• SquirtleHermit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I wonder if people realize posts like this only push away potential converts?

    Even if Centrists were as good as this post makes them out to be (which sadly they’re not), smugly asserting that everyone else is worse than you is a terrible method of persuasion.

    Though I suppose the point is to feel morally and intellectually superior to people who would vote differently. Rather than to actually try to woo the most voters.

    Edit: Fwiw, I believe the best option we have currently is to vote for the Democrats. I simply don’t see an alternative option that is as likely to keep Trump out of the Whitehouse again. Though damage mitigation is not my favorite strategy to employ, in this case I believe it is the “strongest” play available.

  • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I don’t feel centrist is the right word here. Or at least centrist has been co-opted by a group of right wingers wanting to platform fascists.

    I’d go with big tent, labor coalition, or I dunno.

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The theory that Republicans are the Corporate Party and Democrats are not relies upon you ignoring where Democrats get the lion’s share of their fundraising and PAC money from.

  • ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Voting is not a medium for self-expression, or at least not a good one. It’s a tool to affect outcomes. People get angry about voting for harm reduction, but choosing to not even do that much just makes everything worse.

  • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Calling Harris/Walz “centrist” is selling them short. Centrism would have been the fantasy ticket proposed in the press where they tapped a moderate Republican like Romney to run alongside Harris on a “let’s go back to 2016” ticket, attempting to capture the less fashy conservatives, placate big business and let the left know in no uncertain terms that their ideas are not an option, only a status quo that’s not an inch left of centre or the abyss of fascism. They did not do that, and while nobody (at least, nobody unafflicted by FoxNews brainworms) will mistake them for Bolsheviks, they’re decidedly centre-left, with pro-worker policies, albeit in the language of “regular folks” rather than theorists. The Democratic congress itself ranges from the uncompromising left (AOC and Bernie) to the centre-right (Manchin/Sinema and their ilk), though its centre of gravity is left of the notional centreline of US politics.

    • hobovision@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      They may not be centerists when seen through that Overton window of the USA in 2024, but in terms of the modern political spectrum they definitely are. There’s barely a social policy they have that isn’t already enacted for decades in more progressive countries and states.

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    this is not accurate

    centrists trying to build a big tent for everyone are the pro rich and corporations that are voting against our interests

    the “big tent” is just there to fool people with bread and circuses and it has nothing of sustenance that will sustain the people

    the throwing your vote away and getting to pretend you hold some high ground (you don’t) is propaganda spread by both parties to keep the power structure intact and to help control the masses by tamping their expectations of leaders

    yes life is compromise and nobody gets exactly what they want, but everyone does not get a say in how we work to find a fair balance

    some people are hidden away in concrete zoos without adequate ac/heat usually in unsanitary conditions or they just have their votes taken away all together or some other way of quashing votes

    centrists are the right wing with sheep’s clothing on designed to give the illusion of choice

    the right wing billionaire class always wins and have succeeded at confusing most of the US public into a false dilemma and gets everything they want

    voting Democrat or Republican means we give away the opportunity of a third party and the ability to listen to outside voices that may contain a forest of solutions that were unseeable due to the two trees

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

  • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s what I’ve been saying for a while now: If you want to be happy with who you vote for, lower your expectations of what you’re gonna get. It will be ugly sausage making and they will make stupid decisions that you will hate, things won’t improve nearly as quickly as you want, and this is the best we can do as a species because coordinating the actions of tens or hundreds of millions of people is going to suck.

    • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      That and 40-50 year steady march of the Overton Window to the right won’t be undone with a single election. It’s going to take multiple ones to fix what’s been broken by the Republicans.

  • aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Politics are about simple issues. Do we want to solve homelessness? Give people homes. Do we want to solve poverty? Give people money. Should we or shouldn’t we support an ongoing genocide? Geez, I’m not a fucking brain genius, someone find an ethics professor.

    The only complicated thing is getting people to understand this and act on it.

    • WldFyre@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, the Republicans have been successful in accomplishing their goals by not voting repeatedly for 20+ years! /s

      ffs

      • VeganPizza69 Ⓥ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Is it better? It seems like the creeping motion is much better at avoiding opposition than the double-time. Sort of like how the climate is heating just slow enough for most of the humans to think that it’s somewhat normal and usual, and the crises are somewhat normal.

          • VeganPizza69 Ⓥ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I didn’t say accelerationism. Accelerationism is a fascist position.

            I’m saying that the issue here is people not realizing that,

            as an analogy,

            Being threatened with a gun to the head vs being threatened with a dart containing deadly radioactive oncogenic particles should be treated the same. The problem is optimism and hope, it’s what allows conservatives to play the long game.

            And in terms of the strategy you hold dear, understand that capitalists and their fascist pets will bring down the whole biosphere.

            Essentially, the ethics of this aren’t about “lesser evil”, they’re about how willing are you to burden the youngest generations and soon to be born with an exponentially more difficult (deadly) challenge, so you can live your life in the “normal” way and keep your head down.

            • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              When you’re talking about the merits of the greater evil, i.e. speeding towards fascism so people are more likely to take direct revolutionary action, you’re talking about accelerationism. However you try to justify it to yourself, that’s what you’re promoting. And it’s fundamentally a gamble, you’re hoping that it leads to a regime that can be deposed, and a populace willing and able to depose it. The gamble could very easily just lead to enduring fascism.

              I use the tools at my disposal. Voting for the lesser evil buys time and fosters a slightly, but distinctly, more favorable political landscape. That gives people the opportunity to organize, to spread their message, to build campaigns for representatives that represent them, and elevate those representatives to higher offices.

              how willing are you to burden the youngest generations and soon to be born with an exponentially more difficult (deadly) challenge, so you can live your life in the “normal” way and keep your head down.

              The irony is palpable. This is precisely the outcome of your strategy: give the young generations a despotic fascist regime they’ll have to overthrow with chaos and bloodshed, rather than a functioning democracy that they can push to the left.

              Yes, our system is dominated by capitalists and fascists, but that’s precisely because 30+% of people refuse to use their vote. The system has within it the mechanisms for meaningful change, fantasies about a popular uprising against a despotic government are childish and irresponsible.

      • Seasm0ke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Counterpoint, libs cared about kids in cages when it was trump doing it. Ive never seen so many people energetic and aware about government abuses. It was the same with war in the middleast when Obama took over from Bush. All the average antiwar blues stopped watching and couldnt car less about drone bombing funerals and ambulances.

        The two party system does not promote engagement or representation. I get this is a bigger issue than the election but my biggest fear is that the slow walk to fascism under the “we’re the good party” will be more enduring and successful than the attempts from Red to March forward.

        The average lib “shut up and vote blue or you support fascism” crybully will fall asleep again for four years and sleepwalk their way to the same goal without any self reflection along the way.

        Note this is not in favor of accelerationism, but a criticism of this idea that all we can do is slow the roll with a vote every now and then and throw our hands up.

  • dogsoahC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    As someone not from the USA: I guess I agree that, for the upcoming presidential election at least, voting centrist is the only viable option. But the generalized “vote centrist because it could he worse” is infuriating and makes me want to punch whomever made this. Just because they’re not actively anti-working class doesn’t mean they’re in any real way champions of the working class. They’re in the pocket of industrialists just like the right, and thus will never meaningfully challenge the status quo.

  • TrippyFocus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Edit: The US presidential election is not based on popular vote so if you live outside of the ~5-6 swing states that decide the election you can go ahead and vote for a candidate that fits your beliefs even if it’s 3rd party, there’s no argument not to. Continuing to vote for the lesser evil when it’s not needed just means they can take your vote for granted.

    Make sure to pay attention to local/state elections too, those who often affect your life even more. As always voting is only a small part in how we affect change, find local organizations and agitate for change that way.

    • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Just be careful and look well at the data, states that non-election forcasting nerds would consider not be swing states still have a >10% chance of going the other way according to the best statistical models.

      So if you live in: Texas, Ohio, South and North Carolina ®, or New Mexico, Colorado, Oregon, Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire (D)

      You still live in a state that has a statistically significant chance of going either way >10%.

      However, if you live in Washington DC, or Wyoming, by all means…

    • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      For the record, if you want to change the fact that the US president is not elected by popular vote, depending on your state there’s an initiative called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact), where a bunch of states are setting up trigger laws so that when enough states with enough electoral college votes have signed it into law, each of those states will vote for the candidate who won the popular vote.

    • takeda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It is BS even if you are in the “safe” states you should not do that.

      This is not really a protest and you don’t make any statement that anyone will care about.

      What you should do that would actually have an impact is to push your local officials to switch to Ranked Choice Voting (like it was done in Alaska and Maine)

      Also make sure your state passes this compact:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I am in favor of strategic voting but regardless of your opinion on this topic we need to be clear eyed that this election will not solve the US’s many very serious problems, regardless of its outcome.

    That can only be achieved by on the ground organizing. So I hope that all of the people who spend so much energy arguing about this topic are out there building local political coalitions that can force our representatives to do what is needed. That’s the only way real change will happen.

    • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      But one side will create many more problems, perscute many more people, and lead to many more unnecessary deaths. While the other would atleast keep the status quo, and try to marginally improve things.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I don’t disagree but the status quo is quite bad, and will remain bad with small incremental improvements. So yes, vote for harm reduction but that is the bare minimum. Find like-minded orgs in your area and get involved. I think one reason the US is in such a sorry state today is that most people think voting is the beginning and end of their involvement in democracy. I felt this way for most of my life but gradually I realized that no matter how good the intentions of the person you vote into office, the system will force them to stay within the bounds outlined by the powers that be and their interests. That’s why we need to build an equal or greater mass movement to demand leaders fight back. Obama spoke of this when he was in office but I didn’t quite understand what he meant at the time.

        • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Mostly agree, but as someone disabled and unable to work, so fully reliant on the state for survival, I find minimising voting / both sides are evil rhetoric is terrifying.

          It takes one very good election for the GOP, for me to become homeless, due to their proposes benefit cuts, and if I’m homeless I die. I’m severely immunodeficient and bedridden.

          • scarabine@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah, voting is something that gets completely recharacterized when you think about it through the lens of harm reduction vs ideal broadcasting. (And, bluntly, for anyone reading this who might disagree: Since votes are private, they don’t cast ideals anyway.)

          • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Damn that’s scary. Best of luck to you. But I still think your interests are best defended by grass-roots organizing. Of course my whole point is that this strategy is completely compatible with voting, so we need to do that as well.

    • banner80@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think that’s the point of the chart. Your elected officials are not going to magically know what you want and bend over backwards to give it to you. If you are serious about a topic, it’s on you to join the political process and have your points heard. That’s what they mean by “we work to find a fair balance.” The work part is a lot of political arguing back and forth. If you want to have influence, you have to make an informed argument for why what you want is better than what we have, and you have to square off with the group on the other side that thinks they have a better solution and will make their case too.

      The Democrats don’t guarantee you that the compromise will break your way. The guarantee is that you do get a voice if you choose to participate in the political process, which is not something that’s on offer with the other party.

      And to those that are annoyed by the Dems due to lack of progress or any other reason, we get it. Don’t think I’m not annoyed too. The difference between you and me is not that I don’t find the Dems disappointing, the difference is that I understand I would be disappointed with anyone because politics are about negotiation and compromise, not about having our whims fulfilled.

      We have to take the wins we can get, and then work on pushing for the next thing. Objectively, Biden has been one of the most progressive and effective presidents in history, let alone my lifetime. One of the first things he did within days of taking Office was move the min wage of gov positions to $15/hr. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-sign-executive-order-raising-federal-contractors-minimum-wage-15-n1265427

      People forget how much he has done and how progressive he’s been compared to even Obama. People complain that Bernie got sidetracked, but Bernie’s movement is still in the conversation and pushed the Dems further left on a ton of things. That’s what discourse looks like, and if you want real change you have to get involved with the only party that is offering a path. That’s why Bernie and AOC caucus with the Dems, because being sour about what you want solves nothing, but getting involved is a real path.

      Vote for the only party that offers discourse and power to change things, and then get your voice in the mix as much as you’d like. Bernie is not sour, he is in the Senate getting things done, he is campaigning influencing the conversation, and he is constantly in the media making his points. A voice from within the system is way more powerful than one sitting on the sidelines pouting. Vote, and then tell your Officials what you want.

      • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        easy to forget when everything he did get accomplished never trickled down to most US citizens but certainly helped the elites

        • banner80@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          How did raising the min wage to $15/hr help the elites? Defending medicare, strengthening bank regulations, coming after junk fees, fighting the GOP on student loan forgiveness… or standing with unions on the picket line, and so forth. I bet I could write a list of 200 things he’s done in less than 4 years that were intended to help American workers, while I’d be surprised if anyone can come up with a list of a dozen things he did that helped only the rich and corporations.

          And if anyone is wondering if I’m exaggerating about “200 things,” you should consider how much the media’s low-effort coverage and Trump’s BS circus are keeping real stuff out of the news. Biden signed 52 executive orders in the first 100 days alone. A list of 200 things he’s done for regular people vs elites would be the highlights, not the full list.

          Here are his first 52 executive orders if you want to review his work: https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/politics/biden-executive-orders/index.html

          That massive list only gets you to April 2021.

          • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            did you read that list

            maybe one or two items on it might make a difference in US households maybe

            no healthcare, no raising of the minimum wage, nothing about women’s rights, no police reform minus the scrap about federal prisons, and these are just some things

            • banner80@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Perhaps the link is loading something different for you and me? Because just in the first 7 items I see:

              Raised the minimum wage Reverse draconian Trump policies on refugees and travelers Defended democracy by sanctioning Russia’s meddling Presidential commission to begin discussions to fix the SCOTUS Defended human rights by reversing bad Trump policies on the ICC New council on gender equality and equity Protect students from discrimination

              That’s just the first 7 items, of the list of 52 items covering only executive actions in the first 100 days. Keep reading just a few more points and you’ll see more defense of democracy, protection of minorities, improvements to the economy, etc. Again, I could be here all day talking about how Biden has done so much for people - if we include signed bills and Bully Pulpit work, it would take hundreds of items to cover even the highlights.

              Perhaps look into it a bit closer, here is a more complete list of 118 executive actions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_executive_actions_by_Joe_Biden

  • PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I often wonder who these are for. It makes no attempt to engage in an honest way with criticisms and hesitations that non-Democrat voters have so it doesn’t have any ability to persuade them. It also infantalizes the view points of both the republican opposition and anyone outside the two party system so it’s not helpful for self-critique for “centrists”. So as far as I can tell it’s just red meat aimed at Democrat supports to keep them all hopped up and believing that they are “the party of responsible governance” (in comparison to the Republicans) and therefore all criticism is invalid and everyone else is childish. Like, if this is supposed to be something else you really need a new way of engaging, because this “there is no alternative” shit is what turned me away from Democrats back in the Obama years.

  • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    If one side wants Fascism, and the other side wants Democracy, what kind of moron calls themselves a Centrist? What middle ground are you fucking standing on?