11.2 million. That’s the number of American citizens who rank climate change as their top issue but didn’t vote in the 2024 election, according to research by the Environmental Voter Project. For context, Donald Trump won the presidency in 2024 by less than 2.3 million votes. For a little over a decade, EVP has been [...]Read More... from If So Many Americans Care About Climate, Why Don’t They Vote Like It?
The United States has a problem with voter suppression, and a history of blaming societal problems on individuals to make it look like individual people are responsible instead of the people in charge.
Solid point. Part of it is a blame game as well. I try to stress how local policies are important. Yet you will still have politicians that will state they will do whatever to overturn popular vote. I mean take pot for example, 41/50 states and it’s only getting a reclassification.
No, you’re supposed to understand that people will be more motivated to vote if you appeal to them based on the policies they care about and follow through, instead of offering nothing beyond, “not the other guy.”
Why do you need to be “more motivated” if you care about climate change so much, when the options couldn’t be more clear? You are just making excuses for apathy.
Why do you need to be “more motivated” if you care about climate change so much, when the options couldn’t be more clear?
I don’t know how I can possibly make this more simple. These people haven’t been motivated enough to vote for your party before. You want them to be motivated to vote for your party in the future. Therefore, you need to find a way to make them more motivated to vote for you. That’s why. This is not complicated.
You are just making excuses for apathy.
No, I’m simply shifting the focus to where it belongs.
There’s a mismatch between what the party does and what the people want, and your solution involves trying to change what the millions of people want instead of changing the handful of people who determine party policy. Not only is that completely undemocratic, it’s also completely impractical. Unless you have a magic wand you can wave that will turn millions of people into Lesser Evilists before you’ll need their votes, you’re gonna have to meet them where they’re at and give them things they want. Which is exactly how any democratic system is supposed to work.
It’s kind of amazing how entitled y’all are with your party. They’re supposed to be “public servants.” If a servant’s employer tells them to clean something, does the servant say, “It’s already clean enough, you need to learn to live with a little dust,” or do they do the thing they’re being fucking paid to do and clean it again, even if they think the request is stupid? The level of backtalk y’all give to the public is frankly unbelievable. You don’t act like public servants, you act like public masters, like you’re feudal lords who get to tell us what’s going to happen and we’re uppity rabble who needs to fall in line. You’ve got things completely upside down.
Me when I reduce infinitely complex beings in static categories to fit my worldview.
Really? Metaphysical arguments? “X people are inherently this type of person and never won’t be” is such a lazy and uninspired argument.
Libs will do anything but question the status quo, as that status quo gets actively worse and worse from capitalism and imperialism. But hey… Those guys are actively making it worse, we just watch from the sides and maybe put some duct tape on it once in a while.
No one is going to open a restaurant where the target market is “people who don’t go to restaurants”. If you don’t vote you don’t matter to politicians and that’s all there is to it.
Yeah, that’s not true at all. The hundreds of millions spent on voter mobilization, get out the vote, rock the vote, voter education, voter registration, and all attendant campaigns is such an obvious massive counter to your inispid narrative.
Because voters have figured out that voting doesn’t fucking matter. Once you realize that a) the country has always been run by a single fascist bloc b) with multiple fascist factions fighting for control and c) fronted by two PR firms with subsidiary PR firms that drive psychological manipulation of voters into believing that d) this time it really is the most important election in history and e) voting will fix it and f) if you vote correctly then the fascists you put in power will stop being fascist and g) actually make structural change - once that becomes obvious, voting is just not something people are motivated to do. And to be clear even people like me who believe all those things vote in vast numbers because it is a ritualized symbol and it has implications in social situations and dynamics. And even still huge numbers of people just don’t vote, which means massive numbers of people understand that the system is fully irredeemable.
Sewer socialists have a long history of winning in the USA, and also of being outmaneuvered entirely by the fascists in both parties, purged, and having nearly all of their progress completely undone.
The purpose of those programs is to increase turnout, not cater to the political leanings of likely non-voters. Dems don’t give a shit what those people want they just want them to vote because statistically they would vote for Dems. The issues important to those voters rarely come up which is exactly my point.
I don’t really expect a well reasoned response from someone going around saying things like “Europe can save Ukraine by disbanding NATO” though. Pull your head out of Putin’s ass and have your own thoughts.
Well yeah, obviously bullies only bully the nerds because the Anti-Bully Club is so anti-bully. If the Anti-Bully Club just disbands instead of defending nerds, then the bullies will have no reason to keep bullying the nerds! Duhhh! (/s)
LOL. You’re fucking amazing. You came to the conclusion that voter turnout programs only exist because they want voters to vote for them but literally won’t do anything that those voters want? That’s your conclusion? You couldn’t reason your way out of a paper bag. Which makes sense because you think an American who has been raised by Americans in America and consumed all the same anti-Russian propaganda you have consumed our whole lives is somehow having someone else’s thoughts when they have thoughts that disagree with the propaganda you and I have both been raised on. You are doing the meme.
If Dems primary concern is the will of their voters then why are they constantly doing things the majority of their voting base disagrees with? You’re acting like Dems know exactly what the people want when the central political problem in America for the last 15 years is that they either don’t know or don’t care.
Also, if your own thoughts are not Russian propaganda then why is what you’re saying matching Russian propaganda word-for-word? Disbanding NATO doesn’t help anyone but Russia and somewhere in that brain of yours you know that. You’re twisting words to make unreasonable things sound reasonable on both of these issues
Oh, sorry, so you’re saying Dems are constantly doing things their voting base disagrees with? So then why should people vote for them? You’re not making a strong argument for your position there.
You think Russian propaganda is the only source of anti-NATO sentiment in the entire world? Have you heard of Heusinger? Are you aware of the controversial decisions to staff NATO with Nazi officers? Heusinger was never even tried at Nuremberg.
Disbanding NATO doesn’t help anyone but Russia and somewhere in that brain of yours you know that.
Pretty sure it would’ve helped the Libyans if the “defensive” alliance that waged an offensive war on them didn’t exist.
NATO is a tool of neocolonialism and there are countless neocolonies around the world that it harms. Even if it were “defensive” (which it absolutely isn’t) it maintains an oppressive status quo over the global majority and gives member states the ability to attack wantonly, without fear of retaliation.
No one is going to open a restaurant where the target market is “people who don’t go to restaurants”.
???
When you open a restaurant, the only target market is people who don’t go to your restaurant. Looking into how to expand your business to people who don’t already go to restaurants is absolutely a valid line of inquiry that companies persue all the time. Maybe the reason they don’t eat out because it’s too expensive, and you can appeal to them with lower prices. Maybe the reason they don’t eat out is because they don’t know how good your food is, and you can address that with free samples. Maybe they have dietary restrictions and you can appeal to them by adding vegan or gluten free options. Restaurants, like any business, are constantly looking for ways to break into new sections of the market. So your analogy falls completely flat.
Look at, for example, Little Caesars which at least back when I was in school had cheap ass $5 pizzas, they tasted like shit but they were $5 so being a broke ass college student I ate there all the time when I might otherwise have not eaten out at all. And that’s why they focused on keeping the price low instead of making it actually good. Because at $5, even groceries wouldn’t be much cheaper.
Likewise, if a political party is uninterested in appealing to people who don’t already vote for them, it must mean that they’re satisfied with their current level of support. Which, considering the Dems lost the last election, doesn’t exactly seem to be working. And what, do you think you’ll have better luck trying, again, to appeal to “moderate” Republicans? Let me know how that goes, lol.
People who don’t eat at restaurants at all are obviously not the same as people who don’t eat at a restaurant that doesn’t exist. You said you understood that concept but then spent the rest of your comment describing people who want to eat at restaurants.
This is what your commitment to your narrative has done to you. It has made you believe that there is a category of people who don’t vote because that is what they prefer, and you’re so committed that you are willing to make nonsense arguments that posit the existence of people who eat food but specifically will not and never will eat food if it’s in a restaurant.
Nothing about your narrative is reasonable. Give people something they want and they will pursue it
People who don’t eat at restaurants at all are obviously not the same as people who don’t eat at a restaurant that doesn’t exist.
Legitimately don’t understand this word salad.
You said you understood that concept but then spent the rest of your comment describing people who want to eat at restaurants.
Someone who doesn’t currently eat at restaurants might start eating at them if the restaurants find a way to appeal to them. That’s not a complicated concept.
If I’m vegan, and no restaurants in my area offer vegan options, then I am someone who doesn’t eat at restaurants at all. If a restaurant opens up that does offer vegan options, or if an existing restaurant adds a vegan option, then I might start eating at restaurants. Do you not understand this concept?
Likewise, someone who doesn’t vote might start voting if they’re appealed to. This is equally uncomplicated.
Uno reverse card
If so many people who care about the climate don’t vote, then why don’t politicians take a stronger line on the issue to appeal to them?
Exactly.
The United States has a problem with voter suppression, and a history of blaming societal problems on individuals to make it look like individual people are responsible instead of the people in charge.
Solid point. Part of it is a blame game as well. I try to stress how local policies are important. Yet you will still have politicians that will state they will do whatever to overturn popular vote. I mean take pot for example, 41/50 states and it’s only getting a reclassification.
Oh so we’re supposed to pretend that climate voters are so stupid they don’t understand that Republicans are bad for the environment?
No, you’re supposed to understand that people will be more motivated to vote if you appeal to them based on the policies they care about and follow through, instead of offering nothing beyond, “not the other guy.”
Why do you need to be “more motivated” if you care about climate change so much, when the options couldn’t be more clear? You are just making excuses for apathy.
How has the Democratic strategy of “at least we’re not the other guy” been working?
I don’t know how I can possibly make this more simple. These people haven’t been motivated enough to vote for your party before. You want them to be motivated to vote for your party in the future. Therefore, you need to find a way to make them more motivated to vote for you. That’s why. This is not complicated.
No, I’m simply shifting the focus to where it belongs.
There’s a mismatch between what the party does and what the people want, and your solution involves trying to change what the millions of people want instead of changing the handful of people who determine party policy. Not only is that completely undemocratic, it’s also completely impractical. Unless you have a magic wand you can wave that will turn millions of people into Lesser Evilists before you’ll need their votes, you’re gonna have to meet them where they’re at and give them things they want. Which is exactly how any democratic system is supposed to work.
It’s kind of amazing how entitled y’all are with your party. They’re supposed to be “public servants.” If a servant’s employer tells them to clean something, does the servant say, “It’s already clean enough, you need to learn to live with a little dust,” or do they do the thing they’re being fucking paid to do and clean it again, even if they think the request is stupid? The level of backtalk y’all give to the public is frankly unbelievable. You don’t act like public servants, you act like public masters, like you’re feudal lords who get to tell us what’s going to happen and we’re uppity rabble who needs to fall in line. You’ve got things completely upside down.
Why would you try to appeal to non-voters? They don’t vote. The right messaging won’t suddenly make non-voters voters.
Your message is literally why progressives hate Democrats and why your party only attacks progressives and actively funds and collaborates with MAGA
Democrats have shown time and time again who they work WITH and who they work Against.
Remember when the Democrats banded together to stop the scary revolutionary candidate bringing sweeping change for the people?
I do, it was Bernie, TWICE
Me when I reduce infinitely complex beings in static categories to fit my worldview.
Really? Metaphysical arguments? “X people are inherently this type of person and never won’t be” is such a lazy and uninspired argument.
Libs will do anything but question the status quo, as that status quo gets actively worse and worse from capitalism and imperialism. But hey… Those guys are actively making it worse, we just watch from the sides and maybe put some duct tape on it once in a while.
Ok so you lose then.
No one is going to open a restaurant where the target market is “people who don’t go to restaurants”. If you don’t vote you don’t matter to politicians and that’s all there is to it.
Yeah, that’s not true at all. The hundreds of millions spent on voter mobilization, get out the vote, rock the vote, voter education, voter registration, and all attendant campaigns is such an obvious massive counter to your inispid narrative.
And yet voter turnout is consistently low.
Because voters have figured out that voting doesn’t fucking matter. Once you realize that a) the country has always been run by a single fascist bloc b) with multiple fascist factions fighting for control and c) fronted by two PR firms with subsidiary PR firms that drive psychological manipulation of voters into believing that d) this time it really is the most important election in history and e) voting will fix it and f) if you vote correctly then the fascists you put in power will stop being fascist and g) actually make structural change - once that becomes obvious, voting is just not something people are motivated to do. And to be clear even people like me who believe all those things vote in vast numbers because it is a ritualized symbol and it has implications in social situations and dynamics. And even still huge numbers of people just don’t vote, which means massive numbers of people understand that the system is fully irredeemable.
Oh fuck you’re an ml bot. Not worth engaging with. Buhbye MAGAtankie shitbird.
LOL
You’re right Zohran Mamdani didn’t win NYC mayor. Fuck off bad faith troll. Who you working for?
Sewer socialists have a long history of winning in the USA, and also of being outmaneuvered entirely by the fascists in both parties, purged, and having nearly all of their progress completely undone.
The purpose of those programs is to increase turnout, not cater to the political leanings of likely non-voters. Dems don’t give a shit what those people want they just want them to vote because statistically they would vote for Dems. The issues important to those voters rarely come up which is exactly my point.
I don’t really expect a well reasoned response from someone going around saying things like “Europe can save Ukraine by disbanding NATO” though. Pull your head out of Putin’s ass and have your own thoughts.
Well yeah, obviously bullies only bully the nerds because the Anti-Bully Club is so anti-bully. If the Anti-Bully Club just disbands instead of defending nerds, then the bullies will have no reason to keep bullying the nerds! Duhhh! (/s)
You’ll never get good faith engagement with ml so all you can do is try to piss em off and waste their time.
LOL. You’re fucking amazing. You came to the conclusion that voter turnout programs only exist because they want voters to vote for them but literally won’t do anything that those voters want? That’s your conclusion? You couldn’t reason your way out of a paper bag. Which makes sense because you think an American who has been raised by Americans in America and consumed all the same anti-Russian propaganda you have consumed our whole lives is somehow having someone else’s thoughts when they have thoughts that disagree with the propaganda you and I have both been raised on. You are doing the meme.
If Dems primary concern is the will of their voters then why are they constantly doing things the majority of their voting base disagrees with? You’re acting like Dems know exactly what the people want when the central political problem in America for the last 15 years is that they either don’t know or don’t care.
Also, if your own thoughts are not Russian propaganda then why is what you’re saying matching Russian propaganda word-for-word? Disbanding NATO doesn’t help anyone but Russia and somewhere in that brain of yours you know that. You’re twisting words to make unreasonable things sound reasonable on both of these issues
Oh, sorry, so you’re saying Dems are constantly doing things their voting base disagrees with? So then why should people vote for them? You’re not making a strong argument for your position there.
You think Russian propaganda is the only source of anti-NATO sentiment in the entire world? Have you heard of Heusinger? Are you aware of the controversial decisions to staff NATO with Nazi officers? Heusinger was never even tried at Nuremberg.
Pretty sure it would’ve helped the Libyans if the “defensive” alliance that waged an offensive war on them didn’t exist.
NATO is a tool of neocolonialism and there are countless neocolonies around the world that it harms. Even if it were “defensive” (which it absolutely isn’t) it maintains an oppressive status quo over the global majority and gives member states the ability to attack wantonly, without fear of retaliation.
???
When you open a restaurant, the only target market is people who don’t go to your restaurant. Looking into how to expand your business to people who don’t already go to restaurants is absolutely a valid line of inquiry that companies persue all the time. Maybe the reason they don’t eat out because it’s too expensive, and you can appeal to them with lower prices. Maybe the reason they don’t eat out is because they don’t know how good your food is, and you can address that with free samples. Maybe they have dietary restrictions and you can appeal to them by adding vegan or gluten free options. Restaurants, like any business, are constantly looking for ways to break into new sections of the market. So your analogy falls completely flat.
Look at, for example, Little Caesars which at least back when I was in school had cheap ass $5 pizzas, they tasted like shit but they were $5 so being a broke ass college student I ate there all the time when I might otherwise have not eaten out at all. And that’s why they focused on keeping the price low instead of making it actually good. Because at $5, even groceries wouldn’t be much cheaper.
Likewise, if a political party is uninterested in appealing to people who don’t already vote for them, it must mean that they’re satisfied with their current level of support. Which, considering the Dems lost the last election, doesn’t exactly seem to be working. And what, do you think you’ll have better luck trying, again, to appeal to “moderate” Republicans? Let me know how that goes, lol.
People who don’t eat at restaurants at all are obviously not the same as people who don’t eat at a restaurant that doesn’t exist. You said you understood that concept but then spent the rest of your comment describing people who want to eat at restaurants.
This is what your commitment to your narrative has done to you. It has made you believe that there is a category of people who don’t vote because that is what they prefer, and you’re so committed that you are willing to make nonsense arguments that posit the existence of people who eat food but specifically will not and never will eat food if it’s in a restaurant.
Nothing about your narrative is reasonable. Give people something they want and they will pursue it
Legitimately don’t understand this word salad.
Someone who doesn’t currently eat at restaurants might start eating at them if the restaurants find a way to appeal to them. That’s not a complicated concept.
If I’m vegan, and no restaurants in my area offer vegan options, then I am someone who doesn’t eat at restaurants at all. If a restaurant opens up that does offer vegan options, or if an existing restaurant adds a vegan option, then I might start eating at restaurants. Do you not understand this concept?
Likewise, someone who doesn’t vote might start voting if they’re appealed to. This is equally uncomplicated.