatever you think about that statement above, it is true.  Now, fast forward to 2020, whoever wins this election will signal to our nation that we either want to go the same direction, or back the other way.  Joe Biden is currently running campaign messaging that is asking potential voters to condemn the acts of Donald Trump and pledge their allegiance to Biden's campaign.  Let's just say this works. I have no idea who will win this election, but just for the sake of this piece, let's say it's Biden.  Come January of 2021, we'll have the opposite half of our nation that can't wait to vote a president out of office.  Not only that, but if Biden were to follow suit with Obama and Trump, and if balances of power stay split in the House and Senate, we're going to spend the next four years seeing different pieces of legislation that previous administrations enacted be reversed.  Or, we'll see the opposing party block things in the Senate to the point where very little will change in Washington.  At this point as you read, you might be thinking, okay, you're a moderate, or, you're arguing for party reform, or maybe the abolition of the electoral college.  And while some of those things may be the answer (I'm not educated enough on those topics to know for sure) what I'm actually arguing for is something that isn't political at all.  It comes back to the examples I gave at the beginning of this piece.  America needs both of its major points of view.  As people, are we better off accepting our neighbor with a different point of view, or turning them into a sworn enemy until they see things exactly how we do?  Before you fire off a retort to a school of thought where you just can't possibly accept Point X of someone's viewpoint, realize that person may be reading this same piece and thinking the same thing about not accepting your point of view.   If we continue in these cycles of behavior, where do we end up?  Do we just keep browbeating each other until one school of thought dies out? Or, do we end up having the public conversations where we say one thing to avoid drawing a reaction, but actually believe something else in private?  To be clear, I don't know how to fix every issue. I don't know how to find a common middle ground for some of society's most inflammatory issues.  But what I do think would be a good start would be to stop trying to make every issue one-sided. 'If you don't believe this, you must be a raving lunatic.' Or, 'If you believe this, you can't possibly call yourself a good person.'  And yes, I have been guilty of reacting in the above manners in discussions I've had. But, bringing these kinds of attitudes to any conversation / debate / issue rarely leads to change and it rarely helps anything.  So, rather than jumping all over your neighbor - or silently writing them off in your brain - the next time you disagree with them, I think we all need to do a better job finding a middle ground.  And again, this isn't to say that we should tolerate terrible things in our country because we're doing the neighborly thing and accepting people's vile viewpoints.  But it is to say that we should be able to find a way to find a middle ground on things that are worth finding a middle ground on.  Because I think many of us can agree that the status quo we've got going on isn't working. For the rest of this year, we can find some solace in saying, 'Vote in November.' But come December, all of us have to live with the officials we elect - and it doesn't do us much good if roughly half of the population is ready to lose their mind if their candidate happens to be the one who loses.  -- I have always thought American ingenuity was our greatest virtue as a country. Throughout our history, we've had groundbreaking inventors and innovators that have figured out new and better ways to do things in more effective ways.  We need to muster up some more ingenuity as a nation. To modify how we think and how we react to opposing thought. We have to empower the things that make us different to also make us great.  We cannot simply agree to disagree.  Or, stop trying to address topics in our world because the opposing sides on certain issues are simply too far apart.  We also cannot simply take politics, or matters of social / racial justice off the table when things get too touchy to deal with.  We must not run to the safety of only those who think like we do and attempt to isolate ourselves from anyone who thinks differently.  We must ask ourselves, in 2020, do we want to attempt to solve the issues plaguing our nation, or do we want to continue to point out how stupid, or wrong, or morally bankrupt our neighbors are?  Let's say you were brought into a situation as a third-party mediator in a fight between two neighbors in the town next to yours.  Let's say you agreed with one of the neighbors, but after talking to the second neighbor, you could see that he or she was 100% convicted on where they stood  -  and weren't trying to be a jerk about anything in any apparent way...  If it was your goal to help these neighbors, would you start your engagement with a ruthless insult of the second neighbor?  Would you tell your neighbor that if he didn't come around to seeing things the way the first neighbor did, he may as well be an idiot?  Would you tell your neighbor that his family - and anyone that thinks like him - is a worthless pile of garbage for thinking the way he does?  Unfortunately, it seems as though these kinds of tactics are often resorted to in response to things happening that we don't agree with.  What about trying to find solutions?  What about trying to listen?  What about trying to work towards mutually beneficial outcomes?  These are the things we need to be doing.  Not arguing.  -- In closing, as discussions, debates and conversations happen over these next few months, try to be empathetic to your fellow humans.  Yes, there are some terrible people in the world who have thoughts that are not worth considering a second side of. However, there are also millions of our neighbors that think differently than we do that are fantastic human beings who deserve to be heard and respected. 

America is better when the right and left find common ground.  America is better when opposing viewpoints are met with intrigue not detest.  America is better when we try to find solutions, rather than simply attacking our neighbors.  In a fantasy world, it might be nice to envision a way where one opinion or one side of an issue worked for everyone, but because that’s never been true at any point in history, America needs to embrace the fact that there are two sides to every issue, and we’re better off if we can consider both. 

[rabbitindisguise]

Honestly don't understand the whole "liberal moderates won't vote for Sanders!" fearmongering all over my news feed because of the advertisement dollars or what the fuck ever (Bezos and Buttigieg are clearly dumping their money on Biden like people trying to get water out of a sinking boat with a leaky pail keep dumping water back in the damn boat)

Like, first of all. Do liberal moderates even exist anymore. If they do, we're not friends, and I'm not interested in changing that.

Secondly, we decide who to vote for. And if we're truly actually committed to blue no matter what, then getting the anti-establishment vote from the third party candidates is worth all the handwringing a moderate democrat is going to feel about Sanders before they vote blue. To be frankly honest, the base they're hailing as the Suburban Blue Waves is unreliable as fuck. They didn't come out to play during the 2016 election. So what if they thought it was a done deal? I'm not gonna forgive that because it didn't get the results we needed. In comparison, Bernie bros are fuckin rabid forces to be reckoned with. I hate their sexism but for fucks sake, stick them in the election with Trump where they belong. I'd watch that nonsense like a WWE match. They can doxx each other back and forth while the rest of us do actual politics.

Thirdly. Trump says Sanders can't win. Trump is very bad at a lot of things, but Trump generally relies on fearmongering his own base to rage so they show up. The fact that he says he can't win is clearly targeting Democratics because simple reverse psychology is something Republicans are aware of. To endorse that position is to say you genuinely believe turnout after four years of a trump presidency is a genuine issue. Ethically and morally, I'm not sure how that is the god damn case. Pick a marginalized grou and Trump has tried to wipe them off the face of this earth. Is there some mythic democrat out there that doesn't give a shit about that, even though the Democratic party is the Giving A Shit About People Party?

And if you think that it is an issue that can be solved by reviving Obama Era "the president is going to commit war crimes the Democratic party will still be getting Republican criticism for years later despite that hypocrisy, but at least he didn't ruin the country worse than it already was!" moderate politics then you all profoundly don't understand what "I'm committed to a blue candidate no matter who the fuck they are" means for people like me who are the ~leftest left~

So yes. I will vote for Biden if he gets the primary because I stand by what I said a year ago and I'm no coward. I know everyone is oh so worried about the Will Probably Not Survive Another Trump Presidency Directly democrats (/s). I don't want him to win because I don't want to vote for his sorry ass. But I will. I will swallow whatever corporate bullshit is being pushed as an additional step in my lifelong pursuit of seeing a socialist in office. I expect every true supporter of Bernie to do the same. And I will give them grief if they don't. We cannot afford Trump to exist. That, at least, I am committed to.

But if he fucking loses I will not shut up about this bullshit for the rest of my life. Don't think there's a non-angry option either. I will be calling Biden and every supporter for his campaign every day if he wins, demanding better. I will be a nuisance so annoying but within the realms of acceptable behavior that there will be a new meme about a bunch of youths that do nothing but exist to thwart moderate politics. There is no way Biden goes well for you, Oh Moderate Fearing Democrat, the real moderate we have to worry about. The moderate phonecall from inside the house. The pearlcluther of devil's advocate politics. The Hypothetical Democrats Are Scarier Than The Reality Of Republicans championship winner, four years running. I will not curb my politics if Biden wins. I will not curb my politics if he loses. And my god, if he does lose, like Hillary Clinton, because everyone believes the country isn't "ready for socialism" . . . politics needs to start navel gazing until it realizes the only cockblocker of socialism are the people terrified that people won't like socialism. And that those people are all cowards. And that those people will have to deal with my socialism supporting anarchist ass until people stop dying from numerous preventable things. Fearful of the moderate democrat opinion, it is you who is the coward more than the moderate democrat themselves. I may have preferred Warren because electability did come to mind, but I never went so far as Biden out of my fears.

And I say all this, determined to vote blue. I have more dedication that any voter that thinks this is even a question. There is no question. Trump would rather see me dead in the streets, and I am hardly the most oppressed person in the world. If Trump wins, it will further embolden my Trump supporters and their transphobic bigotry. On top of supporting them in hurting people for no other reason than being born porn, or a person of color, or a woman, or a thousand other things. I have no choice but to vote blue. Anyone WITH a choice has only benefitted from Trump's presidency. And I damn well hope everyone with an inch of liberal beliefs realizes that their lives have been altered for the worse. The mythical moderate democrat included.

Because otherwise a blue win will be a hollow success, all fanfare and no substance. The moderate democrats will have learned nothing of what it is to be a compassionate human being. And Trump will still pose a risk until he's dead. I want this election to ruin any chance of him ever being elected again, and I'm convinced Bernie is the best way to do that. Undo the damage and move towards actual tangible progress in the hopes that the racism and bigotry standards in stark contrast with people illogically denying its benefits.

If you have a primary vote coming up in your state, consider the me-and-people-like-me ramifications. But who am I kidding. Who the hell is on Tumblr voting Biden. I'm preaching to the choir. In light of that, might as well end this on a different note: may none of us fuckin suffer as a result of a specter that may not even fuckin exist.