I'm not voting in this year's election

Discussion in 'Politics' started by wegs, Jun 10, 2020.

  1. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Neither would I.

    He has been complicit in the rise of fascism in America, and abetted its takeover of the Republican Party - which he then maintained allegiance to, and has overtly and publicly endorsed in its current configuration and behavior. But as we see from history and multiple examples worldwide that complicity in fascism is more often cowardice than anything else - cowardice and racial bigotry, of course, but that second factor is more of a built in universal in the US - the label of "terrible" does not automatically apply.

    Does such complicity make him a "terrible person"? Depends on one's definition. How "terrible" is it to be a coward on that level?
    Or to repeat:
    You guess wrong, as always. Why not read my posts, instead?

    I disapprove of fascism and those who support it, back it, or fail to oppose it when it's their duty as citizens. That the Republican Party has fallen victim to fascism is just a circumstance. That one therefore cannot be decent, honorable, and honest, within the Republican Party is likewise then merely circumstantial.

    That seems to be enough, anyway. Getting the basic facts of physical reality straight is a full time job, when dealing with the current state of US politics.
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Why not read mine? I spoke of politicians and not of Republicans.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    At this point the 2020 election is a binary choice. Either you vote for Joe Biden and you help oust Donald Trump from power in the process. Or you take any other action on election day, and you help Trump remain in power by default. But there are some delusional folks who still don’t understand this reality.

    Take, for instance, the guy who tweeted this today: “Serious question. I am not voting for Trump or Biden as neither of these old men are in any shape to be managing a country. I will likely vote Green Party as it aligns closely with my progressive views. Am I considered a Resister?”

    How poorly did this selfish question go over? Despite it being a fairly obscure account, the tweet received eighteen thousand negative replies and counting. So many of the replies we’re in the form of “No you’re not,” the words “No you’re” began trending on Twitter.

    We’re hoping this guy learns his lesson and decides to join the human race by voting for Joe Biden in 2020. Only a true sociopath would look at the damage that Donald Trump is doing, and then still refuse to vote for Biden, in order to feel special or whatever. Voting Green Party is the same thing as voting for Trump. The difference is that Trump supporters are idiots who don’t know better, while Green Party voters do know better but they’re psychotic enough not to care about the consequences.

    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Not a precise fit, but pertinent enough:

    I'm disgusted by Biden, and for the life of me cannot figure out the rationale for choosing him. Is he considered the safe option? Because I simply can't fathom millions, or even hundreds of thousands, being overly enthusiastic about the creep. And yet... I will vote for him if I have to (fortunately, where I live, my vote would be of no consequence anyway, so...).

    All kinds of possible explanations for refusals to vote for Biden, ranging from some sort of delusional psychosis to just plain ignorance to a strict adherence to a form of nihilism, or even adherence to some variant of antinatalist philosophy (to which I subscribe, yet even I would not go this far).

    As much as Biden sucks, the reasons for "why Biden?" are innumerable: Courts and the legal system. Environmental protections and addressing climate change. Abortion. Fascism. Crisis preparedness. Schools and public education. White supremacism. Endangered and threatened species. Protected lands and sites. The Doomsday Clock. Unchecked corporate malfeasance...

    One could fill pages with just the generalities (sans description or explanation) alone.
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  8. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    There is a really stupid television advert that runs in my market, for some website to curate the news. It features this old white guy who doesn't seem to know much, and this young black woman without a clue; they both need someone to tell them what to pay attention to.

    There is also, in the time of pandemic, a hand sanitizer spot that reminds me of an old comedy bit out of Britain. Apparently, people are unable to put their fingers in between one another unless they have foam. The old comedy bit was for plastic cups, because people couldn't figure out how to drink milk out of the container. Like the jokes about Ben Elton, the idea that British people don't already have cups and glasses in their homes means something particular to the British; in the U.S., the idea that people can't get sanitizer gel between their fingers simply means Americans are just that effing stupid.

    But I do have a question: Part of what sets people off is when others around them start behaving like an internet axiom. I've seen this before, and I never know quite what to think of it. But why do people strike middling yet consequential postures from pretenses of ignorance? It's not like weird rhetorical habits are limited to one range of the politic, or something, but there is a form that reads like someone has suddenly gone test-market, and it does, actually, often follow general trends.

    So it's true, the idea of a "not a Trump supporter" who just happens to be the perfect Trump consumer isn't new, but it really is a head scratcher. I mean, let's go through it in order: Generic polymer equivocation↑, unsupported expectations↑, lack of understanding↑, something about Russia↑, incomprehnsible nonsense↑, pretense of indignance↑, presumptuous nonsense↑, and that's just the first page. Shall we continue? Oh, hey, look at that, you got around↑ to thinking of↑ what would have forestalled the entire discussion leading to, for instance, your pretense of indignance. But at least you managed to clear that up↑, before opposing Democrats↑. There's something that reads like a personal note↑; honestly, I'm just trying to not skip anything. But, yeah, you might have spared yourself pretenses of indignance↑ by getting around to the obvious at the outset. And, you know, sure, lots of people are tired of rich, white, sexist men getting elected, but you don't seem to understand↑ the critique against Biden. As to de Maistre, you're looking at it wrongly↑; the switch back to individuals—("don't all agree")—is what causes your confusion. Then there is the matter of what looks like a straw man combined with an accusation of lying↑. And some insubstantial complaining↑ about Biden. Something about breaking away↑ from the two-party system; a question↑ that reads like a weird televison advert for a curated news website. We can pass over the decision to lead with declaring that you are not a Trump supporter↑, and, yeah, we get that you "don't think Biden is the 'solution,' though", and it's a really weird, fallacious pitch. But, also, the part where you complain, "You seem to pride yourself on putting me down for whatever your reason", is weirdly on mark for the way you've gone about this; it seems part of the package when arguing from a posture of ignorance. But inasmuch as you're "not sure why [someone would] feel the need to position me here as a Trump supporter", it would be more accurate to say it's not unheard of to describe oneself as "not a trump supporter", but spend efforts complaining about Trump's opposition. Even the bit about wearying of the exchange pretty standard fare. Still, if you are worried that someone infers↑ your Trump support, the effort you spend to complain about Biden according to bizarre contexts and insinuations does stand out. And, sure, you don't really need to prove anything↑ to anyone, but you really did just hit your marks for some sort of performance.

    So, please, as a Poe's Law question ...― well, that's the point, isn't it.

    Because did he really say you have↑, "no knowledge of what's going on in our government"? That kind of self-inflicted escalation isn't unfamiliar.

    And please understand, you just keep piling up the examples. If, for instance↗, "It doesn't seem that Republicans and Democrats want to fix the problems that exist, together," such that, "There is this endless struggle for power," it does occur to ask why the equivocation always overlooks what it takes in order to "fix the problems that exist, together". When you ask, "Republicans and Democrats can't even agree on science?" do you really think it's a bothsides problem? Of course, with the arbiter of truth↑ post, you continue blazing oft-tread trails.

    It doesn't even need to be "Trump supporter". Whatever routine you think you're playing, the question remains when you will break form.

    Also, of equivocations↑, look, getting into it with the goes around looking for a fight isn't quite the same thing. Still, though, such is forum life, and you continue to hit your marks.

    So by the time you get back to, "Nothing you've presented"↑, well, that, too, is as well and fine as it is familiar.


    Anecdote in re generic pitches: So, this dude, just this guy I know, and for whatever reason he acts like he thinks he's fooling someone. It's like, speaking of polymer, there was the time he tried explaining his politics, and it read like a twenty-five year old pitch from a "not a Republican" explaining why he votes for Republicans: He's center-left, a bit more liberal on social issues, but conservative on fiscal issues. But this guy also once said something about us liberals sticking together, or something. And not long ago, he tried describing himself as a leftist. Thing is, when he stops evading and actually says what's on his mind, his dialect is anything but. Some of it is rightist-libertarian, and some runs antisocial nearly to type. Oh, right, and he's gone trumpfan on me, twice. Still, he keeps pretending.


    My question, then, is: Why?

    Honestly, it's one of the puzzling things of the time. I think of a particular right-winger who for the longest time trolled to type, and, sure, I get it compared to his time and place. But I really don't understand what people think pretense of asking tabula rasa questions accomplishes.

    It's a superficial pretense of neutrality, but beneath the freshly-molded, shiny, plastic sheen is an empty structure specifically designed to hold particular shape. When we attend the function of what a question proposes, it's uncertain what period of history we might illuminate in order to help you understand, for instance, why DoJ's attempt to undo Flynn's plea is so important; it is uncertain how to answer your polymer equivocations. What you need to understand about being a "closet Republican", as you put it, is that's actually pretty normal. Go look up Blue Dogs; there's a reason Congressional Democrats never had a prominent, influential Red Dog leftist caucus. Then go look at Minnesota and Michigan in primaries, both '16 and '20, and remember the excuses people gave about why not Clinton, in hopes of warding off suggestions of sexism; those voters broke even more institutional, asked for an even bigger dose of what they said they were saying no to. Democratic voters had Elizabeth Warren to get behind, and plenty of others. But the Party's centrism, and the more conservative blocs that demand it, fell back to Biden in order to ward off Sanders.

    When you're down to, you don't think Biden can, what, stop actively fomenting supremacism? or, not violently clear the square for a photo op with the Bible? it's true, people doubt the pretense of neutrality. What Democratic voters are getting is a familiar package promising restabilization. Where Biden can't mollify the hardline right, nobody can.

    It's not that there aren't still problems with a technocratic Biden administration tablescrapping progressivism, but we can have that discussion when we can have that discussion.

    Nor is there is only one version of, I don't support the one but must oppose the other; it's just that this one is really, really familiar, yet utterly puzzling for being so apparent.
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Which is why I spoke of Republicans, not politicians.
    Your point?
    There's still hope. The Dems can still avoid nominating Biden.
    The reason most likely to have great effect is the one where somebody looks at the long and disease-prone line around the polling place (they will exist primarily in Democratic areas, as has become routine for many years now), or discovers they have to get moving if they want to get the mail vote in on time, or runs into some problem with schedules and so forth, and decides the difference between fascism and ordinary rightwing bs and degradation simply isn't worth it.
    It's not the Green voters that will take Biden down, if that happens (and it only has to be close enough to steal) - it's the nonvoters.
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    What? By ignoring the results of the primaries?
  11. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    No (although they could, of course.) By dealing with them in light of Biden's nature and status as a candidate.
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    There you go, wegs. You got a wholehearted support from George Carlin, when he was still here.

    (warning crude language)

    p.s. posted only for the entertainment value. No endorsement is implicated....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  13. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    <----libertarian socialist

    the senator from mbna
    How Biden Helped Strip Bankruptcy Protection From Millions Just Before a Recession

    Biden's Cozy Relations With Bank Industry

    Tellingly, Biden has brought another corporate shill on board.
    this from a few years ago---still true
    John Kerry represents corporations and the rich, not the working majority.

    I've almost given up hope that the dnc will ever get their heads out of their assholes, and come up with a candidate who would actually represent people over corporations.
    They seem to have inculcated their own lies and fantasies which they had hoped to sell to us and thereby lost touch with reality.

    If we go too far down this road to corporatocracy, will we be able to get back?
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    This is why I like Biden.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    This man takes the train to and from home. I like that kind of down to earth lifestyle. Saves tax payers money.
  15. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    poor Jo
    after all these years of being a corporate shill
    you'd think the least they could have done was give him a limo and driver?
  16. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Funny how you're describing Trump's America to a tee.
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Is that a bad thing???
    That is an unfair slur. All politicians are funded by large donors and there is nothing wrong with being pro-business.
    But he choose to take the train. It keeps him grounded as it reminds him of his humble beginnings.

    Joe Biden
    Obama is endorsing him and imo, that means something.

    I'll take him any day over our current wannabe Emperor of the Earth.
    The imagined greatest president this or any country has ever known.
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2020
  18. Bells Staff Member

    Aside from what others have posted about one's political voice and whatnot..

    There is a reason as to why Trump is trying to deny millions of people the right to vote.

    Because he does not want you to vote. He does not want people who don't like him to vote.

    Personally I don't get it. You have the chance to take part to try to unseat one of the most deranged and grossly incompetent and dangerous leaders the US has ever seen and you are electing not to. Why? Because you bought into the right wing and Trump talking points about Biden..

    Biden may not be able to fix everything that Trump broke. But he's a more qualified and better candidate to take your country in a better direction.

    No candidate is without flaws. No one is perfect. But it's people like yourself who get leaders like Trump elected. Do you know why? Your apathy for the entire process. I mean, who cares, right? Both are the same, right?

    I think what has been seen and experienced under Trump should clearly show just how wrong that that is.

    Think of it this way. One day your children will grow up and history will not look back on this time-frame in a kindly manner. Your children may end up asking you what you did to stop him.. And your response will be 'I didn't vote to get him out of office because I didn't like his opponent'..

    Cop out excuse.

    Trump and right wing cronies thank you for your service.
    cluelusshusbund and Write4U like this.
  19. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    After reading threw all of Wegs posts, this is the only thing I could find that looks like the reason Wegs does not want to vote for Biden. Considering this is a falsehood, Wegs has no valid reasons whatsoever and has appeared to have kept herself in the dark as to what's going on in the US, completely uninformed of not only Biden, but Trump, as well.

    It's little wonder why guys like Trump can get into power when people choose to keep themselves in total ignorance. How very sad.
  20. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Lol Thanks for the levity.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I’ve mentioned actually in another thread a few weeks back, that I plan to vote. I haven’t been posting much here lately so I can’t recall the thread, now. Thought I’d update this thread with that thrilling news. It’s a privilege to be able to vote so I’ve reconsidered my position a bit.

    But ...I do hope a third party candidate rises up in the future...we shouldn’t be limited to only choosing from a two party system. Technically we are not limited now, but if I cast my vote in a third party direction, it would be like throwing it away.
  21. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Yes it would be.
    Even if you do not like the candidates, you cannot possible dislike them equally. If you cannot find positive reasons to vote for a particular candidate, pick the "least of two evils"!

    The only option left is to be practical and vote for the candidate who has accumulated a credible public profile over his/her years of service.
    I think Biden's record qualifies him as a dedicated representative of the people.

    Can you say the same of Trump?
    Trump's record qualifies him as a "carnival barker".
    Ask yourself "what has Trump done as a representative of the "people", ever, in his entire life?"

    If anything, visit politifact and get a reliable synopsis of both and who lies the most!

    Obviously the Nation screwed up when it selected Trump over Hillary (by a technicality).
    Let's not repeat that colossal mistake again.
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2020
  22. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    True, but Trump and Biden are poor choices for different reasons. It will be a vote against Trump, more than it will be a vote for Biden, you know? Just wish there was someone whom I felt enthusiastic about, but I will vote because it’s the right thing to do.
    Write4U likes this.
  23. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    A vote for any third party only serves to help Trump stay in office. And, since you've given no reasons to vote or not vote for any given candidate, why not instead educate yourself with truth rather than serving ignorance so you can make an intelligent decision.

Share This Page