7 ms·

Remember, if you can vote, vote the next time you can. Convince your friends and neighbors to vote, too. Apathy has real consequences.

barbazoo 2y ago
It sounds like you're assuming that if more people had voted, they would have voted for not-Trump. Is there data backing that up? Is there any indication that the result would have been different?
- fullshark 2y ago
  No if anything the data suggests they'd go for trump or it'd be a coin flip https://news.gallup.com/poll/24655/party-images.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/24655/party-images.aspx https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/dona... https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/kamala-harris/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/kama...
spencerflem 2y ago
I wish there was a way to get better options though. A vote for Kamala would have just barely kicked the can down the road
- drawkward 2y ago
  Well, we probably wouldnt be in a trade war right now.
  - spencerflem 2y ago
    Yeah ik. But the discontent and conditions leading to this sort of moment would still be there at the end of the term was my point
    - wpm 2y ago
      They will be with this one too. None of this shit is going to help the economy. Eggs are more expensive already and the current admin has admitted they aren’t going to do anything about it. But the media won’t be hammering on the egg price story, and people won’t feel like it’s as bad.
      - spencerflem 2y ago
        im well aware trump is worse and is not solving anything. Also- I do wish the gripe wasn't the egg thing - that one in specific is because they're intentionally killing hens to keep us safe from disease. last thing i want is for them to make the egg price go down and everyone gets sick. when the tarrifs happen we will have plenty of economic disaster to point to. Also Also- when the pitch for the two candidates are "things stay bad" vs "i promise to change things to make your life better (lie)", it kinda makes sense i don't agree with trump voters. frankly i hate them. but it's understandable at least
  - kzrdude 2y ago
    The trade war pales in the long run compared to the power grab by Musk and supporters (accessing the Treasury payment system, shutting down agencies without congressional approval). It's very bad news for American government and democracy, it looks like a coup.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - spencerflem 2y ago
      yeah :c. don't see any way out i hope they don't end too many species along the way
- lostdog 2y ago
  Politicians look at how people vote to decide how to run and how to govern. When you vote for Kamala over Trump, you show them your preferences, and they'll run and govern in a more methodical way. The next batch of candidates gets even better. But Trump winning means the next batch will be even worse.
  - sudosysgen 2y ago
    Kamala did not promise to govern in a methodical way, she promised essentially not to govern, but to keep the system trucking along. The end state of "nothing will fundamentally change" and "I wouldn't have done a single thing differently" is exactly the same as the end state of Trump's accelerationism. It's not clear what other message is going to be sent either way.
    - lostdog 2y ago
      > The end state of "nothing will fundamentally change" and "I wouldn't have done a single thing differently" is exactly the same as the end state of Trump's accelerationism. Pretty wild to suggest that continuing stability, growth, and reindustrialization is the same as tearing everything down.
      - sudosysgen 2y ago
        Real wage growth has been negative in the US for the past decades. Stability and growth was there for us, but it wasn't there for the tens of millions in the precariate who were promised stability in the form of a substantial improvement to the welfare net and didn't get it. From the perspective of tens, if not a hundred million, what that meant is continued decline, increased instability and broken promises, because that's the long term trend they're living and the one they were promised would continue.
        lostdog 2y ago
        Biden kicked off the biggest reindustrialization in our lifetime, and certain consumer protections were improving. Everything you want was blocked by repubs in Congress and trump appointed judges. The Dems don't pass enough policies because every time they do they get voted out by the people they're trying to help ("Obummercare").
- dkdbejwi383 2y ago
  If Americans won’t vote for centre-right candidates like Harris or Clinton, there’s little hope they will go for any real change.
  - spencerflem 2y ago
    I think there's some truth to the idea that they don't go for center right because they promise to do nothing useful for their voters. My take is its less left/right and more useful/useless. Obama won big because people thought he'd do something. Trump promised a lot of change and boy he's certainly doing exactly that. At the end of the day though, I think the time of party politics is over. Whatever Americas gonna be like next its not gonna be this
  - adastra22 2y ago
    The left/right divide in American politics is a myth. Clinton and Harris are both establishment candidates. The only establishment candidate to have won a presidential election since George Bush Sr. in 1988 is Biden. And that was only because of Trump's first term, and he was losing his election before bowing out. The Democratic Party has been putting forward establishment candidates since at least Jimmy Carter, the only exceptions being Bill Clinton and Obama. And notably, they both were, like Trump, a bit of a black swan in party politics.
    - adastra22 2y ago
      Also both George Bush Sr. and Biden were vice presidents of extremely popular/successful non-establishment presidents (Reagan and Obama). So really, there hasn't been an establishment president winning election since Jimmy Carter.
  - max51 2y ago
    The reason people didn't vote for these two had little to do with being "center-right". Both of them were very unpopular before they were forced as candidate undemocratically. Democrats would have won with Bernie and their chances in 2024 would have been a lot better if they did a primary to pick a candidate people actually like and want to vote for. Using an candidate people hate will work if the party is far ahead in the poll, not when it's 50/50.
ncr100 2y ago
And here's the most important comment! Vote in a democracy. Do things to preserve voting in a democracy. Vote with your wallet for representative news stories that matter to you and not just indulgent shock material. Vote with your mind and know what is truly important for you, your happiness, and your loved ones.
masterclef 2y ago
[flagged]
yibg 2y ago
Would it matter much? It seems like the election is fueled on false narratives and outright lies amplified by social media and technology that many of us here helped to build. Apathy is a real thing but at least close to half the population fully intended to and did vote for their choice of leadership. What can we (generalized we in the tech community) now combat this?
- dontparticipate 2y ago
  We need to use our skills to build platforms that have both high retention and diffuse ownership that uplifts its users. We need to build a media ecosystem that isn't just a toy. My generation treated social media like it was just an amusement, and didn't notice it slowly turn the flow of information back into AM talk radio until it was too late. There have to be genuine alternatives to Tiktok and X and Instagram that are just as obsessive about UX as the proprietary apps are, but can't be owned.
  - yibg 2y ago
    Seems like we need a news 2.0 that isn't something controlled by a couple of entities that can filter and shape narrative at the whim of a political party (either political party). Problem that we don't seem to have a good answer for is, how to make such a thing trust worthy and trusted by the public.
- boplicity 2y ago
  > the election Which election are you talking about? Because I'm not referring to the election that happens every four years in the States. Every election in-between can, and often does, have major consequences. Or, it could, if enough people made sure of it. That might actually be related to your question -- what matters is not just one election. If that's the case, then we've already lost.
yubblegum 2y ago
"Apathy"? How about disgust? The choices were Kamala and the Donald. I read that as a 'f.u. either way' from the political class. So yeah, not apathy.
mychael 2y ago
Many of us here voted for exactly this and we are very happy to see all of these changes.
- lunarboy 2y ago
  It's crazy to me that this is the state of hackernews wow
  - dang 2y ago
    The "state" of Hacker News is that simply it reflects the wider society (or societies, rather, since users are from many countries). Every major subgroup is represented here. How could it be otherwise? It's true that when one encounters someone with views far from one's own, it can provoke a kind of shock experience. That's how your comment reads to me. If so, I'm sorry—it's not pleasant to realize that (in a way) your neighbors are not who you thought they were. I've written about this dynamic in the past, in case you (or anyone) are interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22shock%20experience%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
    - speedgoose 2y ago
      It makes me think of the nazi bar problem and the classic paradox of tolerance. You are the moderator, you obviously thought about this. I understand your position, but I don't agree with it. I worry about how the online forums will evolve in the coming years. I'm quite pessimistic, since so many people are now ennemies. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nazi_bar https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nazi_bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- speedgoose 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - 2y ago
bongodongobob 2y ago
Neither side wants to give us affordable healthcare or education. Everything good comes from those two things imo. Voting doesn't matter anymore. Only money. The oligarchs have won (for some time now) and the government is their puppet.
mkoubaa 2y ago
I don't know anyone that voted democrat in this election. If you're looking someone to blame, blame the idiots who engineered the blue ticket, not the voters who couldn't stomach it
- rokkamokka 2y ago
  Blame is generally unproductive. What is productive is realizing wrongs and doing what you can to right them. That said, I was raised that it is the responsibility of a citizen to always vote. If more people had voted, I believe the US would be in a better place.
  - mkoubaa 2y ago
    I believe it's the responsibility of every citizen to _use_ their vote. Sometimes, the best way to use it for a given political outcome is to abstain.
failuser 2y ago
There will be no new elections. At best we’ll have a Russia-style farce.

barbazoo 2y ago

It sounds like you're assuming that if more people had voted, they would have voted for not-Trump. Is there data backing that up? Is there any indication that the result would have been different?

fullshark 2y ago
No if anything the data suggests they'd go for trump or it'd be a coin flip https://news.gallup.com/poll/24655/party-images.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/24655/party-images.aspx https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/dona... https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/kamala-harris/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/kama...

spencerflem 2y ago

I wish there was a way to get better options though. A vote for Kamala would have just barely kicked the can down the road

drawkward 2y ago
Well, we probably wouldnt be in a trade war right now.
- spencerflem 2y ago
  Yeah ik. But the discontent and conditions leading to this sort of moment would still be there at the end of the term was my point
  - wpm 2y ago
    They will be with this one too. None of this shit is going to help the economy. Eggs are more expensive already and the current admin has admitted they aren’t going to do anything about it. But the media won’t be hammering on the egg price story, and people won’t feel like it’s as bad.
    - spencerflem 2y ago
      im well aware trump is worse and is not solving anything. Also- I do wish the gripe wasn't the egg thing - that one in specific is because they're intentionally killing hens to keep us safe from disease. last thing i want is for them to make the egg price go down and everyone gets sick. when the tarrifs happen we will have plenty of economic disaster to point to. Also Also- when the pitch for the two candidates are "things stay bad" vs "i promise to change things to make your life better (lie)", it kinda makes sense i don't agree with trump voters. frankly i hate them. but it's understandable at least
- kzrdude 2y ago
  The trade war pales in the long run compared to the power grab by Musk and supporters (accessing the Treasury payment system, shutting down agencies without congressional approval). It's very bad news for American government and democracy, it looks like a coup.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - spencerflem 2y ago
    yeah :c. don't see any way out i hope they don't end too many species along the way
lostdog 2y ago
Politicians look at how people vote to decide how to run and how to govern. When you vote for Kamala over Trump, you show them your preferences, and they'll run and govern in a more methodical way. The next batch of candidates gets even better. But Trump winning means the next batch will be even worse.
- sudosysgen 2y ago
  Kamala did not promise to govern in a methodical way, she promised essentially not to govern, but to keep the system trucking along. The end state of "nothing will fundamentally change" and "I wouldn't have done a single thing differently" is exactly the same as the end state of Trump's accelerationism. It's not clear what other message is going to be sent either way.
  - lostdog 2y ago
    > The end state of "nothing will fundamentally change" and "I wouldn't have done a single thing differently" is exactly the same as the end state of Trump's accelerationism. Pretty wild to suggest that continuing stability, growth, and reindustrialization is the same as tearing everything down.
    - sudosysgen 2y ago
      Real wage growth has been negative in the US for the past decades. Stability and growth was there for us, but it wasn't there for the tens of millions in the precariate who were promised stability in the form of a substantial improvement to the welfare net and didn't get it. From the perspective of tens, if not a hundred million, what that meant is continued decline, increased instability and broken promises, because that's the long term trend they're living and the one they were promised would continue.
      - lostdog 2y ago
        Biden kicked off the biggest reindustrialization in our lifetime, and certain consumer protections were improving. Everything you want was blocked by repubs in Congress and trump appointed judges. The Dems don't pass enough policies because every time they do they get voted out by the people they're trying to help ("Obummercare").
dkdbejwi383 2y ago
If Americans won’t vote for centre-right candidates like Harris or Clinton, there’s little hope they will go for any real change.
- spencerflem 2y ago
  I think there's some truth to the idea that they don't go for center right because they promise to do nothing useful for their voters. My take is its less left/right and more useful/useless. Obama won big because people thought he'd do something. Trump promised a lot of change and boy he's certainly doing exactly that. At the end of the day though, I think the time of party politics is over. Whatever Americas gonna be like next its not gonna be this
- adastra22 2y ago
  The left/right divide in American politics is a myth. Clinton and Harris are both establishment candidates. The only establishment candidate to have won a presidential election since George Bush Sr. in 1988 is Biden. And that was only because of Trump's first term, and he was losing his election before bowing out. The Democratic Party has been putting forward establishment candidates since at least Jimmy Carter, the only exceptions being Bill Clinton and Obama. And notably, they both were, like Trump, a bit of a black swan in party politics.
  - adastra22 2y ago
    Also both George Bush Sr. and Biden were vice presidents of extremely popular/successful non-establishment presidents (Reagan and Obama). So really, there hasn't been an establishment president winning election since Jimmy Carter.
- max51 2y ago
  The reason people didn't vote for these two had little to do with being "center-right". Both of them were very unpopular before they were forced as candidate undemocratically. Democrats would have won with Bernie and their chances in 2024 would have been a lot better if they did a primary to pick a candidate people actually like and want to vote for. Using an candidate people hate will work if the party is far ahead in the poll, not when it's 50/50.

ncr100 2y ago

And here's the most important comment! Vote in a democracy. Do things to preserve voting in a democracy. Vote with your wallet for representative news stories that matter to you and not just indulgent shock material. Vote with your mind and know what is truly important for you, your happiness, and your loved ones.

masterclef 2y ago

[flagged]

yibg 2y ago

Would it matter much? It seems like the election is fueled on false narratives and outright lies amplified by social media and technology that many of us here helped to build. Apathy is a real thing but at least close to half the population fully intended to and did vote for their choice of leadership. What can we (generalized we in the tech community) now combat this?

dontparticipate 2y ago
We need to use our skills to build platforms that have both high retention and diffuse ownership that uplifts its users. We need to build a media ecosystem that isn't just a toy. My generation treated social media like it was just an amusement, and didn't notice it slowly turn the flow of information back into AM talk radio until it was too late. There have to be genuine alternatives to Tiktok and X and Instagram that are just as obsessive about UX as the proprietary apps are, but can't be owned.
- yibg 2y ago
  Seems like we need a news 2.0 that isn't something controlled by a couple of entities that can filter and shape narrative at the whim of a political party (either political party). Problem that we don't seem to have a good answer for is, how to make such a thing trust worthy and trusted by the public.
boplicity 2y ago
> the election Which election are you talking about? Because I'm not referring to the election that happens every four years in the States. Every election in-between can, and often does, have major consequences. Or, it could, if enough people made sure of it. That might actually be related to your question -- what matters is not just one election. If that's the case, then we've already lost.

yubblegum 2y ago

"Apathy"? How about disgust? The choices were Kamala and the Donald. I read that as a 'f.u. either way' from the political class. So yeah, not apathy.

mychael 2y ago

Many of us here voted for exactly this and we are very happy to see all of these changes.

lunarboy 2y ago
It's crazy to me that this is the state of hackernews wow
- dang 2y ago
  The "state" of Hacker News is that simply it reflects the wider society (or societies, rather, since users are from many countries). Every major subgroup is represented here. How could it be otherwise? It's true that when one encounters someone with views far from one's own, it can provoke a kind of shock experience. That's how your comment reads to me. If so, I'm sorry—it's not pleasant to realize that (in a way) your neighbors are not who you thought they were. I've written about this dynamic in the past, in case you (or anyone) are interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22shock%20experience%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
  - speedgoose 2y ago
    It makes me think of the nazi bar problem and the classic paradox of tolerance. You are the moderator, you obviously thought about this. I understand your position, but I don't agree with it. I worry about how the online forums will evolve in the coming years. I'm quite pessimistic, since so many people are now ennemies. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nazi_bar https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Nazi_bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
speedgoose 2y ago
[flagged]
- 2y ago

bongodongobob 2y ago

Neither side wants to give us affordable healthcare or education. Everything good comes from those two things imo. Voting doesn't matter anymore. Only money. The oligarchs have won (for some time now) and the government is their puppet.

mkoubaa 2y ago

I don't know anyone that voted democrat in this election. If you're looking someone to blame, blame the idiots who engineered the blue ticket, not the voters who couldn't stomach it

rokkamokka 2y ago
Blame is generally unproductive. What is productive is realizing wrongs and doing what you can to right them. That said, I was raised that it is the responsibility of a citizen to always vote. If more people had voted, I believe the US would be in a better place.
- mkoubaa 2y ago
  I believe it's the responsibility of every citizen to _use_ their vote. Sometimes, the best way to use it for a given political outcome is to abstain.

failuser 2y ago

There will be no new elections. At best we’ll have a Russia-style farce.