Nor is it getting fixed by letting Bad politician B take over because A is a little worse. Hence why we're going downhill, despite the presidency changing hands between republican and democrat every eight years. Even Obama wasn't as good as we hoped he'd be. Certainly not as bad as Bush, or Trump, but we still got Trump because the dems lost like a thousand seats under his care.

If you think Trump is only a LITTLE worse, then tbh I'm not taking your opinion on who is a 'bad politician' very fucking seriously.

My opinion is far from professional. I just don't think we'd be getting anywhere good if we took the woman who ran on status quo as her goal. Of course now one of the biggest dem contenders in Biden, who is running on more or less the same thing. The bar that Trump set is so low, you could be a lot better than him, rather than a little, and still be really bad for the country. I remember being afraid that if we got Hillary for president, we'd be going into WW 3 over Syria. Now Trump wants war with Iran, and Venezuela, and has a hard on for Kimmy in North Korea, but I don't think we're on the verge of WW3

Hillary wanted to continue the progress made by President Obama. Including keeping the deal with Iran, nominating supreme court justices who wouldn't side against women and minorities, and putting Mitch Fucking McConnell in his goddamn place.

You're whole imaginary world war iii scenario is just that: Imaginary. Now we're a heartbeat away from women losing the right to their own bodies, we have concentration camps for migrant kids where they aren't getting soap, toothbrushes, blankets, or beds. We're rolling back environmental policies, corruption is at outrageous levels. But hey, at least we don't have the woman who MIGHT have started World War III in office! Instead we have a guy who MIGHT start world war III over a fucking tweet.

(June 23, 2019 at 12:28 pm)Chad32 Wrote: People should vote for who they like. Not for who they dislike less. People who didn't vote for Hillary are not responsible for Trump taking office. If you continue voting for bad candidates, you are complicit in the system being bad. We all need to stop supporting bad candidates because they're "more electable" than the candidates we actually like, since it makes it all that much harder for candidates we actually like to get into office.

No, they shouldn't.  They should vote with the seriousness of knowing what can be achieved and what is at risk, and not like spoiled brats who thinks expressing their desires is all important and the truly important things doesn’t matter or will just sort of take care of themselves.

---

(June 23, 2019 at 6:42 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(June 23, 2019 at 12:28 pm)Chad32 Wrote: People should vote for who they like. Not for who they dislike less. People who didn't vote for Hillary are not responsible for Trump taking office. If you continue voting for bad candidates, you are complicit in the system being bad. We all need to stop supporting bad candidates because they're "more electable" than the candidates we actually like, since it makes it all that much harder for candidates we actually like to get into office.

No, they shouldn't.  They should vote with the seriousness of knowing what can be achieved and what is at risk, and not like spoiled brats who thinks expressing their desires is all important and the truly important things doesn’t matter or will just sort of take care of themselves.

what is at risk in this case is so grave, and by comparison so little is the value of what could be achieved even if what is privately sought is somehow obtained,  that voting in anyway that does not help to avert the risk can be seen as nothing but the petulant squawking of the useful idiot in the service of the perpetrators who created the risk in the first place.

I don't understand why I have to try to defend the idea of voting in people who will actually help, instead of voting in whatever shitty candidate they keep serving us. If you think Biden is a good candidate, and want him in office, then go ahead. I don't like him. And if you don't like him either, then don't jump on my back for not wanting to vote for him, when you agree there are valid reasons for not wanting to vote for the guy. The DNC keeps feeding us status quo candidates because we keep voting them in, and they won't change unless we pressure them to.

I'm not a fan of Joe Biden. I will not vote for him the primary. But if he wins the primary -- I will vote for him. Because if we want to see progress in our lifetime, we have to elect more liberal candidates. Because conservative candidates like Trump will do everything in their power to make that progress even harder. If we keep waiting for the 'right' candidates and refuse to vote, we'll take one step forward, but then take twelve steps backwards. Because the other side isn't waiting for the 'right' candidate. They want candidates who will set progress back by fifty years. That's their goal.

Sometimes it's about more than what the candidate stands for or what they want to do. Unless the conservatives receive the strong message that their ideal society from 100 years ago is NOT acceptable, they will continue to strive toward that goal. And they will win, because their side doesn't care if they play by the rules.

Until Democrats show a continuous united front, Republicans will win major elections and will gain more and more power, and do more and more to take power away from Democrats. It's what they do. Biden is an imperfect candidate. But he is still infinitely better than Donald Trump. Because his ultimate goal is not to set us back a hundred years.

(June 23, 2019 at 7:24 pm)Chad32 Wrote: I don't understand why I have to try to defend the idea of voting in people who will actually help, instead of voting in whatever shitty candidate they keep serving us. If you think Biden is a good candidate, and want him in office, then go ahead. I don't like him. And if you don't like him either, then don't jump on my back for not wanting to vote for him, when you agree there are valid reasons for not wanting to vote for the guy. The DNC keeps feeding us status quo candidates because we keep voting them in, and they won't change unless we pressure them to.

Because your idea is based on airy nonsense propounded to make democracy seem enticing to those who are too dreamy and inclined towards fantasy to grasp the real reasons why democracy is desirable.   

The real reason democracy is desirable is not it will in any way significantly improve the odds of making good decisions or ensure good governance, or even may your every voice count, because it can't.    The real reason why democracy is desirable it offers (very) slightly more assurance of preventing truly bad decisions or governance.   What you are trying to do is to expect from democracy what it can not deliver, while in the process knocking the foundation out from its ability to deliver the only thing it can deliver.

If you act on this nonsense you will but guaranteed people who will do the most harm will gain the office while you fret away your vote in ill considered shallow dreams.

'In any given election, there may not be candidates or proposals that you want to vote for, but there are sure to be candidates and proposals you'll want to vote against.  Do so.  You may not get the results you want, but you're sure to feel good about yourself afterwards.'  - Robert Heinlein

Boru

Then why do we want democracy, over something else, if it isn't improving the odds of good decisions, and ensuring good governance? I know a lot of people get cynical and jaded as they get older, but we're still supposed to work our hardest towards utopia. Instead of just not being as bad as we could have been.