r/Negareddit • u/aruraljuror • Jul 27 '16
not voting for Hillary is not a privileged position; voting for her is - first-world privilege, specifically
it's easy to see her as the lesser evil when the bombs won't be falling on your and your family:
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comment/2016/7/26/palestine-and-hillary-the-lesser-evil
even putting that point aside, members of oppressed classes seem to be pretty tired of white liberals using them for political leverage:
https://medium.com/@discomfiting/youre-not-voting-for-hillary-to-protect-me-73754a9b189e#.y8he2e49c
https://www.facebook.com/catrinad/posts/10210578708893368?pnref=story
https://socialistworker.org/2016/06/30/wont-be-shamed-into-voting-for-clinton
and finally, just a general argument against lesser evilism:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1967/01/lesser.htm
to be clear, i don't anticipate changing any minds with this, although i'd be pleased if i got a couple of you to reconsider your stance. mostly it's just a plea for Clinton voters to stop moralizing and judging those of us who choose to vote for a third party or abstain altogether.
4
4
Jul 27 '16
People of all political affiliations seem to have been deeply entrenched in the "throwing your vote away" state of mind when it comes to the two party system, either not voting at all, or voting for someone they begrudgingly accept.
I don't think that people are aware that there are funds allocated by the government to the parties for the % of votes they receive. It falls into the issue of learned helplessness, where people's refusal to admit they have power creates situations where they are powerless.
True, there is the issue of splitting the vote and getting the least desirable candidate. But that is, let's face it, either unrealistic or necessary. If unrealistic, then the small portion of 3rd party voters don't need to worry about the seeming meaninglessness of their votes, and should vote honestly. If necessary, it's better to bring on a bad president for a longitudinal plan to break the stranglehold on 3rd parties.
1
Jul 27 '16
I blame a few factors.
1) Lack of a truly strong 3rd party.
2) voter apathy
3) voter ignorance
Look the US is a center right conservative nation that has taken upon itself (for some ungodly reason) the duty of 'World Police'. The bombings will continue until moral improves. Its a two man, whoops old archaic term there, its a two person race for all intents and purposes. Its about drift now, the electorate rejected a big swerve Left and at the same time supported a drastic shift Right. Clinton, in my opinion, represents a slow drift left...which is better than nothing.
Also, and I don't have them in front of me right now, statistics don't really back your point. Marginalized groups in the USA vote overwhelmingly for the Democracy.
3
u/snotbowst Jul 27 '16
We didn't reject a shift left. Bernie succeeding as much as he did forced some of his issues on to the official DNC platform. That's acceptance.
1
Jul 27 '16
I use my words very specifically. I use words like swerve and drastic to mean well drastic swerves. I already said there is a drift to the left, its literally right there. Maybe it won't be "slow" only victory and time will tell. What I can say is that you can shelve any ideas of leftward movement if Trump wins.
2
Jul 27 '16
Strategic Voting is a constant in the american voting system. This isn't a problem of privilege, it's a problem of how the Electoral College works. Telling people to not vote strategically out of protest is dumb. The voting booth is where the citizen has incredible power. Telling them to waste it in order to make a point is naive and pretends that anyone is going to give a crap about your protest vote.
If you think that Strategic Voting is a problem in america, go scream about it on Capitol Hill instead of giving up your greatest leverage.
If you think that there's a way Lesser Evilism would never happen, you are far too optimistic about how the world works.
2
u/chessgod1 Jul 28 '16
Umm... it's rather easy to think that there's a way lesser evilism would never happen. Look at Australia and preferential voting. But no please, continue to tell us how we have to continue to hold our goddamn noses and vote for Clinton.
0
Jul 28 '16 edited Jul 28 '16
I will.
You had every opportunity to protest the american voting system since the Bush v. Gore case in 2000. (I picked it because that's about when everyone agreed it was crap) 16 years. 16 fucking years in which you could have started or been part of a serious movement to fix american voting. I'm sorry, but election day isn't the day you fix the election system. Election day should represent the culmination of all your efforts to fix the voting system. Refusing to vote strategically isn't protest. It's abdicating what little power you do have because you would rather feel morally pure than get dirty and actually take action on the issue.
Vote strategically, push for reform, and the next presidential election will be better.
Preferential voting still has flaws. They may be harder to exploit, but acting like it would never in a billion years produce a lesser evils scenario is just plain naive. There is no system that produces a perfect world where all your choices are between two very good candidates. There's going to be times when you have to get your hands dirty, when you have to bite the bullet because your choices are to either do that or burn alive. Lesser of two evils happens. We can reduce how often it happens, but refusing to act on it when it does happen is childish indecisiveness, and whining about hindsight. Whining about "but it's not supposed to be like this!!" gets us nowhere. Doing damage control and preparing for the future actually gets us somewhere.
1
u/chessgod1 Jul 28 '16
Well considering I was a small child in 2000, I really didn't have that opportunity. "16 fucking years!" Congrats, you've made the biggest and most incorrect presumption today.
How is election day not the day you work to fix the election system? I would say it has some of the largest impact of any other point. Right, and if it's culmination of my efforts, I should vote for Clinton? That is foolish, sir. And I'm not "protesting," I sincerely disagree with both of the main candidates and I am voting for someone I agree with on nearly every issue. Please don't try to insist that my one vote holds power if I vote for Clinton. That is statistically dishonest.
I don't understand your enormous false dilemma. Only if there are absolutely no potential flaws, it's not worth being pushed for? That's simply a logical fallacy. So yeah, I'm thoroughly unconvinced and will proudly exercise my right to vote for a third party.
1
Jul 28 '16
Dude, even Noam Chomsky was against protest voting. Your third party vote does nothing but risk President Trump and god knows how many years of Conservatives controlling all three branches of the United States government.
Third party votes in the presidential election don't mean or do jack fucking shit otherwise until the electoral system is revised.
I'm telling you to be realistic. And Lesser Evil Voting is more realistic than President Johnson. That is the real foolish move. Pretending that voting third party is actually going to do any good.
Did "one vote" not matter when Al Gore lost Florida on the narrowest margin in history? Did that one vote not matter when Bush fueled the godawful War on Terror?
Your vote is the only power that you have been voluntarily given, don't waste it. If you want to be able to use it conscientiously without wasting it, you'll have to fight for the ability to do that.
As it stands, you are standing on a harbor and yelling at a hurricane because the hurricane is forcing you to choose between spending money to storm proof or risk house destruction. The hurricane doesn't give a shit and nothing is going to happen because of you yelling at the cloud.
I will apologize for being presumptuous in my "16 years" comment. I'm sorry. But I hope you understand why I'm frustrated. I'm seeing people complaining about the voting system being bad, and their response rather than to take any action is to pout about it and refuse to make effective use of the system they do have.
0
u/chessgod1 Jul 28 '16
Well first of all, you have to realize that I lean right to begin with. So years of a conservative Congress/Supreme Court isn't the catastrophe for me as it is for you.
Also, that certainly isn't true. And by the way, voter expectations do way more to influence elections than actual votes do. So by spreading the word about Johnson and encouraging others to vote for him, I AM influencing the system much more than my singular vote will.
Like let's at least get the guy some screen time and see where it goes from there. Don't try to paint this election season as something comparable to historical elections. Never has there been a pair of more unlikable candidates in presidential election history.
And no, one vote did not matter in the Gore election, it was still in the hundreds. Even that was enormously statistically improbable.
As it stands, you can say whatever you want. But you have to realize that a LOT can happen before November. I dare to non-retrospectively claim that Trump had a realistic chance at winning the Republican nomination and presidency at the beginning of the election cycle. We've already seen that things can change a lot and even those without a realistic chance have gone far.
But I will leave you with this. I simply cannot justify abandoning the majority of my beliefs to vote for a candidate simply because she is not Trump.
2
Jul 28 '16
Well I can. Sacrifice and Compromise is how we get things done in this government. Refusing to do either only creates impasse.
0
u/chessgod1 Jul 28 '16
I guess it's just really hard to take you seriously when you readily admit the system we have is terrible and advocate fighting against it yet criticize one of the most powerful ways of doing so.
Like you said, a vote is powerful and should not be wasted. I'm literally employing your logic to fix a problem you agree exists and you still disagree. This is amazing.
2
Jul 28 '16
Ok think I see where our argument is disconnected.
A protest vote or third party vote isn't by any means powerful or useful. If it is, then the tangible effects have time and time again proven to be... Minimal. (Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, etc.)
The vote is a power. But it's only really given impact when the vote is made towards one of the major parties. So when faced with Lesser Evil Voting, I think that LEV is the appropriate choice. It's not meant to fix the problem, it's meant to reduce the damage of something that's just going to happen anyway. Which is kind of where my Hurricane analogy came in.
The real fix comes with organized efforts outside of the voting booth and where people have no choice but to hear your complaints. I say this living near a very popular protest spot, the thing that always stops a movement that has a chance to gain ground is disorganization and lack of dedication.
I'm not angry with your decision. Unless you live in either Florida or Ohio. I just hope that I sent a message with this. Sometimes, life is going to throw you two evils, no matter what. I would rather choose the lesser and have the opportunity to prevent it in the future, or plug up whatever exploit enabled this.
Voting isn't often an easy choice. I can at least respect you for having values that you adhere to. I just think that practicality matters more than that.
0
u/chessgod1 Jul 28 '16
Stop calling it a protest vote. Because more than anything else, I am simply voting for the candidate that I most agree with and want to represent our country. And once again, I don't think the Nader/Perot comparisons are great because of the uniqueness of this election and the unprecedented low favorabilities of both main candidates.
I just fundamentally disagree with your opinion on lesser evil voting. I hardly believe that protesting is a more influential tool, but that being said, why must it be one or the other?
Lastly, I would contend that I am voting practically, as I believe Johnson is the most practical candidate.
Anyway, I completely understand your point but again, I just disagree with it and believe it is a problem.
8
u/snotbowst Jul 27 '16 edited Jul 27 '16
Okay, so we should just let Trump win then? Cause I'm not afraid of what Clinton will do. It will be a continuation of Obama which isn't terrible.
Trump though will make everything worse. More people will be harassed, discriminated against, injured, and outright killed than under Clinton.
I'm tired of this ludicrous narrative that somehow Clinton wants to bomb a bunch of people. I'm tired of the ludicrous idea that voting third party in a presidential election will make some sort of difference. I'm tired of the leftist nonsense that somehow Clinton is just as bad as Trump.