• Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    You know what terrifies me? Even if I vote for “Bad” it just takes a few thousand people in some other state to completely negate me doing the right thing and we get “Worse.” And then we’re just supposed to accept the results. Because them’s the rules. Oh well…

    It’s a stupid system of government and I don’t blame people for checking out. I wish I could just ignore it, too.

    My point isn’t that people shouldn’t vote - because clearly Worse is worse than Bad - but that we don’t get to vote for Better. For that we need to protest and agitate and get our skulls cracked in by thugs and possibly killed. Our history proves that nothing improves in America without violence.

    • spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      This feels like semantics. There is “bad”, and there is an option that is “better”. I don’t know why folks feel like they need to use “bad” and “worse”, other than to build pessimism. The things people are upset about can’t easily fixed by presidents anyway - we need a large base of like minded representatives to do things like housing policy and universal healthcare and education reform and climate change. It’s a lot easier to break things than to improve peoples lives, which is why it’s critical not to elect people intent on breaking things.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I don’t need to build pessimism. I’ve been aware of politics since the late 80s, and voting since 2000. I’m plenty pessimistic already.