3 ms·
>And you're right voting is all the control we ultimately have I don't fully agree; there other paths, but they involve becoming _more_ politically active; cal
by everdrive 1y ago
>And you're right voting is all the control we ultimately have
I don't fully agree; there other paths, but they involve becoming _more_ politically active; calling & writing your congressman, joining political movements, volunteering, canvasing, etc. I think my argument is that if you're just sitting at home and getting outraged -- but not willing to spend the real time and effort to do the actual work of supporting a political cause, then your outage has no value in your life.
In other words, it's much more about tying your stress and outage to real, practical action. Most of us are just scrolling and fretting, but not doing anything. We either need to do real, practical things, or stop getting strung out for no reason.
>But even if that wasn't the case how can you research candidate positions without knowing the political context you want them to represent you within?
This is true, but you can just do a couple of days of research when it's time to vote. Given how representative democracy works, a candidate's stated view is sort of only going to directionally affect things, and I don't need expert-level knowledge to pick between two candidates. My decision for who to vote for just never requires much real precision.
I don't want to make this too political, but suppose that Gavin Newsom and J.D. Vance were the next candidates for president. Would I really need to pay close attention to politics for the next few years to figure out which one of them I considered to be the 'least bad' option? To my point above, that decision just does not have a lot of precision with regard to my views, and does not require any real expertise on my end. I could 100% check out between now and then, review the political platforms for each candidate (and maybe a few opinion pieces) over an afternoon, and be informed _enough_ to make a decision.
Again, voting is sort of the "bare minimum" when it comes to political participation. So I'm definitely not arguing that people should not become more involved; only that we should carefully consider whether our involvement is tied to any real positive outcomes. (and that's both personally, but also politically. A great deal of personal stress could potentially be a great tradeoff for a really important political outcome.)
- fluidcruft 1y agoI don't know. Personally I'm just extremely disillusioned about both parties so even picking between Vance and Newsom doesn't even registe as picking the best of two evils. They both seem useless and out of touch with reality. To be fair, I know the least about Newsom, having never lived anywhere near California and well California doesn't exactly have any better a reputation than Florida or Texas do in my book. So I'll have to tune in late 2027 if he gets the nod. Assuming Democrats survive 2026 because frankly the party is at death's door and I don't know how Newsom is new growth. We already rejected one Californian.
- everdrive 1y agoWell, I don't disagree with you, but I think that your statements follow my point: is years of political information necessary to render a judgement on these two? I don't really think so. Conversely, if you were going to write policy papers for political organizations, you'd need some real expertise.
- righthand 1y agoHow is the Democrat party at death’s door? Because it hasn’t circled around a single ideology like the Republicans have? Two years ago people were saying Republicans were on their way out because of the circling around Trump. The fact that Democrats are not consolidated is a feature not a bug.
- dragonwriter 1y agoThe Democratic Party is at death’s door because it is an opposition party in what is consolidating into a fascist dictatorship, but that’s probably not what the upthread poster is getting at.
- fluidcruft 1y agoTo be fair I checked out of the news so for all I know Democrats are now thriving.
- dragonwriter 1y ago> To be fair, I know the least about Newsom, having never lived anywhere near California and well California doesn't exactly have any better a reputation than Florida or Texas do in my book. So I'll have to tune in late 2027 if he gets the nod Unless he is running without significant primary competition, he wouldn’t get the nod, even effectively, until sometime in 2028, probably sometime in spring, so you can’t really start doing something in late 2027 based on whether thwt happens.
- fluidcruft 1y agoNo, the game begins in earnest late 2027.