Wanting people to not vote for the only option that can beat Trump?
Wonder who that benefits… 🤔🤔🤔
Seriously believe even on Lemmy there’s gonna be weaponized sockpuppets/bots that try to speak the language in order to discourage voting: “Oh if you’re really based you’ll just protest by staying home.”
“You’re a neoliberal shill if harm reduction is your strategy rather than overthrowing the system and rebuilding it into an enlightened paradise overnight.”
I fancy myself an anarchist in ideals, but I’m sure as heck filling a ballot for Kamala so I don’t have to start taking my “bugout country” plans AS seriously yet…
For a lot of reasons, but if the opposition wins, everybody who works for a living is gonna get waffle-stomped, and the only ones who will get stomped harder are those who can’t work for a living.
We gotta play the hand we’re dealt and deal with the biggest fires first…
It’s the only realistic option at this point. You can still protest the genocide in Gaza AFTER the election (and I fully support you doing so, Hell I might even meet you at one), but look at it this way: if Kamala wins, you have a chance to make a change over there, but if Trump wins again, every Palestinian is as good as dead. Do I like either option? No! Do I think our elections are a good system? No! Am I going to vote for Kamala anyway? Yes! Because at this point, the choice is between shooting ourselves in the foot or in the temple
That is a valid question in isolation, but bringing it up in discussions on where to vote is not leading to discussions or actionable improvements. It only functions to push voter disenfrachisement.
Not saying it’s your intention, but it is your effect.
Voting least bad is important. Don’t discourage it.
Working for better voting options is also important. Do push for that too, but find a constructive setting for it.
