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?
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.
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.