• WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    What are you trying to say here? That it’s better to “take the higher ground” and just NOT vote? Giving the hardcore right-winger voters an even larger margin by which they elect the horrible option?

    You’re brainwashed. Election boycotts are a tried and true method of political participation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_boycott

    If a large portion of the electorate boycotts an election, it doesn’t legitimize either side. Even though one candidate ends up winning by a silly margin, that margin yields no political capital.

    • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’re brainwashed. Election boycotts are a tried and true method

      Depending on the voting mechanism and scale.

      Have you read the article you linked, Mr. Super Not Brainwashed?

      That only works in two scenarios:

      1. The voting system doesn’t punish non-voters (calculation based on the number of eligible voters, not valid votes).
      2. The protest is performed on such a massive scale, that the entire election is voided (usually below 50% turnout).

      There was NOWHERE NEAR enough interest from US voters for anybody sane to have any hope of the latter happening, and the US system doesn’t give a fuck about people abstaining.

      Election boycott is the offside trap of the election system - if it works, it works, if it doesn’t you just gave the opponent a massive advantage.