In a two party system, especially when there’s no clear “I don’t like either” option then yes, nothing else exists. When you don’t vote you’re not saying “I don’t like either party” you’re saying “I don’t care which party wins”. If you don’t care which party wins then you’re in support of both parties.
And it’s telling that so many people didn’t care whether the dictator or Democrats won, isn’t it? If you’re making the case between yourself and a megalomaniac, and the majority of Americans shrug and go about their day, what the hell are you doing wrong?
Yes but in discussing politics we are not relegated to the same limitations we have in voting. Thus there is no contradiction between voting down-ballot Democrat, then going home and tweeting “I hate Dick Cheney and the Democrats.”
OP makes a clownish commentary on this. If someone did not vote blue who probably should have, shame on them, but the Democrats are still wrong.
Yes, political discussions are not as limited in options as voting and there absolutely should be a political discussion about the Democratic party. They suck, have sucked and will continue to suck, unless they change.
And I agree that there’s no contradiction. I’d even go as far as to say there was no contradiction in voting for Harris and then tweeting “the democratic candidate sucks”, because you have to vote for someone and Trump (clearly) was the worse option.
My point was rather that if you dislike a party and you don’t vote for them then you are in support of the other party, even if you don’t vote at all. The nuances get kicked out when it comes to voting.
My point was rather that if you dislike a party and you don’t vote for them then you are in support of the other party, even if you don’t vote at all
And that is a dog shit point. An easy example: California. Nobody who didn’t vote in CA supported Trump by not voting, unless you don’t know how elections work
Stop trying to blame those not at fault you weird authoritarian
Yeah, they’re the non-vote parties. FPTP voting always devolves down to 2 parties, see Duverger’s Law. Even if by some miracle a 3rd party wins (and continues winning) they will eventually kick one of the previous 2 parties out and take their place as the new party in the 2 party system. In practice if my memory doesn’t fail me voting 3rd party hasn’t mattered for over a century because the 2 main parties are so entrenched, so voting for 3rd party is more or less throwing away your vote.
“If they dislike my party, they must support the other party, nothing else exists, right?”
“If you dislike pancakes that must mean you LOOOOVE waffles right?”
No bitch thats a brand new sentence wtf is you talking about.
In a two party system, especially when there’s no clear “I don’t like either” option then yes, nothing else exists. When you don’t vote you’re not saying “I don’t like either party” you’re saying “I don’t care which party wins”. If you don’t care which party wins then you’re in support of both parties.
And it’s telling that so many people didn’t care whether the dictator or Democrats won, isn’t it? If you’re making the case between yourself and a megalomaniac, and the majority of Americans shrug and go about their day, what the hell are you doing wrong?
Yes but in discussing politics we are not relegated to the same limitations we have in voting. Thus there is no contradiction between voting down-ballot Democrat, then going home and tweeting “I hate Dick Cheney and the Democrats.”
OP makes a clownish commentary on this. If someone did not vote blue who probably should have, shame on them, but the Democrats are still wrong.
Yes, political discussions are not as limited in options as voting and there absolutely should be a political discussion about the Democratic party. They suck, have sucked and will continue to suck, unless they change.
And I agree that there’s no contradiction. I’d even go as far as to say there was no contradiction in voting for Harris and then tweeting “the democratic candidate sucks”, because you have to vote for someone and Trump (clearly) was the worse option.
My point was rather that if you dislike a party and you don’t vote for them then you are in support of the other party, even if you don’t vote at all. The nuances get kicked out when it comes to voting.
And that is a dog shit point. An easy example: California. Nobody who didn’t vote in CA supported Trump by not voting, unless you don’t know how elections work
Stop trying to blame those not at fault you weird authoritarian
Just because the electoral college is a stupid thing doesn’t mean I’m not right. Had it been a popular vote those non-votes would’ve mattered.
Why yes, if it was a completely different situation then it’d be a completely different situation
10/10 you dolt
“You would be right if we did things the right way, but because we’re doing things the wrong way you are also wrong.”
I guess I can’t argue that.
ok fair but not relevant to my own point post it somewhere relevant next time if you want me to support lol
Ever heard of third parties? I’ve voted Green Party since I could vote. There is the Libertarian, Reform, Constitutional, and several other parties.
Yeah, they’re the non-vote parties. FPTP voting always devolves down to 2 parties, see Duverger’s Law. Even if by some miracle a 3rd party wins (and continues winning) they will eventually kick one of the previous 2 parties out and take their place as the new party in the 2 party system. In practice if my memory doesn’t fail me voting 3rd party hasn’t mattered for over a century because the 2 main parties are so entrenched, so voting for 3rd party is more or less throwing away your vote.