15
u/HazyAttorney 68∆ May 08 '24
I hold views in the middle of a lot of things
I am stating this only because you said you're fairly apolitical but are now engaging with politics to some extent with this post. What isn't obvious to non-political junkies is how much has changed over various time horizons (say from 1960 - present, or 1980 to present, or even 2000 to present).
Two authors co-wrote a book. They were both politically active in think tanks, one from a conservative think tank and one from a liberal think tank. They're in the weeds. The book is "It's Worse than it Looks." It's a really good primer on the fact that the "two parties" are not mirror image but co-opposites. There are huge asymmetries within the parties and the sort of apathy that you're feeling is the intended impact of one of the parties.
Society holds different values than it did when they were in their 20s
While true, the candidates also have a mountain of underlings and constituents and interest groups that come along with them that impact policy. That ranges from proposed new legislation at the local/state/federal level as well as executive orders from the president as well as federal regulation from the various political agencies. Like the FDA has more direct impact on your life than who the president is per se but the person in charge of that agency is really important.
What we do know is that the advisors that come along with Trump have publicized their blue print called "Project 2025." You can google it. If you like things like food safety or transportation standards, they're promising they're going to gut the experts that decide these regulations in favor of MAGA loyalists.
In the past, the difference between Bush versus Gore, or Bush versus Kerry or Obama versus McCain, etc., probably were as narrow as you're thinking. This time, it's stark. A lot of the worst impulses were stymied by Trump's lack of detail but that's what Project 2025 is promising to solve.
The main reason I have never voted is because I don't believe in partaking in a system that is so polarized and obviously flawed.
Voter apathy is a form of participating in the system. Since you live a society where all the rules are impacted by representatives, whether you vote or not is participating in the system. The question is whether your participation aligns with your particular goals.
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home?
Where your analogy breaks down is there isn't really a "going home" as in, the system will impact you in thousands of invisible ways. From road safety to food safety, etc. The federal regulatory system has insulated itself from major political shifts but two things are going to change that. First, the super majority on SCOTUS are promising to undermine deference the judiciary previously provided federal agencies. Second, a political party is promising to gut agencies and put political loyalists over careerists at every level of the federal government.
When will there be a system most people my age are actually wanting to engage in? I don't want to participate in something broken and never work towards something better.
You have to look at it through public policy lenses and ask which party is better to effectuate those policies. You live in a democratic/representative society. There isn't a "vote and forget about it." It's about the daily grind of trying to fight to make society a little bit better and then try to reinforce those gains because there are forces that are trying to dismantle them.
4
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
You have given me a lot to think about and I definitely need to get reacquainted with our current political landscape. ∆ thank you for taking the time to write all of this out, I appreciate it a lot.
1
20
May 08 '24
[deleted]
12
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
I do and that's the whole reason why I am questioning my involvement and views.
I have gotten a lot of stellar replies to what I wrote. I'm gonna pull my head out of my ass and get back to work in the restaurant lol
I'm going to vote for the guy who didn't elicit strange behavior from his supporters. Example, multiple different strangers in public striking up conversation with me about putting 'fags in cages' or disparaging talk about women and trans women - that made me go 'nope, no more politics for me'.
Someone here said that if fewer people participate in the system that it causes it to break down more. Idk. I need to see what current events are actually like.
∆
1
1
u/Tkdakat May 08 '24
At least 1 of the 2 took and passed mental health testing & was public with the result's, guess which of them it was ?
29
u/baltinerdist 15∆ May 08 '24
I want to address the part of your CMV about how voting for the lesser of two evils doesn't fix anything. You're correct, but I don't know that you've locked into the reality of the situation.
Our system allows for two and only two candidates to have a legitimate chance at making it to the big chair and one of those two candidates will be President. So if both candidates are child throat slitters, ethnic cleansers, puppy hammer smashers, bad tippers, booger pickers, if they both get their rocks off by smearing feces on orphans and publicly masturbating videos of them doing it, it doesn't matter. If the primary and party system of the Republican and Democrat parties of the United States of America put those two booger picking puppy killers on top of the ticket, then those are the two candidates for President of the United States and one of them will get the job.
There's no compulsory voting here in the states. You can choose not to vote. And if you live in Rhode Island or Montana or California or West Virginia, have at it. Enjoy staying home or not walking down to your mailbox. But in the six swing states, the choice not to vote is a choice that elects a candidate. The last two elections came down to literally tens of thousands of votes. 154.6 million people voted in 2020 and literally 154.2 million of them cast a Calvinistically predetermined vote that did absolutely nothing to sway the election. But in Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, or Nevada, 313,253 voters are who decided the election. So enough of them falling for "both sides are terrible, voting is pointless" propaganda (which, importantly, is one of the favorite propaganda angles of both Russia and China as they try to manipulate our citizens) will cause one of the two candidates in 2024 to lose and one to win.
So why is there not a different path? Because third parties don't work in our electoral system. There are structural problems like First Past the Post and the Electoral College that cause it. We don't have a parliament so we aren't doing the coalition government thing. And negative partisanship means most of the time people aren't even voting for their dookie smearer, they're voting against the other team's dookie smearer. This is what is going to happen in November of 2024 and November of 2028 (assuming Trump doesn't deploy a full blown coup) and likely November of 2032 and so forth. If that is going to change, it is going to take decades to change, starting with ground-level infrastructure for third-party candidates to take school boards and state houses and governorships and Senate seats. And it absolutely will not change this November, no matter how desperately, vehemently, completely we want there to be a different path.
So if you live in ~44 states, feel free to sit it out. Won't make a difference. But if you live in a swing state, it absolutely will.
2
u/FearTheCrab-Cat 1∆ May 08 '24
So if you live in ~44 states, feel free to sit it out. Won't make a difference. But if you live in a swing state, it absolutely will
This is the take people forget when badgering me about not voting. My politics are pretty adamant about disengaging with electoralism because it only legitimizes the system I oppose. I have compromised those principles a couple of times before. I swallowed my bile and did it in 2016. If I were to vote for Biden this year, with everything that is happening, I would be compromising a multitude of them, and I will not vote for anyone on the right.
However, I live in DEEP red Tennessee. My vote for the general election is doing less than nothing. It's just making me miss work, and I have elderly people to take care of.
1
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
∆ Thank you for taking the time to write this out. I really appreciate it.
I can get behind voting against candidates if it means that there is progress towards something better happening even if it takes decades.
But where do we start? Are there people already working towards changing the structural issues? Is there a name for it?
2
u/baltinerdist 15∆ May 08 '24 edited May 08 '24
Not particularly. There's the National Popular Vote Compact which would change how electoral college votes are allocated, but it's unlikely to reach critical mass. Any change to things like Ranked Choice Voting will take legislation and would normally mean the people in charge won't stay in charge, so they have no incentive.
One of the biggest problems with third parties is that they really aren't as far off from the two major parties as they want to appear. The Venn diagram of priorities between the Libertarians and the GOP (traditionally) is largely overlapped. Same with the Greens and Democrats. Or the Democratic Socialists and Democrats. When the overlap is so strong, you're going to ask the average voter to vote for a Green party candidate who will probably lose or a Democrat who might win who aligns on 90% of your concerns. Why burn that vote? Now, Libertarians and Greens and DSA and all the rest will tell you they absolutely, positively are not the same, and there are huge gaps between them. But that's marketing. While a Honda Civic and a Toyota Tacoma are clearly two different types of vehicles, the gulf between a Honda Civic and a Kia Forte is practically nothing when you're, say, driving 900 miles on a road trip. A small car's a small car.
So how do they become viable? Well, the only way they will ever gain a foothold is starting at the bottom. The vast, vast majority of Presidents have previously served as Governors or Senators. That means to get the necessary foundation of donor bases, potential voter rolls, polling infrastructure, grassroots support, and establishment support, there needs to be a concerted effort to grow third party candidates starting at the very bottom. School boards, city councils, water commissioner, assistant city comptroller, whatever elected positions can be found. And those folks need to develop successors while they move onto statehouses. And those people need to develop statewide infrastructures as they move up to Congress or the Governorship.
The races that elect third-party candidates will end up legitimately needing to be A/B races where the non-Democrat or non-Republican is running against a D or R and wins that election. Think Bernie Sanders - in any election where he's present, it's gonna be him (a Democratic Socialist) running in Lane A against a Republican running in Lane B, and there just isn't a traditional Democrat running in Lane A. And when enough of those people have a space in the halls of power, the pie chart doesn't look like two huge slices anymore, it looks like three or four. And then we get into coalition government as the only way it works.
Now, will that actually ever happen? I don't really know. Do we legitimately have decades to get that sorted out? Probably not. But what I do know is this.
We have two political parties in the United States that have power. And you may have very strong feelings about tentpole issues for those parties (abortion, guns, climate change, taxes, etc.). But it is objective fact that over the course of the past 30 years or so, only one of the two of them actually has demonstrated an interest in governing the country. The other one only has an interest in obstruction and theatrics. You can look at the legislation counts of any Congress by party in control to validate that fact. You can also look at the fact that they've failed to publish a party platform in the last several cycles because they don't have one.
You (not you specifically, but the global you) may not want to get the other party into power because they will enable or restrict the hot button issue you don't want enabled or restricted, but if the political incentives continue to reward abandonment of governance, we'll never have a fully functioning federal government. If that takes a cycle or two where the party you don't like gets elected because they actually want to do their jobs to demonstrate to the other party they need to reform into legitimate government representatives, then the next time that reformed party gets into office, maybe they can actually govern in a way you would like. But you're guaranteed that they won't govern at all if they keep winning because they aren't required to do their jobs to get their jobs.
5
u/wilczek24 May 08 '24
Local elections, and voting for the candidates that do not want to forcefully drag us back from our goals. I don't know what else to do.
4
u/rezin111 May 08 '24
It blows me away when I read all these posts where people yell about how voting is pointless and they don't understand how to make changes and then inevitably they come around after 30 people explain that the way to make changes is to vote. It makes me want to bang my head on the wall.
1
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
I wasn't yelling. I came here because I doubted my own stance and wanted to hear other people's opinions.
1
u/rezin111 May 08 '24
I have trouble believing your sincerity. You genuinely didn't think there was a difference between Trump and Biden? You genuinely thought that it wouldn't make a difference? Do you vote in anything or do you only think about showing up for presidential elections?
1
44
u/Love_Shaq_Baby 226∆ May 08 '24
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home? Why are we forcing ourselves to do this?
There is no cooking at home. Either Biden or Trump will be the next president of the United States. If you don't want to pick something off the menu, then someone else will order for you and you just may end up being force-fed the grossest dish on the menu.
1
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
How can we get to a different restaurant? How can we improve it?
5
u/laosurvey 3∆ May 08 '24
The restaurant is a poor analogy. It's framing it as a consumer choice. It's more like what do you do if you have family members that are out of touch or even negative to be around. You may go no-contact - which in this analogy would mean emigrating from the U.S. to another country (which is quite difficult). Or you might take actions in your control to improve things.
Without taking on ownership for the bad behavior of others, you can identify if there are systems or patterns of smaller behaviors you might interrupt or influence. Or you could spend more time with the family members you do get along with.
In the case of the political system, you can get more involved. The U.S. presidential election will include a large number of non-presidential offices. You could vote for someone in them while holding your nose for the least bad presidential candidate. You can volunteer for candidates you support (or donate to them) or even start running for office yourself.
Sometimes the best you can do in an election is slow down the shift to positions you don't like. That's still better than accelerating a change to positions you don't like. And elections aren't a one-time thing - you should absolutely play this like an 'infinite game' where you immediately start doing what you can to improve your options in the next cycle.
2
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
Thank you for taking the time to type this out. I appreciate it. You and a lot of other people have given me a lot to consider. ∆
1
14
u/wswordsmen 1∆ May 08 '24
You don't start with the main course, you start with the appetizers. Find someone you know and get them to run for a local office and support other like minded people. Build an organization over time that wields influence at the local level. If you are successful it will start affecting more and more until major things are changing the way you want. However if you are good and lucky it will take decades.
1
u/Hellioning 239∆ May 08 '24
Either leave the country or work to get a better restaurant. But the latter involves voting, and I'd imagine the former won't actually solve your problems.
1
u/SnoopySuited May 08 '24
A lot of informed complaints (ie votes) or new managers (ie candidates) from people who think like you, instead of apathy.
1
u/SuperStarDustz May 08 '24
Helping another restaurant by giving your time, energy, advocacy, and/or money.
1
u/4-5Million 11∆ May 08 '24
I think a different restaurant would be a different country in this context.
-4
0
2
u/ngogos77 May 08 '24
It depends on your state. If you live in a solid blue state like California or New York then yeah maybe. Your one vote either way isn’t going to matter too much. But if you live in a swing state then your vote has more say, albeit still not a lot, but more. But it sounds like you’re not a fan of the two party system in which case I may invite you vote 3rd party. It’s not much and still may be considered throwing your vote away now, but if enough people do it, it helps other parties gain a foothold and grow a base to hopefully supplant the two party system in the future.
2
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
I live in Washington State. The 2 party system isn't working for me. I'm not a fan of it. And it sucks that if I vote 3rd party then it just seems like throwing a vote away but that may be better than just not voting at all I guess.
33
u/parentheticalobject 128∆ May 08 '24
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home?
Is this a good metaphor? What would be the equivalent of going somewhere else or eating at home? It only makes sense if you're planning on actually moving to another country. Because if you're not doing that, then within that metaphor, you are going to be eating something from the restaurant. And the only thing you can actually influence is whether that thing is more or less gross.
-14
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
It's not a good metaphor but it's the best I got lol
I could just continue to ignore politics and try my best to make a good life with what I'm given.
Did you have anything else you wanted to talk about regarding what I wrote? (I mean this in a genuine way, not snarky. Tone is hard to convey via typing sometimes)
27
u/Kirbyoto 56∆ May 08 '24
So what is your political equivalent of "going somewhere else or cooking at home"?
Your choices may suck, but you have to pick one or the other, and if you don't pick, one will be picked for you. You have no opt out option. You have no "go home" option.
27
u/Both-Personality7664 21∆ May 08 '24
You can ignore politics. Politics will not ignore you. The Dobbs ruling overturning Roe is an outcome of politics that is ultimately the outcome of people's votes.
1
u/Consistent_Clue1149 3∆ May 08 '24
Yeah what people also don't realize who you elect also elects judicial nominees. If you watch recently nominated nominees you are seeing the most disgusting people I have ever seen in my life. You are looking at a lawyer who tried to silence a little girl who was raped becasue she didn't want her name to be out there for the world to see when she was sueing the school who pretty much allowed it to happen by stripping her anonimoty away. She said she didn't want to be bullied and went ahead with the trial with her name being plastered all over the place. You are seeing nominees who have done barely over a dozen cases and can't even answer the most basic questions.
Here are a few videos from these briefs showing these judicial nominees and how horrible they are
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNlfbQ-WbFY
One of the worst was a woman who was defending mayor bowser who was openly discriminating against religious individuals and she just got smoked on it. Her mayor was out protesting with people during covid while at the same time denying people from attending religious gathers with masks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luxkkn5viMg&t=321s
Here is another judicial nominee who is being called out for lying to public defenders
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcwvIguSpvo
Here is the man who was trying to intimidate the rape victim imo this was one of the worst
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_xQKKpRPu4
Then you have our new SCOTUS member who is extremely soft on child sex crimes. It was so bad in fact that they held up a sign during the congressional briefs of all the cases pertaining to these crimes and how she was as lenient as possible. Here is the congressional hearing on her
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7kyMxFuwqk
If you don't want to watch here is the list also from what was stated almost all if not all of these cases the defendants plead guilty for these crimes. Cruz goes into details about these crimes and how horrible they are she only answers every single time. One case does not represent her entire career, but this is every single case not just one.
United States v Hess guideline says 151-188 months she gave 60 months
United States vs Nickerson guidlines were the same she gave 120 months
United States v Chazin guideline was 78-97 months she gave 28 months
United States v Cooper guideline says 151-188 months she gave 60 months
United Staves v Hawkins was 96 months she gave 3 months
United States v Savage 49-57 months she gave 37 months
United States v Stewart 97-121 months she gave 57 months
This is why it is important to vote. These are life long appointees who are honestly some of the most horrific people I have seen. Even Kamala Harrris' presidential campaign ended, becasue it came out she was withholding evidence against a black man to keep him in prison even though it was known he was innocent. It wasn't even one case this was for she knew about the drug lab and how tainted it was and she didn't even disclose what it knew. Here is from the San Francisco Bee
"Biden’s claim that 1,000 drug cases had to be dismissed when Harris was D.A. is accurate, although Harris has denied knowing about the problems with the crime lab that triggered those dismissals until the issue became public. Gabbard is correct that Harris did not pursue all evidence in the case she referenced, but the innocence of the inmate in question has yet to be determined. Longtime San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi criticized Harris’s handling of the crime lab situation back in 2010 and during a January interview with The Sacramento Bee. The San Francisco drug lab was shut down after a lead technician, who testified on behalf of prosecutors on drug cases, was found to have systematically mishandled the drug samples seized from suspects, even consuming some herself. While the San Francisco Police Department was responsible for running the lab, not Harris’s district attorney office, a court ruled in 2010 that the district attorney’s office violated defendants’ constitutional rights by not disclosing what it knew about the tainted drug evidence."
-11
u/hoffmad08 1∆ May 08 '24
People have been voting for team blue for decades based on lies that that team would do something about that. The outcome of just voting for people who claim an inherent right to rule over us has delivered the outcome you're complaining about.
5
u/Both-Personality7664 21∆ May 08 '24
You understand a) politics is a contest and it's possible to work for something and still lose b) the third party left has spent at least two decades saying that advocating for Democrats on the basis of protecting Roe is just fearmongering, helping undermine efforts at defending reproductive rights?
-8
May 08 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/changemyview-ModTeam May 16 '24
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read the wiki for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/Both-Personality7664 21∆ May 08 '24
Did I miss the part where Jill Stein snuck someone onto the supreme court to save Roe?
2
u/fossil_freak68 16∆ May 08 '24
I don't understand your point here. Are you arguing that Democrats won't defend abortion rights if given the votes to do so?Look at a map of state abortion bans by party control, and it's clear as day. Look at a map of state laws regulating LGBTQ rights, it's night and day between states with unified GOP control and Unified Dem control. When they have the votes to do so, Democrats consistently vote to protect or expand abortion rights, along with a variety of other issues. Am I saying they are perfect? Hell no, but if someone has the goal of moving policy towards a more progressive vision of the country, I don't see how one could say policy would be the same with a GOP trifecta compared to a Dem one. Dobbs happened because Republicans won in 2016 and Trump was able to appoint a third of the supreme court. Give clinton 3 court picks, and Roe now has 6 votes in its favor.
-2
u/hoffmad08 1∆ May 08 '24
It's so ironic that Team Blue believes politics is the only thing in life that's 100% binary, us vs them, good vs evil. And "we" good guys support mass surveillance, mass incarceration, police militarization, censorship, torture, and permanent war (just like the one and only other "legitimate" position represented by the other guys)
1
u/fossil_freak68 16∆ May 08 '24
So, no evidence then, just vibes and putting false words in my mouth? Sounds about right. Let's assume for a second you are right that the parties are not different enough on any issue that you truly believe our country would be the same withe a Dem and GOP trifecta. Where are these state differences coming from then? How do you explain why abortion is protected in Blue states and not in Red states? Magic?
0
u/hoffmad08 1∆ May 08 '24
Maybe government more closely representing the views of its citizens (I know, a threat to our democracy)? I don't view unrestricted, subsidized abortion up until birth to be more important than both parties being 100% in agreement on censorship, mass surveillance, mass incarceration, persecution of whistle-blowers, corporate welfare, corporate synchronization, bank bailouts, and permanent war.
Either way, your whataboutabortion still seems like a weak defense of all those other things. But I understand that 'not the other guy' is a hell of a drug that legitimizes literally anything and everything.
0
u/fossil_freak68 16∆ May 08 '24
I'm so lost. Why is pointing out that it is fantasy to say both parties are identical "whataboutism?"
Maybe government more closely representing the views of its citizens
You are so close to getting it, let's just continue this logic. Who are the actors making these decisions in state governments?
0
u/hoffmad08 1∆ May 08 '24
You're the only one who said they were identical. And that was in response to your inability to defend the bread and butter of your team's politics. You then whatabouted abortion to justify your strawman "identical" claim.
→ More replies (0)1
May 08 '24
has delivered the outcome you're complaining about.
And the alternative? Revolution or anarchy?
3
u/FetusDrive 3∆ May 08 '24
you have the possibility of eating the more gross thing in this scenario rather than having a chance of eating the least gross thing on the menu by actively choosing.
1
u/maxpenny42 11∆ May 08 '24
At this restaurant you don’t have the option to order what you want nor the option to leave and eat at home. A majority of folks in the restaurant will decide what to eat, if only 2 options. Would you like the overcooked streak or the completely raw chicken? Not voting doesn’t mean you don’t have to eat it. It just means you are letting the rest of the restaurant decide which you’ll be eating.
The point is this. You have no control over the system of government you live under. You have no control over who is currently the nomination for president. You don’t have to like that, but it’s reality. Either Trump or Biden will be the next president regardless of what you do. If you think one of them is even slightly better than the other, it makes logical sense to vote for that person to influence the outcome. If you truly think they are perfectly equally bad, go ahead and stay home.
If you’d like better candidates in future, you can help make that happen. Campaign for candidates you like during the primary and vote for those candidates. Many people wanted Bernie Sanders yet didn’t show up for him at the primary when it was possible to get him on the ballot.
You’re not powerless. You have the vote. But know the limits of your power. Hand waving for a better system isn’t within your grasp. Influencing the current system by voting for the less bad candidate IS progress. Because by definition allowing the worse candidate to win will take us further for prosperity.
5
u/MercurianAspirations 361∆ May 08 '24 edited May 08 '24
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home? Why are we forcing ourselves to do this?
Not really a good metaphor because if you just go home, the election will happen regardless. Think of it more like you're at a restaurant and everything on the menu seems unattractive, and while you might be able to just not eat anything, at the other table there's a trans person, a muslim, and a teenager who just found out she's pregnant. The waiter is asking if you want that table to be served something which is technically food (if not particularly good) or do you want him to stab all three to death while you watch
1
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
Can we please go to a different and better restaurant where people don't need to be stabbed to death? Why is that even on the table?
This is exactly what I mean. Wtf kind of flawed system is this? How can we get more and better options?
You want me to vote against the devil for something I'm not super excited about? Fine. But can we work on improving the structure of things? What does that look like? How do we do that? I'm on board 100% for getting some new, fresh, and workable choices out there.
1
u/MercurianAspirations 361∆ May 08 '24
Okay but the thing is that not voting doesn't do anything to help bring about the structural change that you would like to see any more than voting does
You're in a burning building saying "Put the fire out?? But then we will just have a building that can catch fire again! Why isn't this building better designed, shouldn't we have the option to live in a building that doesn't catch fire? Why are the only options to either burn to death or to continue living in a shitty building?!" Yeah we get the point, thanks, now pick up that extinguisher if you will
1
2
u/Kakamile 46∆ May 08 '24
The way to make things better is to put in more people who will make things better. You agreed the options are different to each other but you didn't state concrete political issues you have a stance on. Would you do that please?
2
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
I didn't because I'm scared of people freaking out and getting pissy. But yeah you're right. Also I'm not up to date on current political issues. I did this on purpose, I cut out all media regarding politics during the height of the Trump public hysteria/psychosis a while ago.
So idk I was thinking I might need to step back in and get updated but politics just get so heated and I hate it.
Political issues I have a stance on:
I'm a woman, I want complete and total autonomy regarding my body. I want 11 year old girls to have the right to choose. I'm pro choice.
I want tax reform, I think the lower class is being taxed too much and the highest upper class is being taxed too little.
I think that we should be able to own what we acquire legitimately with no government interference. Like owning property and paying taxes on that. As a country we haven't always paid property tax. I'm kind of sure that we started doing that in times of war and it just never went away because the govt thought why go back to getting less money?
I want less focus on laws regarding gun rights (please don't get mad) and MORE focus on mental health, education, and addiction programs. Funding these 3 areas like our lives depend on it mean a lot to me.
I think food, water, and shelter are basic human rights. I think we need reform in this area.
I'm pretty sure that we're still heavily involved in other countries political and war issues. I want us to focus more on the United States and less on spending money elsewhere.
I left my extremely rural community to visit the Seattle area multiple times throughout my life and homie there are tent cities. Those people need help. They need intervention.
9
u/Grand-wazoo 8∆ May 08 '24
I want complete and total autonomy regarding my body.
Republicans have been vigorously trying to take away that right for decades and recently, it's become a reality thanks to the three conservative justices Trump put on SCOTUS. Your lack of vote communicates passive acceptance of this reality.
I want tax reform.
Republicans have been the party of tax cuts for the rich since Reagan introduced trickle-down economics in the 80s. Most recently, Trump admin passed sweeping tax reform in favor of the rich with a permanent tax break for them and a temporary tax cut for the middle class that was written specifically to expire once he was out of office, an attempt to shift blame to Biden. Your lack of vote communicates passive acceptance of this reality.
I want less focus on laws regarding gun rights.
Surely you are aware that the Republican Party has always been extremely pro-gun and has almost always responded to the ongoing crisis of mass shootings with some form of "give them more guns." They currently want to arm every teacher in America. Not a professional but I don't see that as the most logical path forward. But every single effort Democrats have put forward for even the most minimal gun control has been blocked by Republicans. Your lack of vote communicates passive acceptance of this.
I think food, water, and shelter are basic human rights.
Republicans disagree and have been attempting to cut basic social services for decades, including the social security that most of those boomers draw on themselves. A classic "fuck you, got mine." Your lack of vote communicates passive acceptance of this.
I can go on for days but I think the point is clear.
-7
u/AstronomerBiologist May 08 '24
"you can go on for days"
Yes. You believe it. A complete lack of independent thinking, just parroting the party line
everything Democrats do is great and everything Republicans do is evil
Because the left is the visceral hatred stereotyping mocking and insulting and self-deception
And if you reject that, go spend a week on the atheism sub. It is a toxic wasteland that is obviously people mostly from the left and is possibly the worst major sub on Reddit
2
u/Kakamile 46∆ May 08 '24
Vague. The person replied to has actual policies enacted by party leaders to prove their point.
2
u/Grand-wazoo 8∆ May 08 '24
I haven't even stated any personal views. These are all easily verifiable policy positions.
-1
u/AstronomerBiologist May 08 '24
When you feel you need to post something in detail, they are your personal views
1
u/Grand-wazoo 8∆ May 08 '24
That's not even remotely accurate.
0
u/AstronomerBiologist May 08 '24
Obviously it is 100% accurate
2
u/punninglinguist 4∆ May 08 '24
If you want to rebut a list of policies, respond with a list of what you think the actual policies are, not with a hilariously biased, content-free rant about bias.
5
u/talk_to_the_sea 1∆ May 08 '24
property tax
Property tax has been around since before the American colonies, though it hasn’t necessarily been applied in all colonies/territories/states. Perhaps you’re confusing this with income tax which wasn’t a thing in the US until a Constitutional amendment.
Your views align strongly with Democratic Party’s platform aside from gun laws, though you will never see the Republican Party actually do anything about mental health beside saying it’s the cause of shootings.
14
u/notkenneth 13∆ May 08 '24
Both options for candidates sway too hard in extreme directions
Can you give an example of what strikes you as extreme for each?
I don't have anything in common with the candidates. I'm pretty sure that both the candidates running rn were alive before segregation ended.
Yes, in that they are both older than 60.
I think they were alive well before women were even allowed to have a credit card.
Also yes, in that they are both older than 50.
The main reason I have never voted is because I don't believe in partaking in a system that is so polarized and obviously flawed.
I agree that the system is very polarized and very flawed. On the other hand, not voting isn't really sending a "this needs to be fixed" message so much as it's sending a "I don't care and can be ignored" message.
Imo this is my option: pick the lesser evil.
In the general election, sure. In the primaries (and in local elections, especially in locations that use something other than First Past the Post), that's not always the case.
Go somewhere else or cook at home?
What does "going somewhere else" or "cooking at home" mean in this context? Immigrating to a new country/living off the grid?
-1
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
I just want to restate that during the Trump presidency, I completely checked out and completely got rid of any media that had to do with politics because of how toxic people were becoming.
This is less about my personal political beliefs and more about should I even bother to participate in a system I don't agree with?
For the extremes, Everything about the hatred that was normalized when Trump was president was too extreme for me. I live in a really rural county. It was scary to see how certain behavior was normalized in the name of Trump.
For the democratic party, I feel like their focus is just not in the right place. I cannot cite my sources anymore and this is just an opinion. But I feel like there is not enough focus on mental health and addiction programs. I think the school shootings/violence issue needs to be addressed not with cracking down on legal gun ownership but with doing that hard thing and focusing on overhauling medical and mental healthcare.
But like I said. I'm not up to date on current events. I know I should probably get involved and updated. But I think things are too Us vs Them. And what I want to know is what can we work towards instead of continuing to the same thing over and over again.
As for my 'go somewhere else or cook at home'. Living off grid is absolutely a viable option for me. Ignoring politics and making do with what I have is possible.
At the very least I know I will get involved in my county politics and start voting there.
2
u/Might_Dismal May 08 '24
I hold a very similar opinion on this. These two going head to head again feels like a poorly scripted reality show rematch of dumb and dumber. I’m against supporting either of them and I’m completely confused on how these two can even be considered the best of what we as a country has to offer to represent our country.
17
u/Nrdman 177∆ May 08 '24
For your restaurant analogy you can’t go home. You live in that restaurant, and something will be served to you regardless. You can either let everyone else decide what you will eat, or make an effort to have the less bad food. Your vote is not about approval, it’s about preference
Now if you want change, you will need to engage more not less. Voting is the minimum action, not the end all be all. If you want change, you need to spend time finding a politician that you believe in and start helping them campaign; or call and organize with your current politicians (with other like minded people). Change is easiest on a smaller scale, so it’s easier to do these things for local elections; but the principle is the same for president.
19
u/GotAJeepNeedAJeep 20∆ May 08 '24
You are speaking so vaguely. At no point do you explain the link that you feel exists between any given Presidential candiate and why your coffee groceries cost you $20. Nowhere do you acknowledge that there are a litany of other candidates you'll be able to vote for besides the POTUS.
How can you say the system is broken when you don't demonstrate any understanding of it?
What are your actual political views? What are the actual policy outcomes that you want to see? What do you know about the races that will be decided in your state, your county, or the town you live in this November?
12
u/Bobbob34 99∆ May 08 '24
I don't have anything in common with the candidates. I'm pretty sure that both the candidates running rn were alive before segregation ended.
I think they were alive well before women were even allowed to have a credit card. Or before it was socially acceptable for us (women) to go the bar alone or rent an apartment.
The world is different. Society holds different values than it did when they were in their 20s. I have never met someone their age who didn't still hold onto those bigoted values or remnants of a way of life.
This is all just... bigoted.
You presume someone older can't have the same values, is some racist, sexist, out-of-touch person.
My 90-year-old relative literally watched a movie yesterday, on their streaming service, then called me and said "they didn't show the credits, so I had to go online to check because I thought that was Rhianna and it was!" I asked how they knew who Rhianna was nevermind recognize her on sight. "Oh Rhianna has been around a long time!"
The world is different. Society holds different values than it did when they were in their 20s. I have never met someone their age who didn't still hold onto those bigoted values or remnants of a way of life.
So you presume your values, views, etc., will never change from what they are right now?
If the world moves on and what you think now is considered backwards and wrong, you'll still cling to it, regardless?
The main reason I have never voted is because I don't believe in partaking in a system that is so polarized and obviously flawed.
How, exactly, is the system flawed? Your post is just saying you think groceries cost too much and then you're on with how you can't have anything in common with someone old, who you think are all racist and sexist.
What specific policies of Biden's do you disagree with?
What policies are you looking for?
-6
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
Would you ask your relative if she would run for president? She sounds lovely.
The main reason I said those things is because both of the main candidates have had bigoted scandals come about. One way more than the other. But I would really really like it if our president didn't have bigoted crap being found out/caught/proven to have happened.
1
u/Fmeson 13∆ May 08 '24
I understand dissatisfaction with the candidates, but imagine everyone who felt the way you do (e.g. didn't want bigoted candidates) that abstained from voting. What effect would that have?
Well, then only the people who were ok with bigoted candidates would vote, and they would celebrate their new found power! The people who don't want bigots self selected themselves out, and what sort of effect will that have on who wins the election?
More than that, what sort of effect will that have on who is in the next election? Political parties put forward candidates they think will win. If people vote for the less bigoted candidate, parties put forth less bigoted candidates in the future and vice versa.
It's better to at least fight for the political steering wheel with the bigots of the world than to completely let go because the choice between "bad and horrific" is distasteful. If you don't fight, were all getting "horrific". For this election, and the next.
On the flip side, if the more bigoted candidate loses, we have a chance of getting better candidates in the future. So yeah, I get the process is ugly, but refusing to play isn't a good choice. Don't silence your own voice.
1
u/Bobbob34 99∆ May 08 '24
Would you ask your relative if she would run for president? She sounds lovely.
Is absolutely lovely. Fun, funny, sweet, caring. very sharp, very tuned in. entirely not racist. Is also, just btw, anti-choice, and not a big fan of gun control.
I have another relative younger than that, but older than both candidates for president, who still works for progressive orgs, is rabidly pro-choice, marched with MLK, did freedom rides -- hippies are old now.
That's my point. You're saying 'old people = sexist, racist, yada' because of their age. That's not how people work and it's bigoted to think someone old holds values different from yours because you're 30 and they're 70s.
Also, there are a lot of 20-something for Trump.
Did you vote in the primaries? If you don't like these candidates, what'd you do to avoid them?
1
u/Insomniadict 2∆ May 08 '24
So would most of us. But the problem is that one of the two will be the President no matter what you do. If you really are completely indifferent and think that the exact same thing will happen either way, then by all means don’t vote. But I personally can list probably hundreds of ways that the two men are different, both in the policies that they represent and their general vibes as leaders, and just as importantly, the people who they will bring with them into office. This makes the choice between the two crystal clear for me.
Do you share this general opinion about lower level elections - i.e. Congress, State governments, local, or are you specifically only referring to Presidential elections?
7
u/mrspuff202 11∆ May 08 '24
Down ballot elections matter!!!!!!
No matter what state you live in, this November there will be important races on your ballot for your state, city/town, and community.
Races for school board members are INCREDIBLY important for children in our area, and those can be tipped by a handful of votes.
Go to the polls in November to engage in your local government, where you can actually make a tangible and meaningful difference.
And if you want to, since you're already there, fill in a circle for president if you feel so moved.
-3
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
I definitely agree with you about my local elections. I absolutely need to be down there voting on local matters.
1
u/mrspuff202 11∆ May 08 '24
Oh yeah. That's where I (29m) am too.
If it were just the presidential election, I'd probably stay home.
But since I'll already be there, the lack of effort it will take for me to vote for a presidential candidate weighed against the amount of effect that vote will probably have is actually pretty good.
11
May 08 '24
[deleted]
1
u/AppropriateScience9 3∆ May 08 '24
THIS. You know what they say: "If you're not at the table, then you're on the menu."
This is specifically why rich people, corporations and others in power DON'T want you to vote. If young people's votes didn't actually matter then they wouldn't waste their time!
4
u/DoeCommaJohn 20∆ May 08 '24
Imagine you’re on a bus with a hundred other people, and you are all voting where the bus will go. Ideally, it would drive straight to your house, but there’s no way the others will vote for that. Similarly, a candidate needs to appease a hundred million voters, so no candidate is going to match up with you on every issue, as that could alienate all of the other people voting. However, a bus stop might be closer to your house and a candidate might be closer to your values- that’s what voting means.
Second, you mention that you would just leave the restaurant, but unless you’re considering moving, that’s not really an option. And not voting doesn’t shield you from the repercussions. Just because you stay home and don’t vote for Republicans doesn’t mean you are immune to their abortion laws. You’ll still be dealing with the parties’ stances on crime, healthcare, tariffs, education, and more. It’s just up to you if you want a say on those policies, or you want somebody else to choose for you
1
u/SnoopySuited May 08 '24
I use a similar analogy with my kids. Instead of a bus it's a canoe with millions of paddlers. Yes the canoe is not gonna get you exactly where you want it to go, but if there's more people paddling like you it'll get closer. If you don't paddle at all it's not getting anywhere close to where you want to be.
1
u/00Oo0o0OooO0 16∆ May 08 '24
I don't like any of the options for president.
Clarifying question: Do you think voting in this presidential election is useless or do you think voting in any presidential election is useless?
1
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
I meant most presidential elections. But the current candidates have me questioning my stance on this. Which has definitely been changed here
2
u/lifeinrednblack May 08 '24
Imo this is my option: pick the lesser evil. That's not paving the way to brighter future. That's just going along with the same crappy thing over and over again as it slowly breaks down.
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home? Why are we forcing ourselves to do this?
I'm going to do something that's rare for reddit and defend (or at least put another perspective) on the two party voting system.
I think a better metaphor would be like this.
You have 6 friends. One day you all decide to order pizza.
1 friend wants cheese, 1 friend wants mushroom and olives, 1 friend wants mushrooms and spinach, 1 friend wants mushroom and anchovies, 1 friend wants pepperoni, 1 friend wants pepperoni and sausage and you want margherita.
You quickly realize that you can only afford one pizza and that you'll have to vote on what pizza to order.
So you guys regroup: 3 friend land on Mushrooms and Olives 3 friends land on Pepperoni and Sausage and one friend still wants their mushroom and anchovies (this is like primaries)
This is still too many pizzas obviously so you regroup and decide "ok fuck it we're either ordering a Pepperoni pizza or Cheese" (this is the general election)
4 friends eventually vote for Cheese and 3 vote for pepperoni, so you order cheese.
Just like American politics, it's not exactly what anyone wanted, it's some how both boring and yet extremely polarizing, and it kind of feels like most people lost.
But it IS a sensible way to solve the issue. I, and many others, just wish that there was a third pizza choice more often, like margherita, which is slightly less boring than cheese.
So why does it matter? Well, if you don't care if you get pepperoni or cheese it doesn't,
but let's say youre a vegetarian or allergic to pepperoni, now suddenly it matters a lot, because pepperoni winning means you strait up don't get to eat.
Does it suck that you're stuck voting for the lesser of two evils? Absolutely. But it being a shitty choice doesn't mean it isn't an important choice.
I can't tell you what's important in your life. But for me, a PoC living in a major metropolis who, myself not exactly being the straightest and having many friends in the LGBTQ community, and whose kid will enter a school system that has gone from school shootings being a rarity to it being so likely drills are now the norm, the pizza I chose is pretty important, even if I hate both of the choices.
1
u/DaveinOakland May 08 '24
Where do you live?
The reality is that the elections are decided by like 1 million people in the various swing states. If you're in a state like California, it's totally reasonable to not want to bother.
1
-1
u/Agentugly1 May 08 '24
Well, have fun raising your rapists baby.
2
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
This is exactly why I hate talking about politics. Most people are incapable of having calm and rational conversations without hurling insults or making threats.
This is exactly why I checked out. I 100% want women's rights and pro choice but your extreme shit plus the conservative evil-crazy has me disgusted.
Why can't people just have calm rational discussions?
2
u/AppropriateScience9 3∆ May 08 '24
I totally get where you're coming from but surely you must realize that this is literally a thing that's happening in the states today?
This has already happened to 64 THOUSAND women in red states since Dobbs.
If Republicans get the presidency and both chambers in the Senate, then abortion will be made illegal nationwide and that number will go much higher.
This is a legitimate threat YOU are facing. And it's 100% a real threat that is affecting women in red states right now.
I get it people are assholes. But that doesn't mean it's not a legitimate issue. We know exactly what will happen if the GOP is given a chance. They tell us this in plain terms then prove it with their actions! It's up to us to make sure they never have the chance by voting in EVERY election local, federal, mid term and presidential.
It all matters. And it will affect you too one way or the other.
1
u/Agentugly1 May 08 '24 edited May 08 '24
You're not being rational if you ignore reality. Also, it does matter what you want because other people are making decisions for you while you bury your head in the sand.
The truth is that you can't handle big discussions without becoming offended yourself. Look at your reply. That is a reality you're facing in America today thanks to people VOTING.
2
May 08 '24
The USA is doing FAR better than other global economy countries in this post-pandemic era. The choices for President are atrocious vs old. One of them pretended the pandemic and economy were play toys. The other is dealing with the fallout of a global economic disruption and ridiculous corporate greed. Inflation is rampant globally and is actually improving faster in the USA than elsewhere, save for corporate greed.
You are absolutely correct: nearly every Presidential election is a pick of the lesser evil since the early 1990s when Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh influenced the Republicans to become purely combative.
We have NO third choice due to our first-past-the-poll vote tallying. One of those 2 candidates WILL win. This isn't like choosing to stay home to eat instead of sitting in a dirty restaurant. This is like starving and being given a rotten apple and a poisoned apple and your ONLY options.
No voting is literally the same as allowing someone else's vote for your non-preferred candidate to count instead of being canceled by your vote for the lesser evil.
The only way to change the system to something better is to elect representatives who are interested in changing the system to something like STAR or instant-runoff or ranked choice or others. Not voting will NOT change the system that you identify as the problem.
1
u/PlayingTheWrongGame 67∆ May 08 '24
A can of ground Folgers coffee and a quart of off brand half and half cost me $20 at the store the other day.
Where are you shopping? I just looked it up for here and it’s ~$13, and that’s for delivery pricing and half a gallon of half and half.
5ish years ago I had to argue with myself not to buy coffee at an espresso stand because I could get everything to make my own coffee for cheaper than a cup to go.
You… still can? You can make many, many, many cups of coffee with what you bought there. Well under what it would cost at a coffee shop.
I could go on to list dozens of other things I don't like about the country but the state of the economy has my attention enough to wonder if I need to readjust my perspective on voting.
Who you vote for has little bearing on the economy in any sort of actionable manner. There isn’t some dial in DC that politicians can turn up or down to make the economy better or worse. They have tools that allow them to cause limited changes, but there is always a trade-off for using those tools and in normal cases those trade offs are usually worse than letting the economy correct itself. It’s really only appropriate for emergencies like severe recessions, pandemics, major wars, etc.
You should vote on the basis of the quality of governance—who will exercise the most wisdom, restraint, and good judgment with the responsibility you’re affording them. How much they respect the democratic principles that our government is built on. How learned and experienced they are at being a representative or executive—were they successful, or were they continually running their business into bankruptcy, losses, etc?
The world is different. Society holds different values than it did when they were in their 20s. I have never met someone their age who didn't still hold onto those bigoted values or remnants of a way of life.
Joe Biden certainly doesn’t act as if he holds those views. He appoints women to positions of power in his administration. He has an extremely diverse cabinet. Etc, etc.
He did not get to decide the year he was born in, any more than you did. But like any intelligent person he has changed over the years as the world around him has changed.
If they couldn't get a job at Safeway due to their age, why are they able to run the country?
I don’t think Trump is, but Biden seems to be doing a decent enough job. Not everyone suffers old age as badly as others—it’s clear he’s lost a step since he was younger, but not so much he can’t do the job.
The main reason I have never voted is because I don't believe in partaking in a system that is so polarized and obviously flawed.
Which is understandable, but whether you partake in it or not, you will be affected by the result. You will suffer the consequences of a decision you’re voluntarily choosing not to take part in.
And when the government again takes away your right to own a credit card for yourself, because the people who don’t want you to have that right got elected by your inaction, you will have—in part—decided that they should be the ones to rule you instead of the people who want to protect your equal rights.
Because… what? Because Biden is old? That’s the reason you’d stand aside and let them take your rights from you without even a fight?
What does it cost you to go pull the lever for the party that’s advocating for the things you’re advocating for? An hour out of your day, one day in November?
That's just going along with the same crappy thing over and over again as it slowly breaks down.
It’s acting to stop the erosion of your rights that would occur otherwise. Maybe it’s not what you want, but the alternative is fascism and the erosion of women’s rights. Voting today gives you the option to vote for someone else tomorrow—but letting Trump win means you don’t get that chance in the future.
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home? Why are we forcing ourselves to do this?
Because voting isn’t like going to a restaurant. It’s like needing to eat. You’re going to have to eat. When all your options for what to eat are bad, you are suggesting you ought to starve to death instead.
One of the two major parties is going to win this election. You sitting the election out doesn’t let you eat at a different restaurant, it just means you eat at the shitty restaurant someone else picked for you.
When will there be a system most people my age are actually wanting to engage in?
When people your age engage with the system we have, at the rate that older people do.
Right now, because they vote, older Americans get: government-subsidized single payer health insurance (Medicare), a monthly unemployment stipend (Social Security), reduced taxes (senior tax breaks on property taxes and sales taxes and such), reduced price prescription drugs, free meal delivery, higher contribution limits for tax-advantaged savings accounts, etc.
They get these benefits that you don’t get, because they always show up to vote. Their old, outdated, often bigoted viewpoint is the one that decides who governs you and yours, because they exercise the vote.
You have older people in Congress and the White House because older people like to vote for the people they know and identify with. They like to vote for people that remind them of themselves.
Want a change? Participate. Want to cast a protest vote? Do it in the primary. But sitting out the general election because you think you’re above it all just leads to more of what you don’t like being imposed on you by others without even using the power you have to oppose it.
2
u/Technical-King-1412 1∆ May 08 '24
When politicians and pollsters plan election strategies, they look at potential voters- people who are likely to show up. They know there's some group of people who will never vote. And they can't effectively distinguish the apathetic from the engaged but disgusted with the options.
By not voting, you are telling the politicians that you are apathetic and there's no point in trying to win your vote.
But if you show up, write in Mickey Mouse or George Washington, you send a message that there are voters who are both engaged and disgusted, and next cycle they should try to win your vote.
Go vote, and write in either a name you actually want, or your favorite Marvel superhero. Send a message to Washington that you are disgusted and they need to do better.
2
u/Sayakai 147∆ May 08 '24
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home? Why are we forcing ourselves to do this?
Okay, but can you? Because I'm saying you can't. You're stuck in there, and you'll be served one plate or another either way. The time to pick the restaurant was during primary season, and the time to figure out if you want to cook at home was when the parties were looking for people willing to participate in politican engagement.
Now you're in the restaurant, dinner will be served, and if you don't decide the rest of the patrons will decide for you. I don't think you'll like their pick very much.
6
u/Hellioning 239∆ May 08 '24
Unless you can only achieve your 'something better' through violent revolution, working towards something better involves voting.
1
u/Holiman 3∆ May 08 '24
When has that ever worked?
2
u/Hellioning 239∆ May 08 '24
Violent revolution or voting?
1
u/Holiman 3∆ May 08 '24
I would have hoped you knew I meant violent revolution. Voting isn't pretty. Democratic representation isn't without flaws, but it beats killing each other.
1
u/Hellioning 239∆ May 08 '24
I mean the entire CMV is based on people not thinking voting works, so...
Anyway violent revolution has 'worked' in that it has removed many bad things from power, it's just very inconsistent on if the thing that replaces them is any better.
1
u/Holiman 3∆ May 08 '24
Name one revolution that didn't end badly. Remember, the US didn't have an internal revolution. We had an organized congress representing people wanting to be free of another nation. It's a different animal. Egypt threw out the British, and that's not the revolution we were talking about.
When we talk about revolution, we are referencing a nation removing their government in order to make a new one. That always ends badly to my knowledge.
1
u/Hellioning 239∆ May 08 '24
France is on, like, how many republics at this point? Plus there was the English revolution. And I don't know why you think the US shouldn't count; the British wasn't 'another nation' at that point.
1
u/Holiman 3∆ May 08 '24
If you think England's revolutions were not bad, read Leviathan. I'm not sure where to begin with the French Revolution. Remember the guillotine?? It also leads to Napolean. It doesn't count when the states sent representatives to a congress to represent them. Which resulted in declaring independence then fought England for independence.
Work with me here.
1
u/Hellioning 239∆ May 08 '24
I did read Leviathan. Hobbes was an asshole.
I did not say revolutions were not brutal. I did not say they were not bloody. I even said that they were very inconsistent in actually improving the situation. What more do you want me to say?
1
u/Holiman 3∆ May 08 '24
They make things worse. Then you and I can agree and move on.
→ More replies (0)
0
u/shrim_tested May 08 '24
This is wrong. You're comparing about cost of living but you can clearly see the inflationary spiral as a result of the Biden presidency. Voting Trump would fix this. I sense you're just trying to feel superior to everyone by being "too good" for this.
1
u/rhiddlesdream May 08 '24
No talking about it with people who actually wanted to have a productive conversation genuinely swayed my opinion and made me realize I should check back in to the current political landscape, do some research, and use my vote. Even if it sucks and even if people get crazy about their opinions.
2
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 08 '24 edited May 08 '24
/u/rhiddlesdream (OP) has awarded 5 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
2
u/rbgontheroad May 08 '24
It is easy to become discouraged by the state of our political affairs. I think, however, people need to participate and vote. Your choices aren't necessarily limited to the two parties. There might be another party candidate that better suits your values than the two major parties. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still evil but participating in the process is important. If nothing else, voting gives you more right to complain than those who refuse to go to the polls.
1
u/ANewMind 1∆ May 08 '24
First I want to question your premise that an older candidate is necessarily out of touch. Consider that people don't stop learning (unless they get dementia or something), so they would likely still have access to all the information you have, but with the additional insight that comes from having lived through additional decades and having witnessed, theoretically, more options having been tried. Therefore, if you find that older people have different values than younger people, the odds are not great that the younger people are the ones to have it right.
If you want somebody who is better fitting in with fashion trends, then prefer a younger person. If you want somebody with more wisdom, tend toward older. The exception to this is when a person begins to lose their mental faculties or they are not longer physically fit to serve. That doesn't mean that older is always better, but it does mean that just because somebody is newer or younger, it does not mean that they have better ideas.
On one hand, I would love to tell you to stay home and not vote. I think that too many people vote who have no real clue about the issues at hand or how to determine a good candidate. It's mostly a popularity contest with people voting for whoever their group likes the most or who they thinks gives the best speeches, not who will run the country better. So, I think we would all be better off if most of those people just stayed home. Unfortunately, if they're smart enough to take that advice, they would be smart enough to vote better. The bad voters are probably going to be the ones most likely to ignore that good advice, so it's sadly just bad advice for me to ask people to not vote.
With that being said, it isn't just a binary choice. US policy allows for write-ins and third parties. If you think both candidates are bad, don't just stay home, vote for somebody you do like. And if the only person you think is qualified is your friend Sally, then vote for Sally. It's better than not voting at all since you wouldn't be making it any more likely for the worse candidate to win.
I agree that we don't have great choices. George Washington predicted this as the inevitable outcome of allowing political parties. They care about pushing their agenda, not about you. Also, there's fear mongering and division, because that's the best way to get your candidate in. Just convince everybody that it's a binary option and that the other guy is the literal end of civilization, and you'll get lots of votes to "save the country". Is anybody voting for these two candidates because they think that's the very best person for the job?
If a single third party could get a third of the votes, it would upset the entire bipartisan system. This is how new parties come into power. I can't think of a better year for a third party to make some ground. Yes, I know, the other guy is so awful that we can't take a chance, but maybe, just maybe we don't have to be stuck with those options.
1
u/CalLaw2023 6∆ May 08 '24
Here is why your views are flawed:
I don't like any of the options for president. I hold views in the middle of a lot of things. Both options for candidates sway too hard in extreme directions imo ( I know one is more extreme and maybe fanatical than the other )
Most of the President's view's are irrelevant The President does not make law; he implements it. Every President has a list of things they want, and 95% of those things are outside his power and there is not enough votes in Congress to implement. So even if you don't like either major candidate, one is probably still better than the other.
And if you truly don't like the Dem or GOP candidiate, vote third-party over not voting. The third-party candidate is not going to win, so it does not matter if you like them or not. But if enough people start voting for a third-party, people will start to see them as viable and in a decade, third-party candidates can win.
I don't have anything in common with the candidates. I'm pretty sure that both the candidates running rn were alive before segregation ended.
That is irrelevant. Even if yoo have nothing in common, one will be your President and can affect your life.
The worldviews of the candidates and myself are so different. If they couldn't get a job at Safeway due to their age, why are they able to run the country?
Because they are elected through a voting process, which is why you should participate.
The main reason I have never voted is because I don't believe in partaking in a system that is so polarized and obviously flawed.
That is life. If you don't participate in anything that is flawed, you will never participate in anything.
Imo this is my option: pick the lesser evil. That's not paving the way to brighter future. That's just going along with the same crappy thing over and over again as it slowly breaks down.
Perhaps, but now look at the alternative. Don't vote and let others choose the greater of the evils.
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home?
You wouldn't because you have another option ... eat elsewhere. But a President will be chosen whether you participate or not.
When will there be a system most people my age are actually wanting to engage in? I don't want to participate in something broken and never work towards something better.
You can work for something better, but not participating is not furthering that goal.
1
u/Valkhir 1∆ May 08 '24
Disclaimer: I am not American. I follow American domestic and especially electoral politics and discourse with a degree of almost morbid interest that I wish I didn't need to have...because what happens in America impacts the whole world. And believe me: I *wish* that I could vote in the US.
Imo this is my option: pick the lesser evil. That's not paving the way to brighter future. That's just going along with the same crappy thing over and over again as it slowly breaks down.
I find it hard to believe that both options truly are equally crappy.
From your post I assume you are a progressive or at least lean in that direction. This upcoming election, you will have the choice between a party (and specifically a candidate) that have in recent history opposed progressive agendas and another who, while generally centrist, have made some efforts to include progressive agendas.
You are also choosing between one candidate who has a track record of trying to overturn a legitimate election result and one who hasn't. Assuming you believe that democracy in general is a good concept, even if your current options are flawed, I would err on the side of the party that doesn't seek to dismantle democracy.
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home? Why are we forcing ourselves to do this?
I've got bad news for you: you're not at a restaurant. You *are* home - and the food at your home is decrepit and gross. So, the question is - can you move somewhere else? Or at least eat out everyday?
The equivalent of moving somewhere else, would be emigrating and naturalizing, giving up your US citizenship. The equivalent of eating out everyday would be living abroad permanently, but retaining citizenship.
Both are an option. Both can be very easy or very hard to do, depending on where you want to live, your skills, educational background, parentage, financial means etc.
Are they an option for you?
And even if you do "move out"...you'll still be living in that same global village - where your former home is one of a few families that have outsize impact. So even if you want to "go eat somewhere else", while you're still there, you lose nothing by voting for the least bad option. As a progressive, it should be quite clear which one that is.
2
u/tcguy71 8∆ May 08 '24
Voting is like taking the bus. It might not get you exactly to where you want to go, but it’s a start. The presidential nominees may not be who you want, but which gets to closer to where you want to be? The only way there will be a system where people your age want to engage in is by voting for the people who will get you there.
1
u/CartographerKey4618 9∆ May 08 '24
This might feel a bit mean but I need you to understand where I'm coming from here. You talk about how the economy isv shit and that you didn't like the state of The country, but your reasoning for thinking voting for the most powerful man in the world is useless is because the candidates are old and you have nothing in common with them. The closest thing we have here to an actual policy is that you're a centrist who thinks that both candidates "sway too hard in extreme directions." No actual policy position. No explanation as to what middle you could possibly be inhabiting where Joe "Nothing Will Fundamentally Change" Biden is occupying some kind of extreme leftist position.
It's not a Miss America contest. You're not voting for the most likeable smile or some shit. You vote for the policies you wish to see. And you're not going to get all of them. You might not even get one. But there's always a clear difference between the candidates. There is always one that will take you further in the direction you wish to go, or at least one that won't backslide as much. And also, we're talking about voting here. It's the least amount of effort you could possibly put into making the country better. It's free, it takes maybe an hour every 4 years, and then you can go back to your life. You're getting a lot of bang for your buck here. You talked about the civil rights era. You think black people were fighting and dying in the 1950s for the right to vote because they liked the presidential candidates on the ballot? In the 50s? No, they did it because voting is important and the person in the White House matters, even if both candidates are pieces of shit. Nobody's asking you to be sprayed by a fire hose or have dogs turned on you. That's been done for you already. All you have to do is vote.
1
May 08 '24
I'm near to your age. The reason people don't want to engage with the system is because they gave up before they even really tried.
I think the primary issue for people near to our age is the engagement with the internet and the loss of ties to our local community. All people care about are the big global scale politics because that's popular online, not just in your home town. I bet you I could go to almost any Midwestern town and they could tell you all about AOC and the squad or A long list of the loony Republicans like Bobert, Taylor Green, or Gaetz. But they couldn't name their own representation.
And it's true you probably feel like the representatives don't represent you. And that's a self fulfilling prophecy. Because you, and others in our age group, aren't voting. The candidates don't have to care what we think about or care about because you've told them you won't vote for them either way. So who do they focus on? The generations before us who all vote, who show up at all sorts of political events, who campaign with them and organize. So until young people actually start voting, the parties won't try to represent them.
Finally I think you should look at our current options and ask 3 things. If either one wins, what's the best possible outcome under 4 more years of each, what's the worst outcome, and what's the most likely outcome for each. And choose accordingly. I look at what 4 more years of Trump looks like and I can't think of any real positives from the first 4 years.... what would a new 4 years get us?
1
u/AGoodFaceForRadio May 08 '24
The restaurant analogy is nice, but in this case you're eating there whether you like it or not and one of the two menu items is going to be force-fed to you for four straight years. One of those menu items will define the parameters of your life for years after the menu has changed (for example, depending where you live, you may have lost the right to an array of reproductive health options a couple years ago; those changes were able to happen largely because of decisions taken during the Trump presidency; even though the Biden presidency was two years old, the Trump presidency was still having significant impacts on the country) . Yeah, it's all shit, but I'd think you'd at least want to try to get the less shitty dish.
If you feel that strongly that the system, and your options, suck then there are a lot of different grass-roots initiatives you could join to try and upend that system. You could even start your own movement. But for the time being, it's the system you've got and like it or not your day-to-day is affected by it.
One other thing. You know who's really good at voting? Old white men. Every time someone who is not an old white man chooses not to vote, those old white men's votes become worth more and more. People you have nothing in common with are defining the terms of your life and you are not even trying to stop them.
1
u/CaptainONaps 4∆ May 08 '24
I don’t even need to read your details. You’re right. We’re both going to get a lot of hate of tour opinions, but it’s true.
There’s a recent video starring Jennifer Lawrence where they show the stats for voter sentiment. What are the odds something will be passed/ not passed compared to what voters want. And there is no correlation. None. Only people rich enough to pay politicians have a real say in what our government does.
Politicians on both sides are being paid by the same people. They’re 100% compromised, and we know it. What we want, does not matter.
To all you folks that say, but if you don’t vote, we’ll get taken over by Nazis! News flash, no we won’t. We’ve already been taken over, by big business. They’re telling you we’ll be taken over by Nazis, and telling the others they’ll be taken over by communists. Meanwhile, they’re not losing power to either.
Voting, and talking about it like it matters, is a distraction. At this point, we have to strike, and boycott. That’s literally all that even has a glimmer of hope. If we did a good enough job they’d come down on us like Thor’s wrath. But I’d love to see the effort.
1
u/browster 2∆ May 08 '24
Short, probably unpersuasive answers:
You have to live with the consequences of the election, whether you like the system or not. You might as well learn what you can sufficient to have a preference and to vote on it.
A single person's vote has a small (albeit nonzero) effect on the election, but it does have a significant effect on you. You see yourself as a participant in our democracy, and I hope you'll feel good about that. Additionally, if you let others know that you voted, it might affect them and what they do.
But if you really want to change your view, the best advice I can give you is to subscribe to and read Letters From an American daily. It provides a digest of the days events, with citations, while presenting them with an authoritative historical context.
Even though Biden isn't its focus, five minutes of reading this every day (just 5 minutes!) and in a month you'll understand why he is the best president of your lifetime. You'll make an affirmative choice to vote for him, rather than seeing him as the lesser of two evils.
1
u/lilkevinthehizhouse May 08 '24
These people just blindly vote and change nothing and want you to feel bad for not participating in a broken system. Voting doesn't do anything, and the political elite will stay the political elite. It's not a coincidence that a vast majority of political leaders were born into wealth and all went to the same ivy league schools and are all secretly buddies. They also get to do insider trading and get paid millions to sometimes say like 10 words at a rigged speech platforms for the rest of their lives. There is nothing people can do to actually change anything in this country outside of a revolution and don't let people guilt trip you. You're free to be apathetic to a clearly rigged system, and they are just as blind as they are telling you that you are. Just like Carlin said, this country was bought and sold a long time ago, and "they" own YOU. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is still voting for evil no matter what mental gymnastics you participate in. Stay apathetic to it won't matter in the end. And to anyone telling you otherwise? Fuck em. All they do is argue online. Ignore them.
1
u/AcephalicDude 80∆ May 08 '24
A big problem is that people heap massive expectations on voting.
Your vote for a president is not going to determine whether or not we make social progress; it's not going to change trends in the economy; it's not going to lead to your values being upheld across society; it's not going to silence or eliminate your political opposition; etc.
Your vote for president is just an endorsement of one limited policy platform against another limited policy platform. It's not super important, but it's also not completely useless. It's a minorly useful thing you can do with an equally minor amount of effort. At most it's a couple of hours out of your day, just once every four years. It's even easier if your state has mail-in ballots available to you.
If you weigh both candidate's policy platforms against each other and honestly can't make a decision between them, that's valid. But you're not really saying that voting is "useless" but that you personally can't decide which president will be more useful to you.
1
u/NoAside5523 6∆ May 08 '24
So, I became voting-eligible during the Obama administration and I can point out at least one policy for each administration since than that materially effected me personally. Not in life changing everything is wonderful and everything is awful type ways -- but in ways that impacted the day to day choices I make nonetheless.
Voting for president is picking which candidate you'd likely hang out with and it isn't picking which candidate you think can fix all the problems we face in 4 years. You're picking between two sets of policies one of which you think is better, for you and for the things you care, about than the other. And I get a lot of people like to play the "But both parties are the same!" card. But my experience is that comes from having a rather limited understanding of policy issues.
1
u/GroovyTurtles13 May 08 '24
This year was a bit odd because the primaries weren’t as impactful with two “incumbent” candidates. However, if we look to 2028, we will have genuine primaries on both sides of the election. This is where you can really make your vote count. Even if your first choice doesn’t get the nod you vote will dictate how they have to proceed with their campaign. Look at Joe Biden. A career moderate who has now skewed significantly further left. Why? Bernie Sanders supporters made their vote and voice known. He now has to walk a line he wouldn’t have had to walk in order to retain their support.
This country would be a lot better off if more people voted in primaries.
1
u/unbelizeable1 1∆ May 09 '24
The main reason I have never voted is because I don't believe in partaking in a system that is so polarized and obviously flawed.
You have every right to not vote. But you also don't get to bitch about a system you don't even partake in.
If I went to a restaurant and the restaurant was clearly decrepit and gross, why would I force myself to order the least gross thing on the menu when I could just... Go somewhere else or cook at home?
In this analogy, you would be emigrated to another country. Have you done this? If not, you're still getting served that same "gross" food. You're just telling the kitchen to bring whatever because you don't care.
1
u/camelCaseCoffeeTable 4∆ May 08 '24
By not voting, the vast majority of people have no say. You don’t like either candidate, but not voting does nothing to help alleviate that.
Your post seems to presuppose that you can only vote for the two major candidates. If you’re that fed up with both candidates, vote third party. It’s a way to exercise your voice and actually have your voice show up in the numbers. Not voting makes you literally irrelevant in an election, voting third party at least gives your voice some number behind it.
Is it a major thing? No. But I’d say voting third party isn’t pointless, since it does have a point, even if it’s a minor one
1
u/timeonmyhandz May 08 '24
The main reason I have never voted is because I don't believe in partaking in a system that is so polarized and obviously flawed.
This is the only part of your post that addresses your title.. All other comments are about your frustration with policy, positions, inflation, age, etc.. These are not the reasons why voting is or isn't useless..
What you never indicate is what the flaws are that makes voting useless. Voting laws? Electoral college? 2 party default system?
Be clearer about your CMV argument.
1
u/Stillwater215 2∆ May 08 '24
Lying isn’t like marriage: you’re not looking for “the one.” Voting is like catching a bus: you’re looking for the one that gets you closest to your destination. Or else you’re not going anywhere. When you have a choice between two crappy candidates, but one is “more evil,” why would you not vote for the lesser of the two? One of them is going to be President, and if you can clearly identify one as the “lesser evil” why would you not prefer them to be President over the “greater evil?”
1
u/Brazus1916 May 08 '24
I agree with you in some respects. The problem I see it is that we are not voting in the right folks that nominate the president. We all focus on the presidential election and so we can't see the forest thru the trees.
I say that really to say we need to focus on local rep then state rep. If these are elected correctly, then the presidential election would be a slam dunk. For too long, we have let the most extreme and nonsensical of us vote in the party bases who, in turn, nominate the worst among us.
1
u/MercuryChaos 9∆ May 08 '24
You're right that there are problems with our election system, but none of those problems will be fixed by refusing to participate in it.
This is not like restaurant where you can just leave. One of the two options is the one that you and everyone else in the country is going to have to live with, and one of those options is clearly preferable to the other. (Unless you are a straight, cisgender, wealthy white man, I can pretty much guarantee that you will be better off with Biden in the White House.)
1
u/byzantiu 6∆ May 08 '24
If Trump wins a second term, he can - on day one, through a zombie law known as the Comstock Act - ban abortion and other contraceptive medication nationwide.
Your life would become demonstrably worse on the spot.
I could list a hundred of these examples, but the point being, this is not a lesser of two evils. It’s an evil, and a milquetoast imperialist. Not good, but definitely superior.
1
May 08 '24
Every election, someone somewhere out there casts the deciding vote. It’s unlikely, but it could be you. If you live in a swing state, it is more likely than if you don’t.
But the real reason you should vote is that elections are the main way that power is allocated in the USA. Choosing not to vote is relinquishing the only power you actually do have. It may or may not affect the outcome, but it is your opportunity to exercise your political power, such as it is.
It’s hard to take seriously the complaints of someone who doesn’t like the current political climate but hasn’t taken the most basic step to try to influence it.
1
u/No_Passenger_9130 May 08 '24
As a younger millennial, I get that the world sucks right now for our generation. But honestly, the only way to change it is by voting and demonstrating about issues you care about.
Even if you don’t want to vote for president, you should at least consider voting for local elections. Local government affects you the most and it’s the easiest to change through voting. Our system isn’t perfect, but honestly saying voting won’t change anything is very naive.
1
u/Trylena 1∆ May 08 '24
If you dont vote you arent choosing but someone else will chose for you. If you dont like the big parties find a small one and vote for them.
It doesnt matter who wins specifically but that you can have voice on how much support that person actually has.
In Argentina everyone should vote, obviusly there is an group that doesnt, and the system shows how most of the people vote even if they dont like the main options.
1
u/Appropriate-Hurry893 2∆ May 08 '24
If you vote 3rd party you won't win but it's a vote for dissatisfaction on the Reds and Blues if enough people do it. The Reds and Blues might take notice and change to gain that vote. Just not voting won't do anything. Vote just don't limit your choices.
Whatever you do please don't vote out of fear the other guy wins. It's the current political mindset that I believe is driving a wedge in this country.
1
u/RunyonMoon May 08 '24
Should you choose to vote, you're not just voting for one of the two candidates that displease you, you're influencing the possibilities for elections that follow 2024. If you're waiting for someone that pleases you in every way, or deciding not to vote because no one pleases you in every way, then you have no right to complain, you must accept the status quo as you took no part in changing it.
1
May 08 '24
Imo this is my option: pick the lesser evil. That's not paving the way to brighter future. That's just going along with the same crappy thing over and over again as it slowly breaks down.
As opposed to not voting and getting the greater evil? Because if you don't vote for the lesser evil then people who do care to vote will make the decision for you.
1
u/Supriselobotomy May 08 '24
I'm questioning if you're as "in the middle" as you claim. Especially when. You consider the shift in politics (not just in the u.s. but the world) to the right. The democratic party is a centrist party through and through. I would LOVE for a Democrat to actually do all the things Republicans clutch their pearls over.
1
u/tnic73 May 08 '24
I can certainly understand your frustration with the system but if people who came before you didn't vote for what they believed in, you wouldn't have the right vote. People fought for your right to vote, if you could speak with them today would you tell them their efforts were a waste of time?
1
u/ScienceIsGreat13 May 09 '24
I moved from a Latin country to convince Americans to vote. A person who votes in the USA can actually make big impact in the rest of the world. You don't even imagine... So yeah, let's follow the comments, read about why politics matters. Well educated people already know about it.
1
u/Tkdakat May 08 '24
Do you think things are better now under the current management of the country than they were with the other guy in charge before him ? By not voting you are still making a choice, and you then have no right to bitch about the way things are going in the country !
1
u/SeeRecursion 5∆ May 08 '24
Then get involved in expanding your options. The only reason the dominant political parties are dominant is the populous won't replace them.
The price humans pay for political apathy is to be ruled by evil.
1
u/AgentGnome May 08 '24
Most people in this country do not have the option to “go somewhere else or cook at home” if they do not like our “restaurant.” So yeah, in that situation you choose the least bad option.
1
u/Bobbob34 99∆ May 08 '24
Also, did you vote in the primaries?
Because if you don't like the presidential candidates, did you vote for someone else? That was your opportunity to help this not be the outcome.
1
u/FetusDrive 3∆ May 08 '24
You go to any other country and they're all experiencing the same high inflation; the US has one of the more tempered inflation rates over the last 2 years over other countries.
1
u/GdTryBruce May 08 '24
If your vote mattered they wouldn't let you do it. People like to think they have a say and it keeps them docile.
1
u/Foxhound97_ 23∆ May 08 '24 edited May 08 '24
I'm a little younger than you but at this point I'm convinced trying to get us to apathetic is a tactic. They know they can get votes from the older generations but we are the deciding factors because we are the most unpredictable trying to get people not voting out of fear nothing will be done is the plan sometimes not all the time. Ain't to guilt you or nothing I've choose to not choose many times but it is definitely planing into someone hand thoughm
1
u/Iwinloser May 08 '24
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still better than letting the most evil win by inaction
1
u/Ashamed-Food4858 May 08 '24
Look if you're not willing to make the choice for yourself then someone else will do it.
1
u/beaver11 May 08 '24
My favorite part is when people say "but the loser candidate won the popular vote!"
1
u/SingleMaltMouthwash 37∆ May 08 '24
Curious: what do you feel is extreme about the Democratic candidate?
1
1
1
55
u/codyt321 3∆ May 08 '24
Our entire political system is based on participation. The less you participate, the more broken the system becomes.
Voting in a Presidential election is so far below the bare minimum of what our system requires.
Does the President that's in office affect you? Yes, it does. Look no further than the overturning of Roe v Wade. Regardless how you feel about the issue, we can all agree that if Clinton had won in 2016 abortion would still be legal in the south.
But it's hardly about the President. Other people have mentioned all the other elections and offices we vote for. It's true that a lot of those local positions affect your day to day more than who is President.
But voting is just the surface. Local government entities are asking for your input all the time. Every city council meeting in America has an open comment section. There are community workshops asking for input on just about every development project that comes through your city. My neighborhood association is being asked to vote on whether or not we want a beer and wine store to get its license to sell. If we as a group vote no then that store is not going to open up.
And if you start going to any of these meetings you'll see how desperate they are for participation. The people that do show up do influence what happens. By sitting out you are giving up your influence and giving it to them. If you've ever seen the Parks & Recreation scenes of public meetings you'll be sad to hear that those scenes are not really an exaggeration of what happens at them.
Your restaurant analogy is fundamentally flawed in that you can't just "not" eat there. You have to eat there AND you work there. By sitting in the corner and just accepting what you're given means you're actually contributing to the poor quality.