this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
218 points (87.6% liked)

Not voting (in your election)

107 readers
1 users here now

Place to hang out, memes, share experiences or just vent.

Welcome to all not wanting to vote, not able to vote or just annoyed by the US presidential election taking over Lemmy and other social media.

Coming here to argue about voting will result in a ban.

Be kind to each other & follow the server rules.

Be specifically aware that not everyone here is from the so called USA.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Text: screenshot of a Tumblr thread reading:

Every day I am forced to confront that the the Democratic Party won the White House and Congress in 2020 and instead of doing the smart thing and ending the filibuster, packing the court, and going scorched Earth on the GOP which, mind you, had just tried to overthrow the election, they kicked back and proceeded to do absolutely nothing of note except cut a blank check for the most televised genocide of the last 30 years.

A disciplined party could have un-fucked everything trump did in the span of a few month, but they chose not to. They chose not to, and now we're all paying for it.

The purpose of a system is what it does.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Ok.

Still voting Democrat because...

  1. They are not Republicans.

  2. No 3rd party is even remotely viable and no 3rd party is doing the work necessary to become viable. The last 3rd party candidate for president received half of a single percent of the total votes cast, proving that no 3rd party can win a presidency, or even come close.

So until a 3rd party actually starts winning local/state elections (they aren't) and gets more than ZERO members in Congress, I'll keep voting Dem.

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

[–] the_mighty_kracken@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The most important elections coming up will be the primaries. It's the only opportunity progressives have of getting into office. A much better rallying cry than, "We're not voting!" Would be, "Primary all of them!"

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 week ago

I agree here. In the past there was this call for candidates to be electable but that is bullshit. Would trump be electable? We can never know so in the primaries go for what you want that is best to you.

[–] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I would strongly discourage people from voting third party. I mean, have you looked at the name of the sub?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

So what you’re saying is we’re boned

load more comments (3 replies)

Ah but if Democrats did literally anything of value or put up any safeguards whatsoever how can they force you to vote for them every single time? Oh you dont like it well too bad the other option is fascism.

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

They didn't win Congress though?

It was 50-48 split in favour of republicans in the senate (with 2 independents) less than that if you could the DiNOs

The only reason the Dems could do anything at all, it's because the VP can be used as a tiebreaker in certain situations.

Like the Dems are worthless corporate shills and only exist to give the illusion of choice to placate the masses, but you still need to be accurate when you say shit like this.

[–] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The two independents were Bernie Sanders and Angus King, both of whom reliably caucused with the Democrats.

And "certain situations" means, if the Senate votes 50/50, the VP can break the tie.

So, yes, 50 reliable Democratic votes in the Senate, plus the VP, plus a majority in the House, means the Democrats did "win" Congress in all but the most pedantic interpretations of the word.

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

the Democrats did "win" Congress in all but the most pedantic interpretations of the word.

No. Both literally and practically the democrats did not have a majority in the senate, if we go by actual part affiliation, then they only had 48 senators, and if we go by voting record then the DiNOs such as Manchin, Sinema and even Fetterman don't relaibly vote with the democrats.

The ONLY interpretation in which the democrats won the senate is one where you purposefully try to construct that narrative by picking and choosing pieces of the combination of those definitions to suit the argument.

And even then Harris still cast more tie breaker votes than any VP in history. So it's a bit disengenous to go after the entire democratic party when it was well documented that it was the actions of a couple of senators, the """moderate""" democrats that repeatedly blocked votes that could have done good from going through.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The important thing to understand about Democrats is even when they have power they actually have no power.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago

this is actually pretty true. republicans toe the party line even if they disagree. democrats are this mix of conservative to liberal and fight amongst themselves all the time.

[–] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I think you're confusing Democrats (who won the House and Senate and controlled Congress) with progressives (who didn't).

Manchin and Sinema were Democrats. They became independents in 2024 and 2022 respectively. Fetterman and other conservative Democrats are still Democrats.

The Democrats controlled Congress in 2021-2022, and Manchin and Sinema and Fetterman were part of that ruling coalition.

Manchin and Sinema and other conservative Democrats sabotaged the Democrats' feeble attempts at progressive legislation, and that was one reason the Democratic Party failed to accomplish anything during Biden's administration. Another reason was the Democratic Party leadership was either unable or unwilling to control those conservative Democrats.

And still another reason was Biden's weakness and political cowardice. Which is painfully apparent now, since Donald Trump has proved a President with a majority in Congress can do whatever he wants by executive order. Biden with a Democratic Congress could have done the same thing if he had the guts. If Biden had actually used the power of the presidency, Manchin would have been an irrelevant footnote instead of the single most important vote in the Senate.

But you cannot say that Democrats didn't control Congress. The Democrats controlled Congress. And then the Democrats let a handful of conservatives in Congress set their agenda and block progressive reform until they lost power.

And the fact that they didn't do shit for America when voters put them in charge, because party leadership sat on their fucking hands and let their conservative wing set the agenda, is the whole fucking point of the post.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago

trump can do what he does because republicans are willing to back him up. Democrats don't always back up even a reasonable president but would completely abandon one acting like trump and disregarding the constitution.

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Did you only read half of my comment or something?

If anything you're the one confusing democrats with progressives here.

Democrats won 48 seats in the senate that year. Republicans won 50. And 2 were independent. Democrats did not control the senate, this is a fact.

As I've said in my last comment if you want to talk about party affiliationbto include Manchin and senma, then you don't get to include the independents.

Democrats did not have a majority in the senate, that is just a fact. You can argue against facts if you want, but all your doing is trying to twist reality to fit your argument.

Also using Trumps lawb breaking and fascist actions as proof Biden could also have broken laws and been a fascist if he wanted to is not only wrong, since the rest of his part is not yes men that agree with him being fascist, but obviously morally wrong.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The Republicans sure dona great job of getting everything they want with a ghoul in the white house and a split Congress. So why can't the Democrats?

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Republicans have 53 seats in the senate whereas in 2020 dems had 48.

That and republicans are all spineless yes men who are in lockstep with the maga platform, they don't really have any """moderates""" like the Dems have.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] julysfire@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If my two options are idiots or evil, I'll pick idiots. Please give me more options

[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago

i'll pick the idiot too but I hate the people who defend them like they're gods greatest gift to mankind. No, we need some adults in the room please.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Dumpy could have been rotting in prison. But no. Fucking Biden and his doj say on their fucking arses and did nothing. Pathetic

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nixus@anarchist.nexus 9 points 1 week ago (8 children)

And yet every election, I'm told that I have to vote for them, because they are gonna fly in and save the day. I'm sure that'll happen any day now... Yup, any day now.....

[–] dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, no, they're not gonna fly in and save anything. They've basically dropped even implying they're going to do that. Now the party line is "vote for us! We'll do nothing for 4 years! That's better than actively doing bad things. Remember to vote for us again in 4 years. Or bad things!"

And the most fucked up part is that nothing for 4 years is better than active bad things. We need actual 3rd party candidates and socialists doing some real fucking organizing at the local and state levels and building a coalition. We're never going to get a viable candidate from a viable party that isn't complete dogshit in a national election if there isn't a huge movement behind them, and we're not going to get that if we don't stop pretending like it can start at the presidential level.

That said, in a solid red or blue state, get the greens or whoever over the threshold so they get federal funding. But swing state voters have a much harder choice before them.

Whole system is fucked.

Made myself sad.

Going to bed now.

:(

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 7 points 1 week ago (5 children)

"Guys! I keep voting for the lesser of two evils, but my country just continues to become more and more cartoonishly evil? What should i do?"

[–] dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 week ago

Effectively, yeah. Even when they do actually do something 'good' it's only to bring things 5 degrees to the left of where Republicans moved it, which is 30 degrees to the right of where it used to be. Ratchet effect in full force. I'm not arguing for the lesser of two evils, I'm arguing for non-evil to get better at building a base outside of the main two parties. Get to a point where people actually have some local and state reps in the green party, or a labor party or whatever, and they might actually vote for them in a national election. But it'll never happen until they've actually had a chance to see those parties doing something instead of just (with the biggest fucking air quotes imaginable) """spoiling"""" the general

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago (10 children)

Yeah. Instead of blaming the criminals that broke in, let’s instead blame the person that didn’t lock the door.

For the record: This is the same logic conservatives use when blaming undocumented immigrants for taking jobs instead of the assholes that are hiring them.

But by all means- don’t let this get in the way of some good ol’ manufactured outrage.

[–] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 11 points 1 week ago (7 children)

You know what? If I hire someone to guard my house, and my house gets robbed, because the person I hired (1) didn't lock the door, (2) didn't call the police, and (3) was too afraid to confront the robbers themselves, then yes, I will blame the person I hired for not doing their fucking job.

The conceit of representative democracy is that our representatives are public servants. That we appoint them to serve our interests. And when they fail at that task we have the right and the fucking duty to hold them accountable for their failure.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] bequirtle@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (10 children)

It's like if you got robbed, and then instead of locking the door or taking literally any preventive measure, you just think "surely I would never get robbed twice" and then do nothing

Then you get robbed again, because you live in a shady neighborhood and you're gonna keep getting fucking robbed until you lock the door

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] _AutumnMoon_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 week ago (17 children)

this is more like blaming a judge for not locking up a known serial killer

load more comments (17 replies)

I'm not gonna hold my breath on the Republican Party holding it's contingent responsible. Thus the only other party with power better take some action.

It may not be the victim's fault but it is their responsibility.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›