As the title states I am confused on this matter. The way I see it, the USA has a two party system and in the next few weeks they’re either going to have Trump or Harris as president, come inauguration day. With this in mind doesn’t it make sense to vote for the person least likely to escalate the situation even more.
Giving your vote to an independent or worse not voting at all, just gives more of a chance for Trump to win the election and then who knows what crazy stuff he will allow, or encourage, Israel to get away with.
I really don’t get the logic. As sure nobody wants to vote for a party allowing these heinous crimes to be committed, but given you’re getting one of them shouldn’t you be voting for the one that will be the least horrible of the two.
Please don’t come at me with pro-Israeli rhetoric as this isn’t the post for that, I’m asking about why people would make such choices and I’m not up for debate on the Middle East, on this post, you can DM me for that.
Edit: Bedtime here now so will respond to incoming comments in the morning, love starting the day with an inbox full 😊.
Edit 2: This blew up, it’s a little overwhelming right now but I do intent on replying to everybody that took the time to comment. Just need to get in the right headspace.
That is not the question. The question is: it’s a binary choice. People should be aware that not voting helps the worst candidate win. Why not vote for the less bad candidate then?
It is not a binary choice. When people vote third party it shows politicians supporting Israel comes with political consequences.
Voting for Green is the best thing a voter can do. Even forgiving Democrats for being complicit in an entire year of Genocide would be questionable. But Democrats are not distancing themselves from the Genocide. They are literally saying they want to continue the Genocide and start a war with Iran too.
Democrats aren’t going to magically do what you want if you reward them for bad behavior. Instead they will double down on bad behavior.
Life lasts longer than 4 years.
In a ranked choice system or other better voting system, yes.
In the current system, voting for anyone but the least bad choice among the two that stand a chance is almost like giving your vote to the one that has the best chances, regardless of your preferences.
Look up the spoiler effect in elections.
Or, CGP Grey has an excellent explanation of the whole thing.
https://www.cgpgrey.com/politics-in-the-animal-kingdom
Your logic works assuming the world lasts 4 years.
Either way the worst candidate is going to win
Thats a fact. Also genocide will proceed as scheduled.
Vote for 3p is just letting regime know that some voters are not satisfied.
I’m glad you think that a candidate who doesn’t want to imprison immigrants, eliminate queer people, and control women is the “worst candidate”
She doesn’t want to, she has to
It is not a binary choice… And you saying this is bad faith behavior.
Third party vote is a protest vote and it is as valid as any other vote.
Not voting is providing the regime legitimacy.
Both of those are in essence a vote for trump. It is a binary choice.
Ans this is likely why kamala gomma lose lol
Keep it up
We had trump already… And we are still here today.
If your entire campaign she is not trump, thats a pathetic campaign.
You really overestimate how many people care abiut trump winning
I care more about making a point that i dont approve of current politics coming from both sides.
Yall can figure between each other which clown wins.