Well, this is a fun discussion!
...Anyways, I like to think that the title implies you're supposed to vote more than once lol
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
742 points (90.6% liked)
politics
19241 readers
2259 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It also implies that not voting for Trump somehow counts more than voting for Trump does
Ok then! One vote for Trump is better than multiple not-votes for no one, so I'll vote for Trump!
/s
load more comments
(1 replies)
so is the line now that even though the biden administrations policies are wildly unpopular there's no reason to be worried or examine support held for the party because the turnout will make up the difference?
shoo!
You were probably taught in school that democracy is a wondrous ideal thing.
When you become an adult you realize democracy isn't about voting for who you like the most. It's about preventing bad people from getting power. You will never get to vote for some ideal perfect person, and even if you did the general muddiness of politics would prevent that person from being able to make the change they want.
Yes, it's "the line" now. But to be more accurate, it's always been the line.
It's what US democracy is. In a lot of countries, you get to vote for people who represent you, and the system works out stopping people who are widely disliked by parties forming coalitions after the vote.
Look at the NL, and how it deals with a Trump-like candidate. He got a plurality of the vote, yet is unable to form a government because none of the other parties cooperate.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Yes, it’s “the line” now. But to be more accurate, it’s always been the line.
You're not wrong, but also, when one of the parties purposely manipulates your vote by using the premise that you described, because they have a bad candidate, then they're no better than the other party that are the "bad guys".
There are more than just two candidates available in the whole United States of America that could run for president.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I am really not following all the vitriol in the comments, are people not only ignoring the article to react to the headline but then also mis-reading the headline?
It's not saying anyone ought to vote a certain way, it's just pointing out that low-propensity voters tend to support Trump.
I suspect this is due to the recent polarization around education. Highly educated people tend to vote more, and over the last decade they have tended to vote more and more for Democrats. And vice versa for low-formal-education folks.
Yeah, when I read the headline I figured it was saying that if you don't vote, that means you're actively supporting trump. But after reading the article, it's definitely not saying that as far as I can tell.
I chalk it up to the headline being worded weirdly, and just the fact that people have been saying things sorta like that.
Wouldn't that mean the opposite then? Voters more likely to vote will vote Biden, so if the less likely to vote don't vote that gives Biden an edge?
What if your a lifelong red voter and you vote less?
Like I get where your coming from, but it’s only because your audience are the sane ones.