4 ms·

Always remember, only 31% of eligible voters voted for the current administration. 69% either disagree, or didn’t vote. If the current administration doesn’t p

Always remember, only 31% of eligible voters voted for the current administration. 69% either disagree, or didn’t vote. If the current administration doesn’t prove their value, the people will start to have a say in another 2 years at the house level.

bluGill 2y ago
If you didn't vote I count you as agreeing without whatever. If you disagree vote. If you don't like the major candidates vote for a third party.
- buttercraft 2y ago
  Not voting doesn't mean you automatically agree with the winner's policies, no.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    It means you don't care. Whatever happens you will happily go along with-
    - teddyh 2y ago
      Voting for either Kang or Kodos does not mean that you agree with whoever you voted for. And not voting does not mean that you do not care at all about the issues.
tombert 2y ago
We still have at least two more years of this crap. It hasn't even been a month and I am already exhausted. I guess that's kind of the point, so at least they're doing one thing right.
jfengel 2y ago
Of those who didn't vote, why would they choose to vote next time? None of this is a surprise. It's not even like 2016, where people could say "I figured he'd be less bad than he said he would be" with a straight face. Whatever excuse they found to not vote for the Democrat in 2024, will still apply in 2026 and 2028. Or they'll find a new one. And turnout in midterms is even worse than in Presidential years. I don't see those non-voters suddenly taking an interest then. It would be fantastic if somebody learned some lessons. But I think 2024 proves pretty definitively that people don't learn lessons.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Of those who didn't vote, why would they choose to vote next time? My recollection is that non-voters tend to be reliably lazy, but I can’t find a good source. The system almost relies on it. If you can identify a non-voting bloc, in primaries or ideally even generals, you can tax them to give goodies to citizens.
  - tombert 2y ago
    It's especially frustrating because it's always a self-righteous and sanctimonious rationalization to why they never vote. It's maddening, they complain about Trump, and when I mention that they didn't vote they say "YOU THINK KAMALA WOULD BE BETTER??? YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO FIX THIS PROBLEM BY VOTING LOL!!". And of course, they never define what "the problem" is, so there's actually no way to solve it, so they never have to actually vote.
    - jfengel 2y ago
      In my experience they can usually cite something that they don't like about the candidate. In the case of Harris I often heard her position on Gaza given. And they'll always find something, since we're talking about an office with life and death on the line.
      - tombert 2y ago
        I'm not sure I was a huge fan of Harris's take on Gaza either, but I didn't think for a second that Trump would be better than her on it either. I guess it's just a mentality I don't really understand.
        lesuorac 2y ago
        Well, not that I like the mentality but it's a hardline one. By not voting for Harris and making her lose it means next cycle people have to care about your opinion to get elected. It's the opposite of when Progressives don't like a Democrat's proposal but still vote for it; it means the Democrats don't have to negotiate with them because they're getting the vote anyways.

bluGill 2y ago

If you didn't vote I count you as agreeing without whatever. If you disagree vote. If you don't like the major candidates vote for a third party.

buttercraft 2y ago
Not voting doesn't mean you automatically agree with the winner's policies, no.
- bluGill 2y ago
  It means you don't care. Whatever happens you will happily go along with-
  - teddyh 2y ago
    Voting for either Kang or Kodos does not mean that you agree with whoever you voted for. And not voting does not mean that you do not care at all about the issues.

tombert 2y ago

We still have at least two more years of this crap. It hasn't even been a month and I am already exhausted. I guess that's kind of the point, so at least they're doing one thing right.

jfengel 2y ago

Of those who didn't vote, why would they choose to vote next time? None of this is a surprise. It's not even like 2016, where people could say "I figured he'd be less bad than he said he would be" with a straight face. Whatever excuse they found to not vote for the Democrat in 2024, will still apply in 2026 and 2028. Or they'll find a new one. And turnout in midterms is even worse than in Presidential years. I don't see those non-voters suddenly taking an interest then. It would be fantastic if somebody learned some lessons. But I think 2024 proves pretty definitively that people don't learn lessons.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Of those who didn't vote, why would they choose to vote next time? My recollection is that non-voters tend to be reliably lazy, but I can’t find a good source. The system almost relies on it. If you can identify a non-voting bloc, in primaries or ideally even generals, you can tax them to give goodies to citizens.
- tombert 2y ago
  It's especially frustrating because it's always a self-righteous and sanctimonious rationalization to why they never vote. It's maddening, they complain about Trump, and when I mention that they didn't vote they say "YOU THINK KAMALA WOULD BE BETTER??? YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO FIX THIS PROBLEM BY VOTING LOL!!". And of course, they never define what "the problem" is, so there's actually no way to solve it, so they never have to actually vote.
  - jfengel 2y ago
    In my experience they can usually cite something that they don't like about the candidate. In the case of Harris I often heard her position on Gaza given. And they'll always find something, since we're talking about an office with life and death on the line.
    - tombert 2y ago
      I'm not sure I was a huge fan of Harris's take on Gaza either, but I didn't think for a second that Trump would be better than her on it either. I guess it's just a mentality I don't really understand.
      - lesuorac 2y ago
        Well, not that I like the mentality but it's a hardline one. By not voting for Harris and making her lose it means next cycle people have to care about your opinion to get elected. It's the opposite of when Progressives don't like a Democrat's proposal but still vote for it; it means the Democrats don't have to negotiate with them because they're getting the vote anyways.