5 ms·

An eligible voter who doesn't vote is effectively a vote for the winner, so a majority was at least complicit.

Tadpole9181 2y ago
Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it true.
kcplate 2y ago
“Complicit” is an interesting word choice here—as if a non-voter is somehow responsible for wrongdoing? What “wrong” was done here? Trump won because he was democratically elected by every measure we have, both popular vote and electoral college. If your candidate lost it’s because they didn’t earn the votes, have the message, or created the reason for that non-voter to vote for them. The candidate and campaign are more responsible for their loss than the non-voter. You are shifting blame to where it doesn’t belong.
- ninalanyon 2y ago
  If an incident of mobbing occurs in a Norwegian school the bystanders are held to account as well as the actual perpetrators.
  - kcplate 2y ago
    This is not even remotely equivalent. Making not intervening when a crime takes place means there is a crime taking place. In the US elections are not a crime and “not voting” is not a crime.
    - ninalanyon 2y ago
      There are at least several non-US jurisdictions in which voting is compulsory so the /idea/ that not voting is equivalent to some kind of problem at least is quite plausible.
- intended 2y ago
  Thats a poor reading of the effort the Republicans have put into ensuring they win. Firstly, its not because of reasons that people win in America, not anymore. People didnt know that the ACA was Obamacare, or that Biden dropped out. Fox and the GOP created an orwellian political power that has parasitized democratic processess. Classic example would be climate change, in the 90s, when FOX was created. Fox platformed cranks, and made them look legitimate. Republican lawmakers pointed to Fox news reports, and stalled if not killed climate change legislation. The governing principle at that time, was to not provide credibility to cranks. However, shocked by the effectiveness of Fox, scientists decided to talk directly to viewers on Fox. This resulted in them being fed to the media lions, because the goal of Fox was to discredit them, along with the ivory tower education systems. Through this process, FOX and the GOP own the overton window for climate discussions. THEY decide what positions Dems must take. Repeat this proces year after year, and eventually there is no place you can hold a position to win at a national level. For state level elections this is different, apparently local knowledge overcomes this distorition field. However, thats not the only trick. Republicans are beholden to never grant Democrats any credibility. See Romneycare and Obamacare. It shocked me even then, that Repubs actually credited Obama for getting Osama. This election, people remember Harris as being the Trans supporter. The Campaign itself never focused on this topic. The Repubs sets the stage on which everyone dances. Yes - the other candidate should earn peoples votes. They should create the right message. Yes - as a voter, you should know when its not a fair fight. Simply so that you can apply the right handicap when viewing candiates.
  - kcplate 2y ago
    No offense but my comment was a response to the suggestion that someone who didn’t vote somehow committed wrongdoing. Not sure how a diatribe against the “evils” of the GOP voter persuasion machine speaks much to that. It’s obvious to me both parties denigrate the other candidate through media and publicity. My decision to not vote for Harris boiled down to my opinion that she failed in her one duty as VP, which was to effectively step in and govern in the event that Biden was unable to function as president. That much was painfully obvious during his debate, which exposed her dereliction of duty.

Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it true.

“Complicit” is an interesting word choice here—as if a non-voter is somehow responsible for wrongdoing? What “wrong” was done here? Trump won because he was democratically elected by every measure we have, both popular vote and electoral college. If your candidate lost it’s because they didn’t earn the votes, have the message, or created the reason for that non-voter to vote for them. The candidate and campaign are more responsible for their loss than the non-voter. You are shifting blame to where it doesn’t belong.

ninalanyon 2y ago
If an incident of mobbing occurs in a Norwegian school the bystanders are held to account as well as the actual perpetrators.
- kcplate 2y ago
  This is not even remotely equivalent. Making not intervening when a crime takes place means there is a crime taking place. In the US elections are not a crime and “not voting” is not a crime.
  - ninalanyon 2y ago
    There are at least several non-US jurisdictions in which voting is compulsory so the /idea/ that not voting is equivalent to some kind of problem at least is quite plausible.
intended 2y ago
Thats a poor reading of the effort the Republicans have put into ensuring they win. Firstly, its not because of reasons that people win in America, not anymore. People didnt know that the ACA was Obamacare, or that Biden dropped out. Fox and the GOP created an orwellian political power that has parasitized democratic processess. Classic example would be climate change, in the 90s, when FOX was created. Fox platformed cranks, and made them look legitimate. Republican lawmakers pointed to Fox news reports, and stalled if not killed climate change legislation. The governing principle at that time, was to not provide credibility to cranks. However, shocked by the effectiveness of Fox, scientists decided to talk directly to viewers on Fox. This resulted in them being fed to the media lions, because the goal of Fox was to discredit them, along with the ivory tower education systems. Through this process, FOX and the GOP own the overton window for climate discussions. THEY decide what positions Dems must take. Repeat this proces year after year, and eventually there is no place you can hold a position to win at a national level. For state level elections this is different, apparently local knowledge overcomes this distorition field. However, thats not the only trick. Republicans are beholden to never grant Democrats any credibility. See Romneycare and Obamacare. It shocked me even then, that Repubs actually credited Obama for getting Osama. This election, people remember Harris as being the Trans supporter. The Campaign itself never focused on this topic. The Repubs sets the stage on which everyone dances. Yes - the other candidate should earn peoples votes. They should create the right message. Yes - as a voter, you should know when its not a fair fight. Simply so that you can apply the right handicap when viewing candiates.
- kcplate 2y ago
  No offense but my comment was a response to the suggestion that someone who didn’t vote somehow committed wrongdoing. Not sure how a diatribe against the “evils” of the GOP voter persuasion machine speaks much to that. It’s obvious to me both parties denigrate the other candidate through media and publicity. My decision to not vote for Harris boiled down to my opinion that she failed in her one duty as VP, which was to effectively step in and govern in the event that Biden was unable to function as president. That much was painfully obvious during his debate, which exposed her dereliction of duty.