but ultimately the responsibility is on the voters to be competent, critical thinkers that at least attempt to be informed.
I disagree, it’s a politicians job during a campaign to convince people to vote for them. I agree that voters should be informed, but if someone chooses not to vote, I view that as a failure of the candidate, not the voter.
You have the right to vote, you don’t have the obligation (some countries do, and I wish we did, but we do not). And no candidate is entitled to a vote simply for existing.
Beyond that… Yeah, you and I are basically on the same page. I appreciate that you’ve been civil about this, and I want to reiterate: I do believe the Democrats are the lesser of two evils, by a long shot. I do believe they should have gotten more support, and I really wish they had turned out the vote.
But they didn’t, and I don’t think it’s fair to blame apathetic voters when the worst option was “fascism,” but the lesser evil was “status quo that you’re drowning under, with a touch of genocide.” Trump supporters? Yeah, they’re… Everything they want the world to believe they are, they have no excuse for gladly marching into fascism.
But I don’t blame apathetic voters for not wanting to participate in a system they don’t feel represented in, and aren’t inspired by either candidate to vote in.
Why though? Isnt part of living in a democracy an obligation to be well informed and making the correct choice, depending on whatever your ideological beliefs might be?
If inflation is hurting my family, isn’t the proper course of action for me to figure out what the causes and possible short and long term solutions are? Why is the onus on the politician to wow me with buzzwords in a 10 second tiktok, which ultimately will be half truth at best? If anything I need to follow up with more rigor and view their platforms and their past records.
I get it, its too much work. I get it, the Democrats did horrible messaging on multiple fronts. Kamala was definitely reserved and filtered in all her appearances and facing an uneven playing field.
But to absolve 80 million voters (a second time) by saying “theyre just angry you see, they dont know any better where to direct this anger to” is unfair.
But to absolve 80 million voters (a second time) by saying “theyre just angry you see, they dont know any better where to direct this anger to” is unfair.
Ah, see, the general vibe on Lemmy has been to criticize and shame people who didn’t vote, and that’s where I thought your debate was coming from. I cast no blame on anyone who either didn’t vote or voted third party.
If we’re talking the 80 million who voted for Trump a second time? Oh yeah, absolutely, fair game on that front. The only defense I have for them, which I think is important to understand for Democrats to maybe start winning, is that they want change.
And Trump, as shitty as he and his cohorts are, showed them they can change things dramatically during the course of a single presidency. It’s shitty change, and many of them don’t live in reality, so I’ve just been discounting them entirely. But it’s still observable change that usually aligns with what they want.
Biden/the Democrats have made change, but it’s not… Flashy enough? It’s not enough, the status quo isn’t enough for the voting base they need, and they need to adjust their platform accordingly.
So yeah, if you’re criticism is of those who voted for Trump, I agree completely, I’m as angry and disappointed as you are (though not surprised). I just don’t think it’s fair to blame non-voters and third party for the Democrats failing to convince them they’re worth voting for.
