#like fixing the electoral college

[haldenlith]

Seeing that Feinstein finally kicked the bucket, and, her accomplishments aside, I have to agree with the sentiment I'm seeing around.

"Why was a 90 yr old still in Congress?" I legit can't think of a time when she wasn't a congresswoman.

(I just checked, and I see why -- she's literally been a senator almost my entire life, since 1992. I was born in 1988.)

Seriously, that right there is why we honestly need either age limits or term limits, or both. (I'm personally in favor of term limits so that we can stop getting career politicians that are increasingly obviously only in it for the paycheck...)

I saw a take, however, that said that term limits would only "make things worse" as it'd lead to more aggressive lobbying and less getting done (because they'd only have limited time to get motions passed, ie during their term). I say two things to that:

Presidents only have limited terms, and they somehow manage to get shit done (or undone...), so... I'm failing to see the point.

If you're worried about lobbying, then maybe we should, I don't know, finally deal with the lobbying problem? I suggest flaying them, but I'm sure someone more civilized than myself has a better approach.

It just seems like the failings in our "great and wonderful system" keep becoming more and more obvious as time goes on. I wish people would stop going "but this is how it's always been!" and start going "yeah, maybe there's a problem, and we should try fixing it."

[confinesofmy]

how you gonna vote your way out of something you didn't even vote your way into...

[jrrtfanforlife]

Getting a bit tired of all the “just go vote” posts floating around my dash. I will vote and everything, but I don’t live in the US anymore so I’m not allowed to vote for anything but federal stuff. So hooray I get to throw a vote at Maria Cantwell and Rick Larsen (probably, depending on primaries but they’re the incumbents) which is wild in and of itself cuz I lived in that area so briefly but that’s forever where I’m registered to vote now I guess.

And of course presidential election. Which wow so cool so exciting. Wonder who will get all those electoral college votes from Washington state, really on the edge of my seat over here, my vote sure is gonna make a difference.

[qqueenofhades]

I just feel like even if we all vote and Biden wins, Trump won't accept the loss, and eventually they'll just put him in anyway. And then there won't be another real election. Even if Biden wins and somehow is actually confirmed (which again, I think is unlikely) we're going to have to do this for 30 more years because of the SC, and that isn't at all sustainable.

All this isn't to say I won't vote but I just think people are being way too optimistic about what happens if Biden wins. I don't think him winning will keep Trump out or the horrible fascist future at bay.

Look, I get the fear. I do, I do... but this is also one of the times when you have to ask if it's actually telling you something true, or if it's just preying on that generalized feeling of doom to make everything seem hopeless even if we win again. And that is... there is absolutely no actual mechanism for Trump to be installed as president if Biden wins the Electoral College (since as we have repeatedly seen, the popular vote is immaterial). SCOTUS is horrible and evil and are trying to interfere as much ahead of time for Trump as they can, but part of that is because they can't simply issue an order for Biden to be removed and Trump to become God King By Fiat. That is not how it works. If Biden wins in November, he will be president until his term ends, he steps down, Kamala takes over, or anything else.

Trump tried a coup with all the entire overwhelming might of the US government as the sitting president last time; fortunately, it failed. Reforms to the Electoral Count Act have been made to prevent another January 6. The Department of Defense and the military are still under (and would be on another January 6) Biden's command, not Trump's. That's not to say that Trump won't try some shit with his insane cult followers, but he is just a late 70s conman from Queens out on bail and under sentence for a criminal trial, who is already the biggest and most disgraced loser and asshole in American political history. He is so desperate to cheat his way back into power because in a real sense, this IS the last-chance saloon for him. He can't put off the legal proceedings, however long they take, for another four years. He's losing his marbles at a rapid rate. I'm just saying: we don't know what or when, but there will be (and already have been) real consequences for him. That is why he is scrabbling so hard.

"Even if we vote, nothing matters and Trump will win anyway" is another of those insidious lies that works to make you feel as if the battle is endless and pointless and none of its victories matter. Of course it will not all be magically fixed forever if Biden wins. We will still have to figure some godforsaken fucking way to expand SCOTUS or kick Alito and Thomas off it. But we will have bought ourselves, our democracy, our country, and the world time to do that, and put another nail in Trump's coffin. That matters. It matters a lot.

Fascism wants to present itself as overwhelming, irresistible, inevitable, and ready to happen no matter what you do, and that's what your brain wants you to buy in now. But that's not the case, Trump is not inevitable or some all-powerful monolith (in fact, another of the debate takeaways seemed to be that Biden looked bad but people still hate Trump too much for it to really shift anything). He is a loser, a fraud, a conman, a liar, and a crook, and he WANTS you to fear him like an almighty god. Don't give him or the MAGAGOP the satisfaction.

Frankly, having to endure another four months of this might kill us all, and I know that we are tired and scared (me too). But IT IS NOT INEVITABLE THAT WE ARE DOOMED. Not at all. Let's hang onto that and tell that anxiety doom voice to shove it.

Hugs.

[omgthatdress]

So, Charles really fucking sucks, doesn’t he?

Honestly, for a long time I was kind of neutral on whether or not the monarchy should continue to exist. After all, I’m an American, it’s doesn’t affect me, and one thing that annoys the fuck out of me on Tumblr is British people going on about how the electoral college should be abolished or someone from Iceland talking about how to fix the American healthcare system. But seeing all the drama with Harry and Megan has convinced me that it needs to be abolished regardless of politics because of how badly it damages with people trapped within it.

The people who stan Harry and Megan and their kids on Twitter are FREAKS and tweeting about how adorable and precious a four-year-old that you’ve never met is fucking weird and creepy. Under any other circumstances I’d probably find them annoying as hell as celebrities. They are mere mortals, just like the rest of us, and we should be talking about them as such.

BUT. Here’s the thing. Harry removed himself and his children from a cycle of abuse and dysfunction that killed his mother and left his father and brother as broken, bitter, and miserable shells of men. Anyone who’s ever been in a toxic family situation will know that it’s an incredible act of bravery and deeply admirable. I genuinely think Archie and Lilibet are going to live much better lives and be much happier people than George, Charlotte, and Louis will be.

Yes, I went there, and I don’t think it’s inappropriate to talk about the kids in these situations because they’re going to be inheriting marriage and family-related trauma that can be traced back generations. If the cycle isn’t broken, it *will* be handed down to those kids. We’ve seen what happened when Edward VIII, Margaret, Charles, and Harry all wanted to marry someone who didn’t quite fit into the family. What happens when George, Charlotte, or Louis comes out as gay? What happens when they come out as trans? They deserve a better future.

[still-searching-for-something]

I feel like I'm constantly talking like a broken record, lol, leftists this, leftists that.

Sometimes it's surreal to see myself typing that and agreeing with it, given I used to be very left wing myself until the response on the left to October 7th. And I hate the idea that it's giving other people the impression that I'm conservative--I'm not. I have some views that I'd share with conservatives--being a Zionist being one of them... obviously.

But I'm literally bisexual. I support same-sex marriage. I think democracy is the best form of government, that the US should have universal healthcare, should abolish the Electoral College (National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, I'm praying for you). I think the invasion of Ukraine is a monstrous crime and Putin is a threat to world peace. I think systemic racism is a real thing in the United States, as is police brutality against black people. I think vaccines work, and mandates are a good idea. I think most right-wing politicians are right-wing populists more interested in causing democratic backsliding and peddling conspiracies than they are in fixing literally anything.

But I can't call myself a leftist anymore, even with this set of values. Why? Because--oh, God--I believe Israel has the right to exist. And to defend itself.

I'm not even some radical on Israel unlike some friends of mine--I think it's a travesty that Israel hasn't yet legalized same-sex marriage or established a civil marriage system. I think the 2018 Nation-State Law was racist in making Arabic no longer a co-official language with Hebrew. I think Bibi is one of those aforementioned populists. I think Israel has a democratic backsliding problem.

But the rest of the left--the rest of the queer community, especially--has made it clear in no uncertain terms that I am not welcome among them anymore. Like, they genuinely think I'm a genocide defending fascist, which is just so weird to me sometimes. Yeah, me, the fascist who thinks queer rights should be non-negotiable in any society. And they, who are posting pro-Hamas slogans, are the ones standing against genocide and bigotry. Uh huh. Oo-kay.

I don't want to constantly be saying 'Oh, the left...' and 'Leftists when...' like I'm some boomer posting shitty memes on Facebook. The right has its share of problems, too. And I'm sure they'll do something soon to make their antisemitism known as well--especially as the 2024 presidential election draws nearer.

But right now, the immediate threat isn't in Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, or whoever. I'm more worried about being accosted by pro-Palestine protestors with something to prove than I am about neo-Nazi gangs. And so are most Jews right now. And that's why I'm posting about the left more than the right here... even though my values are mostly left.

Oh, the wonders of being politically homeless!

[robertreich]

The First Step to Fixing the Electoral College

Should someone else's vote count more than yours?

For 80% of Americans, that’s exactly what’s happening. Their vote for president isn’t nearly as valuable as the vote of someone in a so-called “swing state.” Why?

Most of us live in states that have become so predictably Democratic or Republican that we’re taken for granted by candidates. Presidential elections now turn on the dwindling number of swing states that could go either way, which gives voters in those states huge leverage.

The 2020 election came down to just over 40,000 votes spread across just three swing states.

2016 came down to fewer than 80,000 votes also across three states.

In those elections, the national popular vote wasn’t that close. In fact, in the last five elections, the winners of the popular vote beat their opponents by an average of 5 million votes.

The current state-by-state, electoral college system of electing presidents is creating ever-closer contests in an ever-smaller number of closely divided states for elections that aren’t really that close.

Not only that, but these razor-thin swing state margins can invite post-election recounts, audits, and lawsuits — even attempted coups. A losing candidate might be able to overturn 40,000  votes with these techniques. Overturning 5 million votes would be nearly impossible.

The current system presents a growing threat to the peaceful transition of power.

It also strips us of our individual power. If you’re a New York Republican or an Alabama Democrat, presidential candidates have little incentive to try and win your vote under the current system. They don’t need broad popular support as much as a mobilized base in a handful of swing states. Campaigning to a smaller and more radical base is also leading to uglier, more divisive campaigns.

And it’s become more and more likely that candidates are elected president without winning the most votes nationwide. It’s already happened twice this century.

Now, fixing the Electoral College should be the ultimate goal. But this requires a constitutional amendment — which is almost impossible to pull off because it would need a two-thirds vote by Congress plus approval by three-quarters of all state legislatures.

But, in the meantime, there’s an alternative — and it starts with getting our states to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Don’t let that mouthful put you off. It could save our democracy.

This compact would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes nationwide WITHOUT a constitutional amendment.

How does it work?

The Constitution assigns each state a number of electors equal to its number of representatives and senators. As of now, the total number of electors is 538. So anyone who gets 270 or more of those Electoral College votes becomes president.

Article 2 of the Constitution allows state legislatures to award their electors any way they want.

So all that’s needed is for states with a total of at least 270 electoral votes to agree to award all their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.

The movement to do this is already underway. 15 states and the District of Columbia have joined the compact, agreeing that once enough states join, all their electoral votes will go to the popular vote winner.

Together, states in the compact have 195 electoral votes. So we just need a few more states with at least 75 electors to join the compact and it’s done.

Popular vote laws have recently been introduced in Michigan [15 electors] and Minnesota [10 electors], which if passed, would bring the total to 220.

Naturally, this plan will face legal challenges. There are a lot of powerful interests who stand to benefit by maintaining the current system.

But if we keep up the fight and get enough states on board, America will never again elect a president who loses the national popular vote. No longer would 80 percent of us be effectively disenfranchised from presidential campaigns. And a handful of votes in swing states would no longer determine the winner — inviting recounts, audits, litigation, and attempted coups that threaten our democracy.

If you want to know more or get involved, click this link to read about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

If your state is not already a member, I urge you to contact your state’s senators and reps to get your state on board.  

[mariacallous]

It is a measure of the divisiveness and tolerance for violence in the United States that the possibility of civil war looms so large over the 2024 presidential election—no matter which candidate wins. It is even the subject of a hit dystopian thriller. Though an actual civil war resulting from the election’s outcome remains unlikely, a range of sufficiently alarming politically violent scenarios are nevertheless quite possible.

Former President Donald Trump’s conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records has sharpened frictions, with threats to the judiciary and his opponents immediately intensifying. “Time to start capping some leftys. This cannot be fixed by voting,” was one typical reaction tracked by Reuters on Gateway Pundit, a right-wing news site. Far-right media personality Stew Peters said on his Telegram channel that “our judicial system has been weaponized against the American people. We are left with NO option but to take matters into our own hands.”

Meanwhile, our assessments suggest that elements on the far left in this country are also escalating militant threats. A call to “Fuck the Fourth” recently appeared on an anarchist website, heralding a day of action on July 4 targeting the ports of Seattle, Oakland, Los Angeles, Boston, New York, New Jersey, and Baltimore. Additional summons to “Flood The Gates: Escalate” over the Gaza War both on college campuses and in communities across the nation this summer and fall are circulating on social media. At a pro-Palestine protest at the White House in June, one protester held up a decapitated likeness of President Joe Biden’s head, while crowds chanted “Revolution.”

These would-be violent extremists represent a microcosm of a U.S. political landscape that is increasingly willing to tolerate violence. A survey conducted last year found that 23 percent of Americans agreed with the statement that “because things have gotten so far off track, true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.” Another more recent poll similarly found that 28 percent of Republicans strongly agree or agree that “Americans may have to resort to violence in order to get the country back on track.” Meanwhile, 12 percent of Democrats agreed with the premise.

Among gun owners in the United States, these sentiments are even more prevalent. According to a survey conducted by the University of California, Davis, “About 42% of owners of assault-type rifles said political violence could be justified, rising to 44% of recent gun purchasers, and a staggering 56% of those who always or nearly always carry loaded guns in public

As the United States approaches its November election, the risks of violence will thus rise. This should not be surprising. Historically, violence is actually quite common in the United States, especially during election seasons. During the Reconstruction era, much of white supremacist violence directed against freed Black men and women was intended to intimidate would-be voters, ensuring that segregationist Democrats maintained their grip on power in the Deep South.

More recently, the 2022 midterms saw an assassination attempt target the speaker of the House of Representatives in an attack that seriously wounded her husband. The 2020 election, of course, sparked the Jan. 6, 2021, terrorist attack on the U.S. Capitol. In the 10 days leading up to the 2018 midterms, there were no fewer than four far-right terrorist attacks, most notably the deadliest antisemitic attack in U.S. history at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. The mail bombs that circulated that same week showed that threats to politicians have in fact been particularly frequent during the Trump era.

Despite that disquieting pattern, 2024 appears to provide even more fertile ground for militant responses to electoral developments. Trump’s court cases, coupled with the insistence from both parties that—in Trump’s words—“If we don’t win this election, I don’t think you’re going to have another election in this country,” have painted the election in existential terms.

As the United Nations Development Program concluded from its research into election violence around the world, “A common cause of election violence is that the stakes of winning and losing valued political posts are in many situations … incredibly high.”

Rendering the threat yet more severe is the range of possible locations and individuals that extremists may target, spanning the duration of election season. But how might violence differ at various stages of the campaign? Before the election, extremists may be more likely to target politicians on the campaign trail, seeking to intimidate them into changing their policies or deter them from running in the first place. Presidential candidate Nikki Haley had, for instance, requested Secret Service protection during her Republican Party primary challenge, while prominent Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher hinted that he was forced into retirement by threats against his family.

Based on experience, the election itself will likely feature armed intimidation at polling places and threats levied against election officials. A database analyzed by scholars Pete Simi, Gina Ligon, Seamus Hughes, and Natalie Standridge found that threats against public officials are likely to hit an all-time high in 2024. The data initially jumped in 2017, the year of Trump’s inauguration.

In the weeks after the forthcoming election, depending on the results, extremists will likely direct their animus toward representatives of the government—especially on one of the many ceremonial dates accompanying the transition of power—such the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, for instance. An exact repeat of that attack is probably less likely; law enforcement agencies will be far better prepared this time, and the groups that led the assault on the Capitol have been effectively dismantled by seditious conspiracy charges targeting their leadership.

Although white supremacist and anti-government extremists will be the likeliest to lash out, in line with trends over the past decade, violence from the far left cannot be discounted. Stabbing attacks have repeatedly targeted right-wing political leaders in Germany, for instance, and the harassment and violence targeting American Jews on U.S. college campuses have highlighted a more militant political left that has historically been quite open to violent action, including in the United States. This violent fringe has frequently deployed armed threats against politicians in particular—never more seriously than the lone gunman who targeted the Republican team practice for the congressional baseball game in 2017, or the far-left extremist from California who brought weapons to the home of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh to threaten him in 2022.

Salafi jihadi actors are also emboldened by recent successes in Afghanistan, Iran, and Moscow, and they may seek to take advantage of this particularly divided moment in the United States to elbow themselves back into the national consciousness. FBI Director Christopher Wray has suggested that his organization is growing increasingly concerned about the “potential for a coordinated attack here in the homeland, not unlike the ISIS-K attack we saw at the Russian concert hall back in March.” The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has similarly warned that “threat actors” will likely “converge on 2024 election season,” with foreign adversaries using influence operations to further divide the U.S. populace and create new sources of divisiveness and violence.

Is the violence likely to lead to civil war? Trump and many of his allies have repeatedly warned that another election loss—coupled with forthcoming trial verdicts—would trigger one or lead to revolution in the United States. A post on Truth Social shared by Trump, for instance, suggested that 2024 might resemble 1776, “except this time the fight is not against the British, it’s against communist Americans.” The threat doubled down on Trump’s previous warning that his defeat would spark a “bloodbath” in this country.

Punditry, however, is not prophecy. Despite the warnings from scholars, policy wonks, journalists, and others, civil war is in fact unlikely in this country. Geographic distinctions between would-be warring factions today run urban-rural rather than north-south, robbing any potential seditious movement of the geographical safe haven it would need to engage in nationwide conflict. But political rhetoric and the proliferation of threats is almost certain to lead to some level of violence.

Making the threat even more serious is that the Biden administration carries little-to-no legitimacy among most hardcore Trump supporters—who still persist in believing that the 2020 election was stolen. The vice grip that these conspiracy theories hold on many mainstream Republicans means that any response by the Biden administration will be regarded as illegitimate—whether that response is deploying additional law enforcement or even the National Guard to polling places or seeking to educate the public about the veracity and integrity of U.S. elections.

In other words, the United States finds itself in a security dilemma, where any defensive measures designed to safeguard the electoral process will in fact likely be interpreted as an offensive strike—that is, to ensure a repeat electoral fraud. As the aforementioned White House protests have demonstrated, Biden also has little legitimacy in the eyes of the far left, meaning that particular movement would not likely be sated by a Democratic election victory.

Countermeasures will need to focus on education and law enforcement preparation. In particular, the Biden administration should champion education tools that reassure the U.S. public about the resilience of its electoral system from hacking or cheating while also pioneering digital literacy measures that might help protect Americans from disinformation and conspiracy theories shared online, including through artificial intelligence.

In particularly high-risk areas, which might include swing states, the administration should also consider raising the law enforcement presence to deter violent actors from targeting such locations. Successfully stopping violence, however, will require a bipartisan commitment to accept election results and publicly praise the integrity of the election and its many officials—which seems completely unrealistic at this stage.

Americans are therefore left with a political landscape defined by existential rhetoric and violent threats, with very little that the government can do to effectively counter these charges. Accordingly, the threat may be less of another civil war than of the total breakdown of the democratic electoral process that has defined the country since its creation.

[baronfulmen]

It's only March and I am already losing patience with the "if you vote for Biden you're a bad person" bullshit

I am going to explain this one more time (lie, I will explain it like a hundred more times but probably more pissy each time)

The way the electoral college works, there is NO viable way for a third party candidate to win.

You could REPLACE one of the existing parties in theory, but more likely you would just change the party until you like it more.

This is done starting at the local level, which is also where third party candidates can actually win. Despite this most people totally ignore everything but the presidential election and then bitch about it.

You could fix our elections by working to eliminate gerrymandering and voter suppression and by fighting for ranked choice voting, but again that's not a thing that's going to happen all at once (or ever in an election year).

Biden is awful, duh. All US presidents have been awful. They have all committed war crimes and if hell were real there would be a special section just for US presidents. Yes even whichever one you think was okay, Carter or whoever.

Biden's administration has done a TON of good shit, alongside the bad. No I'm not saying the bad stuff was worth it, I'm just saying it is not all bad stuff which is important because Trump really is basically all bad shit. All of it. He's all the bad shit that comes with Biden AND so so so much more.

Not voting doesn't send a message, because voter turnout is already abysmal and so your protest non-vote is lost in a sea of apathetic non-votes and Republican generated lack of votes due to voter suppression.

Not voting doesn't somehow make you a more virtuous person, nor does voting for Biden make you a bad person even though he's a bad person. You have two options, Biden or Trump. That's it. Not voting is still making a choice, and that choice will STILL RESULT IN EITHER TRUMP OR BIDEN so you might as well be a fucking adult about it and acknowledge that one is less bad than the other.

There are some states that are so OVERWHELMINGLY certain to go to a particular candidate that it's harmless to vote third party, but I have frequently seen people on this site say that applies to them and then mention where they live and it's ABSOLUTELY not one of those places so I don't know what some of you are smoking. Florida, for christ's sake.

I get that a lot of you want to start the bloody revolution or whatever, but please understand that even if you're serious and actually plan on doing that there's no reason you can't ALSO vote.

This isn't that complicated. Grow up and vote for Biden, and be angry and bitter about it the whole time. Work towards change in ways that actually matter and have a chance of making a difference, instead of sitting back and smugly acting like doing nothing makes you a better person you fucking cowardly assholes.

[anexperimentallife]

A few things you should know about shitty US electoral politics (long post)

Neither party gives a fuck about you, and the leadership of BOTH parties support the genocide in Gaza, but you already knew that.

HOWEVER, various prominent GOP figures ALSO supported a right-wing domestic coup attempt, want to ban abortion nationwide (overturning Roe v Wade was a step along the way to that), want draconian restrictions on birth control, to ban same-sex marriage, ban sex education, ban any and all queer-positive literature, want to "phase out" social security and medicare, to completely rewrite US history textbooks nationwide with a nationalist agenda that erases US crimes against non-white peoples (already done in some states), allow US law enforcement to stop anyone darker than mayonnaise and demand to see their papers, start a nuclear war, abolish the minimum wage, outlaw their political rivals, weaponize the justice department, FBI, and other federal agencies against their political rivals, outlaw dissent of any kind, and remove restrictions against using US troops against US citizens (see Tuberville's blocking of top military appointees so that a future GOP president can appoint GOP/Trump loyalists to those positions, the way they blocked judicial/SCOTUS nominees in order to get Roe v Wade overturned).

The GOP openly states that they know the only way they win elections is by keeping non-right-wing voters away from the polls, and they invest heavily in, among other things, online psyops to convince people not to vote. And it works, because right wing voters ALWAYS show up to the polls.

Every time a right wing candidate wins, Dem leadership goes, "Huh, I guess we need to field more conservative candidates if we want to win elections." The idea being that if they can somehow "meet in the middle," they'll get the conservative vote. (Hint: They won't.)

So what convinces the Dems to run more progressive candidates? Overwhelming support at the ballot box for leftist candidates on the local and primary levels--school board elections, senators and representatives at the state and federal level, sheriffs, judges, mayoral and city council races, and various other local and regional elected positions. That's it. The only two things they understand are money and winning.

Whomever wins the presidency and gets enough congressional support gets to appoint federal and supreme court judges, top military officials, and various other decision-makers. THIS IS HOW THE GOP WAS ABLE TO OVERTURN ROE V WADE.

The US can't be fixed in a single election cycle. Every cycle in which the GOP wins, however, pushes the Dems further to the right AND allows the GOP more power to enact their vision.

Yes, we need viable third parties. Unfortunately, barring a miracle, third parties and independents are right now viable only in some local, and possibly a few congressional races.

In order for third parties to be viable for things like presidential elections, we're most likely going to need ranked choice voting--which, again, we may eventually get by pushing progressive candidates at the state and local level--publicly-funded elections, the abolition of the electoral college (both Bush and Trump lost the popular vote, and were only awarded victory because of the electoral college), and the repeal of Citizens United (which essentially legalized large-scale corporate bribery of candidates).

Look, we all hate Biden, and refusing to vote for him (or whatever other shitbag candidate the Dems run) might feel good, but it is also likely to result in a GOP win--which means MORE support for genocide the world over, and the GOP gaining more power to enact their wish list, which I partially enumerated above.

How many people do you think will die under a nationwide abortion ban? How do you think it's going to work out if a far-right president has the authority to unleash US troops on protesters? How many seniors and disabled folks do you think will suffer and die if Social Security and Medicare are abolished? How many will suffer and die if Trump gets his wet dream of a nuclear war?

I mean, the US has already bombed its own people for not toeing the capitalist/white supremacist line, sponsored coups against foreign leaders and replaced them with dictators, and invaded or threatened to invade foreign countries for not bowing to US corporate interests (look up the origins of the term "banana republic," "overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom," and "1953 Iran coup," for just a few examples), experimented on US citizens without their knowledge (look up "tuskegee syphilus study," among many other things) and so on, and so on.

And if the GOP gains control of all three branches of government, it's going to get even worse.

Today's GOP is more rabidly extremist than at any other time in my life. And as I said, I'm OLD, dude. I was born the year Kennedy was assassinated. Among my early memories are watching the first lunar landing, watching Nixon's "I am not a crook" speech, and seeing news footage of the US withdrawal from Vietnam. And I'm telling you, today's GOP makes the GOP of my youth look practically benign in comparison.

I used to roll my eyes at the refrain of, "this is the most important election of your life," and the "blue no matter who" folks, but man... The 2016 election really WAS the most important, but only SO FAR.

Because the GOP--due to the facts that GOP/Trump supporters voted, and many others didn't--will most likely control the Supreme Court for DECADES to come, and currently control the Senate. If they gain the presidency, retain control of the Senate, and take control of the House, all may be lost.

Again, the far right openly states that keeping non-conservatives from voting is how they win, and they invest a lot in gerrymandering, voter roll purges, and online psyops to make that happen. Doing exactly what the fash want "but for leftist/progressive reasons" isn't the own you think it is. Funny--I hear the same folks who mock far right voters for voting against their own best interests say they're "protesting" by refusing to vote--when that's exactly how the far right wins.

Look, I'm old. I was planning to live my final years outside the US, eventually immigrating to the Republic of Ireland or Uruguay or somewhere like that, but now that I have a child, I'm being forced to return to the US for at least a few years so I can use my medical benefits to live long enough to see her grow up. If she ever needs an abortion, or birth control, or to fight a discrimination or sexual harassment case, or simply to speak her mind without fear of being arrested or killed for it, or needs social security or Medicare because of a disability, I want her to have those things.

Another argument I've heard is that, "Voting doesn't change anything." Well, when I was a kid, mixed-race marriages were FINALLY legalized across the US, and schools became multiracial. More recently, same-sex marriage was made the law of the land. Conservatives fought all of those things, but voting made them happen.

On the flip side, thanks to the far right takeover of SCOTUS, Roe v Wade was overturned as an end result of the far right winning elections. (And again, this is just part one of their plan for a nationwide abortion ban.)

So don't look at it as voting FOR whatever shitbag the Dems run; look at it as voting AGAINST a full-on right-wing takeover of the US and buying time to make some fundamental changes. Voting doesn't mean you can't ALSO march, etc.

Or I mean, if you want a nationwide abortion ban, a nuclear war, MORE genocide, and all the other stuff of right-wing wet dreams, and want a far right takeover of the US while you tell yourself, "Yeah, but I maintained my moral purity," then by all means withhold your vote. Just don't delude yourself about the outcome.

[fairuzfan]

just hopping in to add that the fact that the us uses first past the post further emphasizes a movement toward two parties (you can see earlier stages of it in canada and the uk as well). also, the electoral college, etc etc. (just pointing out specific names for the systems in place that need to be fixed)

Yyyes those parts are messed up but the structural system itself is made up on the basis of inequality and subjugation. So even if we were to fix specific aspects, the system itself would not be fixed because even the laws in place (not being able to vote if convicted of a felony, which the prison industrial complex in a way functions as an arm of the system, is the example that comes to mind rn) make it so the people who are the most disadvantaged in society won't be allowed to participate anyways.

Also the fact that either way the US is gonna bomb the middle east. Every "democratic" power bombs or allows for the bombing of Asia and Africa + the control of Latin America. So like, sure we might be comfy here but we still got all the weapons and money.

[boreal-sea]

How do we get people we actually like into government?

This is a multi-stage problem that comes in 3 parts:

Immediate concerns for the election of 2024

Near-future concerns after the 2024 election

Far-future concerns after certain goals are achieved

Immediate Concerns: Re-elect Biden and Democrats in your state on the national and local levels:

You might not like Biden or the Democrats, but if you want REAL election reform, we NEED them, because Republicans are against election reform in every way.

Near Future Concerns: Election reform in your local area:

Vote in local elections! I told you to do this up in step 1, but I'm going to reiterate it again because towns run elections all the damn time. Local elections are a great way to build power from the bottom-up. These people are closer to you than the president or your congressperson; they know you and your town. Vote for school board, vote for mayor, vote for the chief of police, vote for council members. You're going to need them on your side for the following goals.

Lobby for ranked-choice voting (RCV) in your town or city. This is one of the biggest reforms we need. With ranked-choice voting, we can fix a lot of problems. Ranked-choice voting means we'll be able to vote in third party candidates and actually have them win elections. It is happening! You'll notice on the map I linked that states like Florida have banned RCV. That's because Republicans know they'll lose if it becomes the law in their area. So if you have Republicans in charge of your town or city, this is going to be an uphill battle - which is why step 1 was to vote local.

Lobby for more polling locations. Many Republicans have had voting locations taken down, making it harder for people to vote in a multitude of ways (longer distance to get to a polling location, more people per location causing longer lines which makes it harder for people with an hourly wage to take off time to vote etc).

Vote for voter-ID reforms: Republican-lead states have incredibly strict ID laws you can help strike down. Vote them out, and then vote out their laws.

Lobby for incarcerated/convict voting. Being convicted of a crime and even being in jail shouldn't strip you of your right to vote especially in a country that disproportionately arrests and convicts people of color.

Vote to expand by-mail voting and other voting methods that make it easier for working people, disabled people, and other marginalized folks vote so their voice is heard.

On election day, VOLUNTEER. Drive people to the polls. Be a poll watcher - Republicans love to volunteer for this because it allows them to intimidate marginalized people out of voting. Your presence could make someone feel safe. You could get someone to the poll who might not have been able to make it otherwise.

Far-Future Goals: Lobby to eliminate the Electoral College

Once we have ranked-choice voting and we've been able to vote far-left candidates into office and we no longer have Republicans in control of everything, then we can do the hardest part: a Constitutional Amendment to eliminate the Electoral College. This absolutely positively cannot happen with Republicans in power. It requires 2/3rds of all US states or 2/3rds of the House and the Senate to even get and Amendment proposed. Then, 3/4 of all the state legislatures must ratify it.

[alpacaradio]

I've seen a handful of posts suggesting that "vote blue no matter who" is a toxic idea, and then coming to the conclusion that the threats of Project 2025 are hypothetical and that Biden's real crimes cannot be compared to hypothetical crimes that Trump _will_ commit.

This is bullshit.

Plain and simple, this is a bullshit anti-queer fascist lie. People who say this are trying to get me killed.

Trump has a playbook for killing queer people. There is a playbook for rolling back every right we've won in fifty years or more. These rights are everything that black people, women, gay people, and trans people have fought for in the last sixty, seventy years. The court has handed complete immunity to the executive to wield power without restraint. There's only two ways to fix this, and Trump being in power will cause a disaster.

Never forget that Trump killed hundreds of thousands of Americans by deliberately dismantling the CDC before and during COVID. He wants to keep going. There's not an aspect of life that will be safe. If you think Biden's real crimes don't compare to Trump's hypothetical crimes, that negligence, and the misinformation he supported online to his fan club, killed more people here and around the world than have died in Gaza during this war.

Anyone who says that Trump isn't worse for Palestine, too; he definitely is. Anyone who says a vote for Biden reinforces the apathy of the Democratic party to leftists, wants me dead. And anyone who wants to argue with me can first explain to me just how dead they want me and why.

I stand with Palestine. I reject the war crimes of Israel, a war undertaken as collective punishment without a plan. America is complicit, and Biden hasn't done what he should have to end the conflict, and I'm mad and I'm miserable about it, but the only people advocating for fighting the Democrats by not voting for Biden are the people who literally want to see Trump do worse, and the people who are too stupid to see that he has a written plan to do worse. And every one of these people is trying to kill me.

Vote in leftists and actual progressives, everywhere you can. They're the only ones brave enough to try to impeach these corrupt people. They're the only ones with enough moral spine not to be assimilationist to a fascist regime. Impeaching the Supreme Court is the only way we don't start getting killed off across the country. But we don't have that kind of luxury for the Presidency. A leftist will not win this Presidential election. The electoral college is rigged and the two-party system is baked into the political machine of this country, and we can not risk it with politics in this state. The Republican Party is insane, and they WILL kill us if they can.

You can fuck around with whatever bullshit you want, but letting in the fucking Orangesicle is going to kill so many people, and pretending like it's fine is a vote to kill me. And it IS personal.

[foreverlogical]

In most states in the U.S., the Electoral College is a winner-take-all system. Conservative rural turnout in Texas overrides all the Democratic votes in major urban centers like Houston, Austin and El Paso; heavy Democratic turnout overrides all the conservative rural votes in Upstate New York.

Nebraska is a rare example of a deep red state that splits its electoral vote, and the district around Omaha is more Democrat-friendly than most of the state.

In an op-ed published by The Guardian on September 19, Canadian journalist Stephen Marche warns Nebraska Republicans may put an end to that — which "could alter the course of" the presidential election in November if it's really close.

"In one of those strange freaks of American politics," Marche explains, "Nebraska has a split Electoral College vote. And for the past few elections, the city of Omaha has reliably voted Democrat. The other four electoral districts vote solidly Republican. Ordinarily, this little hiccup in the system wouldn't matter much. But 2024 represents a uniquely precarious moment."

In 2008, Democrat Barack Obama won that one electoral vote in the district around Omaha.

But now, Republican Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen wants to end that split electoral vote.

Pillen recently declared, "I strongly support statewide unity and joining 48 other states by awarding all five of our Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the majority of Nebraskans' votes. As I have also made clear, I am willing to convene the (Nebraska State) Legislature for a special session to fix this 30-year-old problem before the 2024 election. However, I must receive clear and public indication that 33 senators are willing to vote in such a session to restore winner-take-all."

"The Electoral College was the product of an 18th-Century agrarian society whose capitol sat a hundred miles from virgin forest," Marche argues. "At this point in history, it is little more than a legitimacy crisis in progress. The founders built their system to avoid exactly the kind of situation that the erasure of the district Omaha, Nebraska, would represent: the possibility of democracy in bad faith and by name only."

[solarpunkani]

With genuine respect, re: recent ask abt this, the reason a third party candidate won't work is not about numbers and more about the electoral college. Electors commit to vote for their party nominee OR in some states whoever wins the state; tmk there are no third-party electors (certainly not enough to win FPTP) and neither party would replace/challenge an incumbent no matter how unpopular they are. Unfortunately, the two-party system is gonna result in one of two parties, and that simply cannot be fixed with a top-down one-ballot candidate in the next nine months.

There is hope though! It just takes time, just like with environmental reform!! We need a large progressive presence in Congress first, so that we can get national ranked choice voting/get rid of the EC, plus a few other changes. We need more progressives to both vote AND run at all levels/offices and every opportunity, and to continue this high-energy protesting and involvement. It might take 8-12 years (just 2-3 federal elections!) but it is absolutely doable, if we buy ourselves more time this year to be able to make those changes at all in the future.

ugggghhhhh I completely forgot about the electoral college you're totally right about that.

With that in mind yeah you're 100% right. It's just like. God. It feels like 90% of the people running blue for any level are just so increidbly.... basic. Basic at best, pro-genocidal and stagnation fans at worst.

Still, I wouldn't be a solarpunk blog if I didn't have hope for a better brighter future. But goddammit I'm impatient.

[bakafox]

Having to unsubscribe from more and more 'leftist' Youtubers who are committing to the bit that it's more important to bash the Democratic party and Joe Biden as if they're just as bad as Trump than it is to just focus on the fact that Trump and the GOP are the absolute fucking worst.

Especially since they keep pulling the 'Biden is senile and a drooling zombie' card since the fucking debate. Biden's fucking speech impediment has always been known about. He's always had pauses and problems finding words sometimes because of it, like friends of mine who struggle with that sort of shit do. 'Debating' someone like Trump on live TV isn't something a president needs to be able to do, but they'll focus on that gleefully and still never bring up all the left-leaning policies the Biden Administration has successfully pushed over the last 4 years or that were blocked by the fact Dems don't control congress, senate, or the supreme courts and

I am just begging people who haven't recently refreshed themselves on how the US system even is supposed to work to watch some stuff and refresh themselves.

Like, is the system pretty busted and rooted in shitty racist and classist shit? Yes, but it's not going to be fixed before this election, just like it isn't fixed before other elections because not enough people are willing to work for things like ranked choice voting in between election cycles.

But the system also isn't completely dead yet, and right now there's game plans and blueprints on how to at least survive within it- and how to push for changes in between big election cycles by voting the right people in during even smaller election cycles.

Those are the times you beef up third party ideals or whatever, because yes, right now, when the presidential election happens the only two choices that mean anything numerically for the electoral vote system are Republican and Democrat.

If you want to call that 'not a real election' or whatever, fine, but even if there's only two choices, one choice is still actively less harmful than the other, and if the only applicable choices in a shitty election have differences, and electoral results actually have a chance of being honored even if the less awful side wins it's still actually an election that matters. Is it a shitty choice? Is it not much of a choice? It's still a choice, and it's still a difference that can be made.

Of course with Project 2025, the Republicans plan to finish gutting and rearranging the US government to suit their desire for a theocratic dictatorship, which means they are actively working to make elections completely irrelevant or end them entirely. There will no longer be even a map or blueprint for anyone who isn't a white heterosexual Christian (of the kinds of Christians they approve of, I will bet five dollars that once in office the evangelical protestant type Christians are going to start throwing other denominations under the bus, because five dollars is all I even have right now,) to follow.

All of the between-election activism and community support and service that needs to be done is already hard, too, yes, but it will be much harder if Trump, a guy who has literally talked about having protestors on college campuses shot or deported as Hamas sympathizers, and people who think like him and will unequivocally back him takes over.

There's no real choice, but if the Democrats control senate, house, and presidency, there's actually room for a choice to grow if people don't just give up the minute the election is over and actually seek and work towards the reforms that are desired.

If the GOP gets any more seats and the presidency, I cannot stress enough that we are probably going to be living in an actual, literal, dictatorship, which by all definitions, the US is currently not, despite what I see people trying to twist definitions around to say it is because a 2 party system isn't great.

I am just so tired right now, the lives of so many people, including those of people I know personally, are on the line with this vote. I've only just gotten to celebrate things the Biden administration has done for disabled Americans and yet I know that if Trump is elected, we're going to go immediately at least back to shit like 'people buying you food can reduce or stop your SSI' if not worse since the GOP are pretty open about wanting to axe Medicaid and disability with social security.

Biden's administration has put protections for LGBT people in at the federal level, and it is remaining state's rights shit that's keeping it bad in red states, which is complicated as fuck, but if the GOP get their way, their stripping out the idea of state's rights will go after the states that are sheltering trans people or providing abortion care and asylum.

Project 2025 and Trump have made a VERY big deal out of wanting to deport millions of people and have ICE raiding churches and schools. (Oh hey remember what I said about even other Christians are gonna get shat on if maybe they're inclusive or whatnot?)

And for that single issue: Yes, Trump will be worse for Palestine. Also worse for Ukraine, Sudan, and pretty much everywhere else there is a genocide happening.

There isn't a 'real' choice, is the argument, but there still is a choice, and it's one that has to be made to try and reduce harm and keep the boot from being so firmly on everyone's neck that no one can breathe well enough to fight it.

There also is not going to be a glorious revolution formed if Trump wins, there's going to be concentration camps, deportations, increased incarceration for profit, no social safety net at all, and more and more deaths including state-sponsored violence and murders. Facists like Putin, Bibi, etc will be emboldened and given more actual weaponry and support.

On paper maybe it sounds like something that makes a revolution happen in the US, but in reality it is far more likely that it further divides and crushes people into inaction.

Also in reality the US has a fucking huge military with drone strike capabilities and the Republicans will not hesitate to make the poor neighborhoods of any US city into craters, and groups of actual revolutionaries will be very scattered and isolated and much more poorly armed because the US is a big space- and there can be no counting on Canada, Mexico, or any other nations in the world for help. That'll be the start of WW3.

If there is a revolution against a GOP dictatorship it is not going to be glorious, it is not going to go well. It should not even be being considered as a preferred option by anyone who claims to be 'for the people' compared to harm reductive voting and then community activism and pushes for voting and government reform in a setting where there is still some freedom to do that.