The discourse on American politics sometimes devolves to “Leftists who won’t vote” & “MAGA Republicans” teaming up to “getting revenge on liberals”.
If you aren’t familiar with Project 2025 there’s a good video deep dive here: https://youtu.be/dk7sCJalxAo
MAGA wants revenge and it isn’t limited to just liberals.
I’m shocked and dismayed to see “Protest both candidates by telling them you’d be okay with either” on 196 of all places.
If you don’t vote for Biden, Trump is gonna win. You guys know that, right?
Yes but what about the horrible things Biden is doing that Trump will also do plus a fuckton more?
Tell the DNC to get their head out of their ass?
Because that totally worked in 2026 right? They obviously just need to lose to Trump and they will suddenly realize the error of their ways and become a full leftist party overnight. All we need to do to save America from the evil DNC is let Trump win again! It makes perfect sense!
You seem mad at ME because THEY don’t give enough of a shit
I’ve been saying it for MONTHS. If they run biden they WILL lose.
I do not WANT them to lose, I am just informing you of the outcome babe.
How much are you betting on that?
Who tf bets on who the uniparty picks lmao?
It’s a good site to collect the money of delusional right-wing crazies. I collected $500 in 2020.
I’ll buy the opposite of whatever bet you make mate. HMU
but if I vote for Biden, he might win. I don’t want that, either
Well, one of them is going to, and it might as well be the one who doesn’t think climate change is made up and campaign on how miserable he’s going to make the lives of gay and trans people.
Oh, and funnel arms to Israel even faster than Biden currently is.
Gather around for a personal story.
The year was 2015 and a friend who lives in a school bus visited town. We were all smoking weed in his bus and he said “Oh please let Clinton loose”. I asked WTF are you thinking? And he responded that he spent lots of time protesting and that it didn’t work because people weren’t listening. It seems no matter how many terrible fascists get elected, liberals still won’t listen to him.
Liberals never pay attention to popular protests unless the talking heads on TV tell them to.
I lost my faith in American “Democracy” during Occupy Wall Street, when the national media completely shut out any of the actual demands being made in favor of a “they don’t even have any goals” narrative.
I still remember how well that propaganda worked on people. It became commonplace for liberals to complain that the OWS protests were aimless and lacked message.
I still see them repeating that shit!
Even when liberals are shown protests on TV, they often walk away with the wrong message. It seems the only time it doesn’t happen is when the state uses violence in a way that is indefensible.
And even then it’s down to a coin flip whether they’ll care.
I protested at the DNC years ago with an anti-war group. Liberals won’t listen to anything that even remotely pushes them out of their comfort zone. They’d rather keep voting until something magically changes (it won’t), or they waste the rest of their time criticizing you for “allowing the right to win.”
I have to say, it’s pretty fucking annoying to be scolded by liberals that do nothing but fill in a circle, while you’re doing things like marching to protest war, writing articles, participating in things like Food Not Bombs… meanwhile, they are in a state of malfunction because you refuse to vote for one of the two right-wing candidates propped up in front of us by the ruling class so we can do the same old song and dance again while thinking something will be different this time.
Did his protests get more attention under trump?
He doesn’t protest anymore, but I get your point. As noted elsewhere, the protests got more attention because the responses were more violent. Is that good? Considering how the police have even more money than before I am not so sure…
looselose
yeah turns out that pesky international policy liberals barely pay attention to? fucking us over big time. and by us i mean almost the entirety of the not-western world.
and it really doesnt matter how much you try to talk to them, i guess they will not care (or just pretend to) until its too late for they themselves.
“Revenge”?
Vindictiveness doesn’t have anything to do with it, I just can’t bring myself to vote for genocide.
If anything, it’s resignation and apathy as everything I predicted back in 2016 continues to come to pass.
Trump is going to win in November because the Democrats care more about preserving their AIPAC financing than representing their constituents.
Okay then vote against genocide.
Donald Trump is Genocide at home and abroad.
Joe Biden is “only” Genocide abroad, and probably less of it.
Therefore, a vote for Joe Biden is a Vote against genocide.
No, it doesn’t matter that he’s an active participant in the apparatus that’s creating the genocide, because if he’s in office there’s less genocide. Which is the important part, and pretending otherwise is sophistry. By abstaining from voting, you are increasing the likelihood of more genocide, if you discourage others from voting, you are an active participant in the overall social apparatus that is probabilistically increasing the ammount of genocide.
The utility calculation is dead simple: more votes for Biden in key states makes more genocide less likely, and discouraging people from voting for Biden makes more genocide more likely. Therefore, discouraging people from voting for Biden is a pro-genocide strategy and voting for Biden in battleground states is an anti-genocide strategy. I live in a solid blue state, so I reserve the right to vote third party, but I will also encourage other people to vote for Biden.
You should vote for Biden unless you live in a solid blue state, and even then it’s not a bad idea.
Offering a sandwich with more and less peanut butter when I am allergic to peanuts still means I will be sick. I’m hungry and I want a sandwich with no peanut butter. There are third party candidates providing sandwiches with no peanut butter. I am sorry demand decreases for the sandwich with less peanut butter, but I am unable to stomach peanuts.
Alright, but it’s not really about you, is it? There’s untold many hungry people, some of which are allergic to peanuts, and the only crate left has nothing but.
There are several people needed to open the crate. Maybe it can be opened without you, maybe it can’t maybe it’s stuck regardless. But even if you don’t want peanuts, it’s incredibly selfish of you to not only refuse to help feed the people who can be fed but also pretend to be of upstanding moral character when you do so. So take an antacid and show up at the ballot.
There’s untold many hungry people in the world because our comfort depends on it. In fact, what a wild metaphor to continue using when there’s thousands starving to death in Palestine right now with our tax money. Hey, but at least we’ll get cheap oil shipped to us through that new India>Saudi Arabia>Palestine trade route that’s being set up as a competitor to the “new Silk Road” thing china is doing. Cheap oil might be that peanut butter sandwich that people over here need to stay financially afloat, but it’s only a few layers removed from your actions being responsible for genocide. Some people don’t like this fact and would rather we had actual representation in our government.
because our comfort depends on it
That’s not actually relevant to the discussion; dismantling the United States, capitalism, and/or all imperialism isn’t on the table.
If you want to have a birthday cake, and you see Timmy about to start playing with a loaded gun, you should still stop that from happening even if it doesn’t get you birthday cake. That’s especially true if there’s no birthday cake readily available.
Edit: the more I think about it, the better an analogy this is, because if >!little Timmy blows his brains out after you chose not to stop it, it seriously hampers the ammount of birthday cake you eat in the future. Because if there’s birthday cake available you probably won’t be able to eat it after that, people will be less likely to invite you to a birthday party, and little Timmy won’t have any more birthdays.!<
CW: casual discussion of graphic and dark topics.
People are upset they can’t vote to dismantle the system and so they don’t vote thinking that it somehow withdraws their consent. I feel like that Patrick’s wallet meme where we all agree voting doesn’t do the things we want, including withdrawing consent.
Oh look, it’s another metaphor that ignores the fact that doing what we’re doing is actively harming other people (and comparing genocide to “eating cake”). You gave the gun Timmy was playing with to his brown friend and even disengaged the safety for him. And then you’re surprised when the little boy’s parents are upset you gave him the loaded gun. You’re right. This is a good metaphor for this situation we’re in.
This reply is so bad I’m comfortable not giving an actual response.
Edit: I should’ve just said “ratio”. 😂
There is a flaw in making a collective choice individualistic. Helping others is a moral thing to do and I was there in 2020 even though peanut butter sucks. Individually, I will get a sandwich, probably with peanut butter.
However, this crate landed on Palestinians. Helping the people under the crate seems important.
However, this crate landed on Palestinians. Helping the people under the crate seems important.
What does that even mean in the context of the previous metaphor? The crate itself doesn’t represent anything; the actions that the crate is subjected to represent acts that are not done to something.
There is a flaw in making a collective choice individualistic.
Yea; that’s why talking about yourself doesn’t change the ethics of the situation. Good👏 Job!👏
I referenced a news story in which the parachute on an air dropped aid package failed to deploy crushing people underneath.
Genocide is not ethical. Voting for genocide, but less, does not change the ethics of genocide. Part of the coalition that elected Biden in 2020 will not vote for him again due to his support of genocide.
The options for such voters are:
- Being complicite in genocide
- Voting third party or not at all
I understand the two party system created by first-past-the-post. I understand third party candidates are unlikely to win. I understand Democrats are rightfully nervous. If Democrats are nervous enough, they should do something to change the minds of voters that will not vote for genocide.
Voting for a sandwich without peanut butter will result in other people deciding what sandwich you get, and the only realistic options are those with peanut butter.
Also, you’ll have to eat the sandwich.
I understand needing to eat the sandwich. I also understand making a collective first-past-the-post choice individual is a flawed argument.
However there is an individual component to saying I really can’t eat peanut butter. The decision then becomes stand your ground (no peanut butter), compromise (just a little peanut butter) or protest (full peanut butter; see you in the ER). The claim is the compromise is best.
How do we reach a point where we no longer need to compromise on peanut butter?
Okay then vote against genocide.
Okay, then put it on the ballot.
Therefore, a vote for Joe Biden is a Vote against genocide.
No, it doesn’t matter that he’s an active participant in the apparatus that’s creating the genocide
On the contrary, I think it matters very much.
By abstaining from voting, you are increasing the likelihood of more genocide, if you discourage others from voting, you are an active participant in the overall social apparatus that is probabilistically increasing the ammount of genocide.
By voting, you are prolonging the existence of the United States and guaranteeing that the genocides it supports will continue. You have made yourself an active participant in reifying the implied consent of the governed that entitles the government to act on your behalf, and with your consent it will continue to ship weapons to apartheid regimes.
The utility calculation is dead simple: more votes for Biden in key states makes the governments’ dealings with the Israel appear legitimate and discourages people from taking meaningful action which might alter that relationship. Therefore, discouraging people from voting is an anti-genocide strategy.
By voting, you are prolonging the existence of the United States
Sophistry. Half the U.S. doesn’t vote in elections, and they’re still a global super power. Whoever told you that is an idiot.
makes the governments’ dealings with the Israel appear legitimate
More sophistry. The government’s legitimacy isn’t brought into question by a lack of votes; your actions are no different from someone who is simply politically disengaged and apathetic.
Keeping quiet isn’t an effective component of destroying the United States. Engaging in this argument the way that you are is a pro-genocide strategy because you are increasing the probability of more genocide.
Half the U.S. doesn’t vote in elections, and they’re still a global super power.
You admit that half of the country is already on my side and still call it sophistry?
The government’s legitimacy isn’t brought into question by a lack of votes
That’s because our government isn’t democratic. It only pretends to be so that the citizenry doesn’t depose it.
Keeping quiet isn’t an effective component of destroying the United States.
Hence, this discussion.
Engaging in this argument the way that you are is a pro-genocide strategy because you are increasing the probability of more genocide.
As opposed to engaging in this argument in the way that you are, begging me to vote for more genocide because you’re afraid the wrong half of our two-faced, one-party government would be put in charge of it.
on my side
Nope, that’s a misrepresentation of my argument and you know it.
because you’re afraid
✨ Correct. ✨
I love happy roadkill, and I’m familiar with this comic. I’d have gone with the one where the elephant is reaching down the donkey’s pants, though; it gets your message across more poignantly.
The the two parties form a bulwark against mainstream progressive political action. This is an inarguable fact, and if the option were between the DNC and green party, I’d vote green. The GOP is currently in a state of extreme disunity; it’s in a condition strikingly similar to the whigs prior to their dissolution and so losing Texas will likely cause the party to fracture as well as giving Biden a guaranteed victory. Once the GOP is made irrelevant, a left-wing electoral movement may be able (with the help of non-electoral leftist activitists) to form a genuine left-wing party, which will make direct action easier and our ultimate victory just that much closer and more likely.
I’m much less concerned about the hostility of those who openly demand genocide than the inaction of those who merely pretend to oppose it.
Strong “at least they’re honest about it” energy
The worst thing I could wish for you as a person, is that this comment follows you around for the rest of your life.
The complaint is about duplicity, not an acceptance or exoneration of those who openly agitate for it.
An ‘ally’ who goes along to get along, but has a radically different value set is not an ally. “9 people sit a a table with a Nazi and say nothing - how many Nazis are at the table?” We decry the Russians who don’t speak out against Putin, but shuffle uncomfortably when the DNC’s top candidate is pursuing a path that enables atrocities?
It’s a bullshit complaint for many reasons, but one of them is that they already stated that they won’t participate in an easy activity to help mitigate genocide.
You misspelled “prolong”.
When trans kids are being shoved into meat grinders I’ll let them know that it’s okay because you mastered the peak of internet wit.
I’d certainly hope so, as I was loosely paraphrasing Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”:
I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
In your mind, MLK was okay with the right kind of genocide?
Where did that come from? Of course not.
It’s easy to know where one stands in relation to enemies. The same can’t be said for false allies and fake friends like all the liberals who turn a blind eye to genocide when it’s their guy enabling it.
Gives me an idea for a new meme to cover the other half:
“Leftists who won’t vote” 🤝 “Democrats” agree on being “apathetic”.
I won’t vote for Biden. The DNC has known that for months and has decided to do shit-all about that fact.
Socialism 2024 has my vote, and that IS still a vote
You’re not the main character
Tf does that have anything to do with this lmao
“Fundamentally, nothing will change.”
-and then it didn’t
Now, here we are. Again.
Don’t abstain or vote third party to get revenge on vile liberals.
Do it because you have a backbone and can spend your time better doing almost anything.