948
Has anyone noted the pre-election uptick?
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2026
948 points (94.7% liked)
Political Memes
12530 readers
1750 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It really makes me feel like the arguments (and votes) to the contrary (which are plenty throughout this thread) are coming from one of two kinds of people:
Foreign interests attempting to push the US further towards fascism
Incredibly naive people, likely including children
I just don't see how else a Trolley Problem answer like "I can't touch the lever, because that would mean I killed someone" could be applied here. You can either sit back and allow the US to slide further towards fascism or you can vote for the party lightly tapping the brakes. When it's primary season again, we can resume the very valid conversation about opposing the rightmost factions of the DNC.
Imagine a system where there are two rounds of voting, where we vote for a dinner we must all eat, between Salad, Sand, or Sewage. For numerous and mostly stupid reasons, Salad loses the first round and we now have to vote for Sand or Sewage.
I'm voting Sand, y'all. I know you'd rather eat Salad, and I would too, but it's off the table as of the end of the primaries. Encouraging people not to vote for Sand just pushes us towards being forced to eat Sewage.
Yes, it's infuriating. But here we are.
because both lever paths are going on the same track. That's the problem.
Every single one of these analogies is doing a specific thing - ignoring that there will be future elections.
Yes, if you're going to vote once for Sand or Sewage, you take Sand. But that is NOT the real choice. What you're actually voting for is "Sand now, Sewage to follow, since we're eliminating Salad".
See 2020 - and how that led to 2024 - for a perfect example.
Nope.
Open fascism is not the exact same as half-hearted resistance to fascism, and any argument to the contrary incites voter apathy which the fascists depend on. Similarly, voting against fascism does not drive the country further into fascism.
Vote with your heart during the primaries, and in the general you vote with your brain while plugging your nose.
Your stance only makes sense if you're unaware of the Spoiler Effect. Here's some reading for you on the topic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoiler_effect
Of course it is - because if you're not going to change direction, then slowing down the speed which you move to fascism doesn't matter.
And the Democrats as they stand are effective ONLY at stopping any move to the left.
Use your brain. Has your strategy worked? It's been done for literally 3 decades, and the US has drifted more and more to the right.
It's not hard to understand why, either, if you actually use your brain. You've removed any consequence for the supposed opposition to move to the right.
In a 2 party system, the most marginal voter is the one that sets policy. And you're demanding that the left make themselves the least marginal.
It is funny how shitlibs hold onto their arrogance above all. It's one reason why your brand is even more poisonous than the GOP, who most people do hate. They just hate you more, and this is why.
"A spoiler campaign in the United States is often one that cannot realistically win"
So Kamala was a spoiler?
This is beating around the bush because we're clearly using different definitions and you're getting increasingly ridiculous (straw-men and ad hominem) because you aren't getting any traction with logical arguments.
So let's establish what you're actually advocating for, as I've already made my stance clear above:
Which POTUS candidate did you vote for (or would you have voted for if you were eligible) in 2016?
Which POTUS candidate did you vote for (or would you have voted for if you were eligible) in 2020?
Which POTUS candidate did you vote for (or would you have voted for if you were eligible) in 2024?
Hell kiddo, I'll do you better . . . because I've got the mileage to show exactly how sick of this bullshit the Democratic Party does I am. Do you want the names of the rotating villians they used for the bait and switch as well? Cause I've got those.
2000 - Bradley primary / Nader general 2004 - Dean primary / Kerry general (volunteered for both) 2008 - Obama primary / Obama general (volunteered for both) 2012 - neither 2016 - Bernie primary (volunteered) / Hillary general 2020 - Bernie primary (volunteered) / Biden general (against my better judgement) 2024 - Marianne primary (what little there was) / De La Cruz general
When I tell you your Vote Blew No Matter Hoo nonsense doesn't work, it's because I've been there.
Okay cool, so you did the right thing by voting strategically until 2024, where you threw away your vote.
Whenever you see a headline with Trump in it, I hope you feel responsible.
I voted not to support genocide.
You threw away your vote - unless support for genocide is what you wanted?
No, I didn't nominate Harris. I didn't make her ignore her own campaign reports that Gaza could lose her the election.
You, meanwhile, enabled that, and seem to not only fail to reflect on that, but are proud of it. So you'll probably make the same mistake again next time.
No, you voted to let the genocide-lovers win rather than the mix of genocide-ambivalent to genocide-averse. You really think Trump isn't much more pro-genocide? Didn't he say he'd nuke Gaza to pave it over and build a hotel or whatever?
I voted for De La Cruz. In New York. So no, not in any way.
Buddy, you're the one who voted for genocide. I'm not sure why you're trying to make a moral argument that your vote for genocide support was somehow better than someone else's one, but here you are. You voted for a kindler, gentler, genocide or something?
Nah, you're exaggerating to fit your narrative. Not much point in further talking to you, I guess. Seeya.
I'm exaggerating that you voted for Kamala? How does one do that, you only kind of did or something?