Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

George Takei's Based Voting Take [Rule}

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.

Custoslibera ,

This would all be resolved if America just changed first past the post voting.

SolarMech ,

Or if the debates weren't managed by a private entity owned by the other two parties.

Canada has first past the post voting, and 3 active parties. My province has first pas the post and has 4 major parties (with a 5th one that is close but can't get a representative in).
I'll agree that ranked voting at least would be a lot better.

psychothumbs ,

And it's a disaster in Canada. The only reason the Conservatives ever take power up there is because of the giant vote split between NDP and the Liberals. Look how the conservatives are heavy favorites to win their next election despite every poll showing them with less than the combined votes of the Liberals and NDP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_45th_Canadian_federal_election

SolarMech ,

I mean you assume that a significant number of NDP voters would vote for the libs if they weren't there (or maybe vice-versa). I'm really not sure of that.

psychothumbs ,

Yes I definitely assume that. Maybe not every single person since who knows what goes on in people's heads, but generally we should expect the voters for the two left of center parties to prefer the other left of center one to the right wing one. Particularly since presumably if there was a single party representing those voters it would probably be somewhere in between them ideology-wise.

SolarMech ,

Sorry for the late reply, the lack of a red envelope makes me not notice replies.

People on election day have to decide if they go voting at all. This is a big deal, it's what most of the campaign in the ridding is focusing on changing (you want to make sure all of your voters go vote, that is top priority in an election).

Having a party that is a bad fit for you is demotivating and likely­ to reduce turnout. That is what I mean by "likely to vote". It's not the right wing option that people will go for. It's the comfort of staying home and not bothering to vote for a "lib" if you're a progressive, or for a "commie" if you're a lib. For some people, the NDP is already too far right...

So yeah, some of the support of the NDP would transfer over to the liberal party, but definitely not all. And that's not to mention all of the crazy people who can go from NDP to tories at the drop of a hat (voters have shallower roots than the base, or have irrational hatred of specific politicians or parties) or who would just vote Bloq Québécois or something else.

Lianodel ,

Hoo boy. Against my better judgment, I'll wade into this pool.

  1. If voting for either party gets you the same result, fascists wouldn't be so focused on elections and trying so hard to take the vote away.

  2. Withholding your vote doesn't do anything. When has losing an election pushed either party left?

  3. Voting doesn't prevent you from engaging in other forms of direct action.

Both parties suck. People will needlessly suffer and die no matter who wins. But there are also people who will suffer and die under one party but not the other, and the same can't be said the other way around. Our democracy is fundamentally flawed, but voting is a tool at our disposal, and we're in no position to turn anything down.

Rozauhtuno ,
@Rozauhtuno@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

"Democrats have always fucked me over but I keep voting for them because the alternative is actively more harmful".

No, I don't find it touching nor powerful. This is a celebration of the failure of the 2 party system.

reverendsteveii ,

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"

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
  • random
  • incremental_games
  • meta
  • All magazines