If you’re not familiar, the US uses a two party system. Not voting is no different than voting for Jill. There’s no difference between not voting for Biden and voting for Trump.
Unfortunately, it’s not up to “the Democrats”, it’s up to the DNC and there is no way they will back anyone else unless Joe has a major medical event between now and election day.
Even if he did drop out, they would push Harris who is poison right now.
The problem is that, in a democracy, you have to vote for the best candidate. Otherwise, democracy doesn’t work. If you decide to vote for a candidate "you don’t like* (i.e. “strategic voting”), you are contributing to the problem.
People call it “voting for the lesser evil”, but a vote for a lesser evil…is still a vote for evil. So, while it isn’t as wrong as voting for Trump, it’s still wrong.
If you’re not familiar, the US uses a two party system. Not voting is no different than voting for Jill. There’s no difference between not voting for Biden and voting for Trump.
my ballot often has 4 or more parties on it.
yes there is. not voting at all is NOT voting for trump OR biden.
wrong. voting for jill adds 1 vote for jill. not voting adds 0 votes for jill.
Unfortunately, when the votes are counted, whoever has the most votes wins.
It doesn’t matter if the “not Trump” vote gets split across 1 candidate or 4 candidates, if Trump gets more votes than any one of them HE WINS.
Trump - 40%
Joe - 35%
Jill - 15%
West - 10%
Trump wins. Even though “not Trump” is 60%.
yep. i guess the democrats better drop out and throw their support behind a candidate other people can stomach.
Unfortunately, it’s not up to “the Democrats”, it’s up to the DNC and there is no way they will back anyone else unless Joe has a major medical event between now and election day.
Even if he did drop out, they would push Harris who is poison right now.
lets hope a miracle happens and the next president decides to oppose genocide.
Won’t happen as long as they need money from Zionists and Evangelists.
Maybe if we had public funding of elections.
The problem is that, in a democracy, you have to vote for the best candidate. Otherwise, democracy doesn’t work. If you decide to vote for a candidate "you don’t like* (i.e. “strategic voting”), you are contributing to the problem.
People call it “voting for the lesser evil”, but a vote for a lesser evil…is still a vote for evil. So, while it isn’t as wrong as voting for Trump, it’s still wrong.
Coalescing behind a candidate to defeat the worst choice is not wrong. Especially when the worst candidate will win otherwise.
Now, in an election that goes to a run off if nobody gets 50%+1 - Great, vote for who you want. But be prepared to coalesce in the run off.
Unfortunately, presedential elections aren’t subject to a run off.
This isn’t true, even if Jill loses.
It shows the level of support for Jill’s platform.
If the Green Party gets 5%, they qualify for a huge government grant which will help them become a more viable party.
Jill won’t win. It’s slightly better than not voting but ultimately you’re just helping Trump.