Stuff changed. Are you happy with the changes? Cause I’m not. I want positive change, but I’d rather have the status quo than this. And I’d especially rather have incremental improvement rather than rapid devolution.
Refusing to vote in your best interests because you want faster change is absurd. Make changes happen where and when you can, and vote rationally.
This is the status quo. If you want positive change then you need to make a change instead of repeating the same behavior over and over while expecting different results.
I legitimately don’t understand how you can gesture at everything terrible happening around you while arguing that voting differently for once is “voting against your own best interests.” If that’s the case then what’s happening now is in your best interest, and you should be happy about that because this is the result of constantly maintaining the status quo every single election.
Yup. No doubt. But the choice between “things are bad” and “fascism” is, while distasteful, an easy choice. The spoiler effect means that in a First Past the Post voting system, mathematically, if you decide to instead vote for the idealistic but unpopular “things could be better,” all you’re doing is removing a vote from “things are bad,” which only benefits “fascism.”
It sucks. I know it sucks. But it’s what we have right now. Ideally we can make a better system, but we won’t get there by letting fascism win. At least not without a LOT MORE people dying.
Again, make positive change where and when you can, and vote rationally.
I mean, if you’re voting within a “first past the post” voting system for a solo position, then yeah you cannot vote outside the two expected, establishment choices and expect it to do anything other than spoil the next candidate you would have chosen.
You have to change the voting system first to something else like ranked choice.
Well if you’re so eager to keep people voting for the establishment choices, you really shouldn’t complain when either one of them wins, nor should you complain about the state of the government as both represent the system working exactly as you want it to.
Frankly, we should just simplify things by making everyone’s vote automatic based on which ever one of the two parties you register with and restrict any unapproved party or candidate from running for office. There’s no point in filling out ballots as this just leads to people voting incorrectly and opens the possibility of things happening outside of the establishment’s expectations, which is bad for everyone.
We just need to have faith and hold on to hope that the establishment will change the system that keeps them in power at some indeterminate point in the future, but for now we must do as the establishment commands.
“The two party system makes things terrible but dont you dare vote for any party other than the two parties or else things might become terrible.”
And people wonder why nothing ever changes.
*Gestures at everything*
Stuff changed. Are you happy with the changes? Cause I’m not. I want positive change, but I’d rather have the status quo than this. And I’d especially rather have incremental improvement rather than rapid devolution.
Refusing to vote in your best interests because you want faster change is absurd. Make changes happen where and when you can, and vote rationally.
This is the status quo. If you want positive change then you need to make a change instead of repeating the same behavior over and over while expecting different results.
I legitimately don’t understand how you can gesture at everything terrible happening around you while arguing that voting differently for once is “voting against your own best interests.” If that’s the case then what’s happening now is in your best interest, and you should be happy about that because this is the result of constantly maintaining the status quo every single election.
The status quo still involves people dying.
Yup. No doubt. But the choice between “things are bad” and “fascism” is, while distasteful, an easy choice. The spoiler effect means that in a First Past the Post voting system, mathematically, if you decide to instead vote for the idealistic but unpopular “things could be better,” all you’re doing is removing a vote from “things are bad,” which only benefits “fascism.”
It sucks. I know it sucks. But it’s what we have right now. Ideally we can make a better system, but we won’t get there by letting fascism win. At least not without a LOT MORE people dying.
Again, make positive change where and when you can, and vote rationally.
I mean, if you’re voting within a “first past the post” voting system for a solo position, then yeah you cannot vote outside the two expected, establishment choices and expect it to do anything other than spoil the next candidate you would have chosen.
You have to change the voting system first to something else like ranked choice.
There’s a fun little article about it here.
Well if you’re so eager to keep people voting for the establishment choices, you really shouldn’t complain when either one of them wins, nor should you complain about the state of the government as both represent the system working exactly as you want it to.
Frankly, we should just simplify things by making everyone’s vote automatic based on which ever one of the two parties you register with and restrict any unapproved party or candidate from running for office. There’s no point in filling out ballots as this just leads to people voting incorrectly and opens the possibility of things happening outside of the establishment’s expectations, which is bad for everyone.
We just need to have faith and hold on to hope that the establishment will change the system that keeps them in power at some indeterminate point in the future, but for now we must do as the establishment commands.