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?
if clearly motivated people don’t want to vote for you, it’s not an indication that they should lower their standards, it’s an indication that you should have standards to begin with
it’s cute how liberals here are so resilient to reality. people don’t care for slow, steady, painfully incremental progress (if even that) when every summer is so much hotter than the last one.
Non voters aren’t motivated to vote, they’re non voters, why would anyone cater to a group that intentionally throws away any influence they could have?
Thanks, I’ll go on and implement a policy to destroy the ability to vote for as many people as possible in as many ways as I can come up with, that way they become non-voters and I don’t have to listen to them. Oh wait, that policy is already what’s happening.
Because progressives don’t fucking vote and give power to Republicans by doing so. If you refuse to participate in the system then you don’t get to be upset when the system disregards you.
Over several decades, progressives are told to vote for the lesser evil, they do, and then the lesser evil helps the greater evil silence progressive voices, so that progressives eventually find out they can’t vote anymore.
If progressives voted in every election over the last several decades we’d have a progressive democratic party, but progressives mostly don’t vote. You sound like a republican.
Incremental progress is better than actively working to make things worse, but y’know, stick to your guns and help make SURE things get worse. Good job!
i’m not saying people shouldn’t vote (truthfully, i don’t care). i’m saying parties who want votes should have policies worth voting for.
y’all keep talking about how the “let’s not vote for the lesser evil because it’s still evil” voter strategy has lead to terrible results. why not talk about how the “let’s be the lesser evil instead of doing anything good that people would want to support” party strategy has lead to the same terrible results?
The time to make that change is before the general election.
Anytime you’re presented with two choices, take the less bad option. But if that’s the only time you bother to act, or even worse, if you don’t even act THEN to pick the lesser bad option, then you are one less vote against the worse, and therefore by your actions support it. But you already supported it if you weren’t fighting for better options.
“Well, I didn’t pick which restaurant to visit very well, and this restaurant only has moldy fruit or sandwiches made literally from shit. I don’t like either option, so I’m just gonna eat whatever they bring me”. Sure, it’s not a great analogy in the sense that picking a different restaurant is not so easy in the context of politics, but I think it makes the point - always choose the lesser bad option. I’d rather eat the moldy fruit (we’re assuming that we must eat something in this metaphor) than the literal shit. And then work harder to try and prevent us from going to this restaurant next time. But if you are presented with the two bad options and one is worse, not picking an option is fucking stupid.
if clearly motivated people don’t want to vote for you, it’s not an indication that they should lower their standards, it’s an indication that you should have standards to begin with
it’s cute how liberals here are so resilient to reality. people don’t care for slow, steady, painfully incremental progress (if even that) when every summer is so much hotter than the last one.
There hasn’t even been slow progress for anything but shifting right. We have been losing everything from the new deal.
It’s literally their equivalent of trickle down economics. SOMEDAY IT WILL HAPPEN DESPITE ALL EVIDENCE SHOWING OTHERWISE
Non voters aren’t motivated to vote, they’re non voters, why would anyone cater to a group that intentionally throws away any influence they could have?
Thanks, I’ll go on and implement a policy to destroy the ability to vote for as many people as possible in as many ways as I can come up with, that way they become non-voters and I don’t have to listen to them. Oh wait, that policy is already what’s happening.
Because progressives don’t fucking vote and give power to Republicans by doing so. If you refuse to participate in the system then you don’t get to be upset when the system disregards you.
Over several decades, progressives are told to vote for the lesser evil, they do, and then the lesser evil helps the greater evil silence progressive voices, so that progressives eventually find out they can’t vote anymore.
You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Yeah, and not voting will make everything much worse a lot faster.
So please, throw away your vote. The republicans will thank you.
If progressives voted in every election over the last several decades we’d have a progressive democratic party, but progressives mostly don’t vote. You sound like a republican.
I sound like a Republican when saying that the Republican have destroyed voting rights? sure buddy.
You sound like a republican because you were spouting both sides bullshit.
Incremental progress is better than actively working to make things worse, but y’know, stick to your guns and help make SURE things get worse. Good job!
i think you misunderstand
i’m not saying people shouldn’t vote (truthfully, i don’t care). i’m saying parties who want votes should have policies worth voting for.
y’all keep talking about how the “let’s not vote for the lesser evil because it’s still evil” voter strategy has lead to terrible results. why not talk about how the “let’s be the lesser evil instead of doing anything good that people would want to support” party strategy has lead to the same terrible results?
The time to make that change is before the general election.
Anytime you’re presented with two choices, take the less bad option. But if that’s the only time you bother to act, or even worse, if you don’t even act THEN to pick the lesser bad option, then you are one less vote against the worse, and therefore by your actions support it. But you already supported it if you weren’t fighting for better options.
“Well, I didn’t pick which restaurant to visit very well, and this restaurant only has moldy fruit or sandwiches made literally from shit. I don’t like either option, so I’m just gonna eat whatever they bring me”. Sure, it’s not a great analogy in the sense that picking a different restaurant is not so easy in the context of politics, but I think it makes the point - always choose the lesser bad option. I’d rather eat the moldy fruit (we’re assuming that we must eat something in this metaphor) than the literal shit. And then work harder to try and prevent us from going to this restaurant next time. But if you are presented with the two bad options and one is worse, not picking an option is fucking stupid.