3 ms·

Honestly your post sounds more like rhetroic than anything else. Organized labor still seems supportive of left leaning candidates. If they had "abandoned" th

by duxup 1y ago

Honestly your post sounds more like rhetroic than anything else. Organized labor still seems supportive of left leaning candidates. If they had "abandoned" them you'd think it would show. I don't buy into these ideas that <observes behavior that doesn't jive in some way> must be directly related to <pet peeve of mine>. Voters behave in unexpected ways all the time.

rbanffy 1y ago
> If they had "abandoned" them you'd think it would show. A left-leaning candidate that has "abandoned" worker's causes is still a better prospect than a candidate that openly opposed to them. I find it odd that so few people vote in the US - like I said, if all candidates are terrible, one is certainly less terrible and your job, as citizen, is to vote for the lesser evil to prevent the worse one to get power.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- UmGuys 1y ago
  Working people are effectively slaves. Everyone has children or college debt. Health care is useless in not urban areas and even then it's restricted by insurance or lack of it. There's not much hope to own a home other than through inheritance. Even inheritance is unlikely as health care for aging parents is very expensive. People are uneducated, don't have time, and rightly feel like politicians don't represent them. No one wants to have no home or the worst health care system except the people taking bribes. There's no incentive for reform.
  - rbanffy 1y ago
    Still, even if all options are bad, there has to be one that's less bad.
    - UmGuys 1y ago
      Which is why sane people should vote democrat, even if they're objectively bad. GOP is infinitely worse.
- dns_snek 1y ago
  I'll have to strongly disagree, the turnout is way too high if anything. Voting for the "lesser" evil just legitimizes an institution that doesn't deserve it. There isn't an asterisk next to your vote that says "this person disagrees with this candidate's platform". No, your vote will be used to legitimize that candidate's platform to other people, future generations, and the history books.

by duxup 1y ago

rbanffy 1y ago

> If they had "abandoned" them you'd think it would show. A left-leaning candidate that has "abandoned" worker's causes is still a better prospect than a candidate that openly opposed to them. I find it odd that so few people vote in the US - like I said, if all candidates are terrible, one is certainly less terrible and your job, as citizen, is to vote for the lesser evil to prevent the worse one to get power.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
UmGuys 1y ago
Working people are effectively slaves. Everyone has children or college debt. Health care is useless in not urban areas and even then it's restricted by insurance or lack of it. There's not much hope to own a home other than through inheritance. Even inheritance is unlikely as health care for aging parents is very expensive. People are uneducated, don't have time, and rightly feel like politicians don't represent them. No one wants to have no home or the worst health care system except the people taking bribes. There's no incentive for reform.
- rbanffy 1y ago
  Still, even if all options are bad, there has to be one that's less bad.
  - UmGuys 1y ago
    Which is why sane people should vote democrat, even if they're objectively bad. GOP is infinitely worse.
dns_snek 1y ago
I'll have to strongly disagree, the turnout is way too high if anything. Voting for the "lesser" evil just legitimizes an institution that doesn't deserve it. There isn't an asterisk next to your vote that says "this person disagrees with this candidate's platform". No, your vote will be used to legitimize that candidate's platform to other people, future generations, and the history books.