let’s gooo

    • jennwiththesea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      121
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      So help them vote. Volunteer with efforts to get out the youth vote. Push for universal mail in voting where you are, or at least early voting. Help get politicians and initiatives on the ballot that they actually care about.

      Shaming and complaining about the demographic you want to reach accomplishes nothing.

      • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        54
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Obligatory-

        If you are a legal resident of Wisconsin, and are not currently serving time or on paper, you can register to vote entirely online if you want, and you can request absentee ballots for all elections for the entire year (no reason needed, but necessary annual renewal, it’s my New Year’s resolution every year because it’s so easy to accomplish. entirely free of charge ofc.).

        Just go to www.myvote.wi.gov to register, request absentee ballots, check your registration, or find your polling place. If you have any difficulty with your registration, you can find your local rep and contact them directly.

        Please vote. Please vote for your own wellbeing. Please.

        Edits to fix link redirect per convo below

        • flames5123@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          This is why I love Washington. Everyone has an OPT OUT absentee ballot. Everyone gets one at your address. Every election. All the time. The same address that’s on your ID. It’s amazing.

            • callyral [he/they]@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              i see what happened.

              you typed [www.myvote.wi.gov](www.myvote.wi.gov) in your comment’s source. for it to register as a URL you have to put https before the link inside the parentheses: [www.myvote.wi.gov](https://www.myvote.wi.gov).

              for me it goes to https://pawb.social/post/www.myvote.wi.gov (my instance, error: couldnt_find_post)

              in your comment’s source it is written [www.myvote.wi.gov](www.myvote.wi.gov), which shouldn’t behave like this. looks like a lemmy bug maybe?

              i have two theories:

              1. the bug is related to typing a link directly, as in pasting a link in the comment, like example.com (i typed it without brackets for a name or parentheses for a URL)

              or

              2. it’s related to links explicitly starting with www, such as what you linked.

              for testing purposes:

              www.myvote.wi.gov

              www.myvote.wi.gov

              you can report lemmy issues at https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues. i searched on there to see if it was already reported but couldn’t find anything, though if you want to i’d recommend searching.

              • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                10 months ago

                Hey thanks, I changed it and that did the trick.

                I guess it makes sense that would be a thing. I’m so used to everything accommodating for that lack, though lol

        • moitoi@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          It doesn’t work. Every swiss citizen older than 18 receives them at home. The younger generation doesn’t vote.

          I’m older now and the older I’m the more people of my age around me vote. It’s depressing. I try each time to make the younger vote but it’s not working. And, I didn’t miss one. Next one is the 3rd March. I will try again.

          Don’t take me wrong if I convince if just one younger person, it’s a win.

      • GlendatheGayWitch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        10 months ago

        I hope things will change, but we still have abysmal turnout. TX started allowing early voting over 40 years ago and we still struggle to get people to the polls. Early voting is a span of 2 weeks, where in the 1st week, polls are required to be open for at least 9 hours and can be open from 6 AM to 10 PM on the weekday and shortened hours on the weekend, and in the 2nd week, polls are required to be open at least 12 hours a day and typically have the same hours as election day. Yet we still have virtually no lines through all early voting and a massive line on election day.

        It doesn’t help that the news only bangs the final day of voting into peoples’ heads.

        • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Many Republicans vote exactly on election day because they are being fed lies that early voting and mail in voting are riddled with fraud.

          • GlendatheGayWitch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            That explains a few people, but doesn’t explain why everyone else hasn’t been utilizing the early voting system for the 40 years prior to 2020. TX cities are pretty blue and their early voting lines are always very short.

      • Resonosity@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’ve been helping my fellow zoomers by figuring out what their townships/town wards/city districts are, then what their local/state/federal legislative/executive/judicial districts are, then who’s running for what position, then where to vote and (primaries and generals).

        Information is power!

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      But both sides are the same or my vote is worthless or it’s too hard to vote or something

        • Welt@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          In Australia it’s always on a Saturday, and it’s compulsory to vote. Works OK for us.

          • Oderus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            In Canada, we get mail in voting, advanced voting and voting stations are everywhere. I’ve never had to wait more than 5 mins to vote and the closet voting station is a 2 min drive from my house. They’re also open late and most employers give us time off to vote. Not sure if there’s a law for that but voting here is easy af yet some people still don’t bother.

        • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Which, while a good idea, still screws over the working class that don’t get federal holidays off. In fact in many industries they are mandatory work days because of the increased business.

          State and federal opt-out mail ballots for all I say.

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        if you think both parties are the same you’re living in a fkn alternate reality. Only one part is seeking to end democracy in America and set up reeducation camps

    • Machinist3359@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yes, but political engagement can’t revolve around voting.

      It’s shit. You have to navigate a beurocracy and don’t even always have choices down the ballot. And when you do, you often have no idea who the candidates are beyond some half baked Facebook page. It’s also a huge burnout pit. Put months of stress into a binary outcome you can barely control. And even that is if you’re engaged in canvassing and etc, otherwise it’s just a chore.

      Youth need to be mobilized in long term action projects. Something like Encode Justice for example, where they make civic engagement a part of their daily life, is far superior. It’s also harder, but that comes with doing something actually impactful.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Things can change, though. California voted for an open primary in 1996 (think that was the year) and now you can participate in either one. Prior to that, you could only vote in the primary for the party you registered with.

        • nybble41@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Open primaries invite strategic voters to sabotage the party they want to lose rather than supporting the candidate they want to win.

          Of course you can still do that with closed primaries—you just have to register as the party you want to vote for in the primaries, ignoring your own preferences. Nothing forces you to vote for your registered party in the general election. It’s slightly more involved this way since you would need to change your registration more frequently, and commit to it earlier, but that isn’t much of a hurdle.

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    124
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Unless all these Gen Z kids actually fucking VOTE it won’t matter, because Boomers fucking do.

    Oh, you think the choices are trash? Well fucking vote in the primaries then. Get involved at a local level, and start promoting candidates that represent you. Don’t just bitch and moan that the choice is between a codger and senile draft-dodger.

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      With the exception of millennials, who were born between 1981 and 1996, Gen Z adults are notably less likely than those in other generations to identify as conservative.

      Or in simpler terms, both Millennials and Gen Z are equally less likely than those in other generations to identify as conservative.

      • zurohki@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        53
        ·
        10 months ago

        It turns out that people don’t become more conservative as they age, they become more conservative as they gain wealth. Millennials and Gen Z aren’t.

        • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Dude it’s plainly obvious, at least in my lived experience trying to reach 40. The Republicans I know who “became” republican all either

          1. Moved up in class (perceived or real)
          2. Became religious
          3. Legitimately has a mental illness

          I am not saying this as a dig, and I am not saying all Republicans etc etc just the people who weren’t and then CHANGED THEIR MIND.

          • Blue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            religious

            Mental illness

            You repeated the same thing twice.

          • bedrooms@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I’m starting to move up my career ladder somehow, and I feel this. It’s very easy to be selfish and vote for less tax, taking advantage of the young and poor etc. Well, I mean, people other than me grab easy money, around my circle. (And when they justify themselves, I feel they show anger in order to warn me from questioning the morality further.

            What’s making me insist to be on the progressive (?) or socialist side (which I believe is the right thing to do) is maybe I’ve had enough anger towards the ruling class while I was younger. Or I read enough reddit / fediverse posts from the working class.

            • Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              What’s more important than the absolute number of your taxes is what they’re being spent on.

              I personally like having a nice community to live in, my shit not being stolen, my family not getting mugged, etc. And that means investing in communities so they can be better, so then the people living there will get better jobs, and we all grow our economy and have nice places to live.

              If one party is promising slightly lower taxes, but they want to spend those on militarizing the police and book banning committees, you’re not really getting much in return for your tax investment.

          • stoly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            My experience mirrors yours. Those who are after material wealth in any context tend to be conservative and define themselves by their perceived successes more than by their personalities. Such people will fill that void with religion.

      • J12@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Get on board GenX. We’re the future and the soon to be majority, so you might as well join the club. We promise we’ll treat you better than the boomers treated you.

        • Sprokes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          10 months ago

          The issue is that if Republicans win they will make sure they will win every election from now on. They already started doing it (vote suppression for the black and Latinos for example).

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Gen X will never be the majority, Millenials are greater in number. And the older ones will be 50 by the time the boomers disappear from power.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because people are already jumping to conclusions without reading the article. Here is the core of the survey data. Identifying as Republican went from 32% in the Boomer Generation to 21% in Gen Z. Identifying as LGBTQ+ went from 4% with Boomers to 28% with Gen Z.

      The conclusion I would have jumped to is that the percentage of Gen Z who identified as LGBTQ+ would be greater than that who identified as Republican. So it seems I don’t actually need to read it. 😜

  • cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    Once the hateful boomers die out, the republican party will be finished. They know this and is why they have been focusing on voter suppression so much.

    • Welt@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      They’re more powerful and influential than you think - they’re not going anywhere. They might change their policies to suit the times (remember Lincoln was a Republican) but the so-called “Grand Old Party” ain’t going nowhere unfortunately.

    • FoxBJK@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      10 months ago

      I remember seeing this comment on Digg while people speculated that W would be the last republican president elected for a generation.

      • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        10 months ago

        To be fair, he didn’t win his first election by getting the most votes, and neither did Trump.

        The Republicans realized during the Reagan administration that they would soon be unable to win the presidency with a majority of votes and took many steps to undermine the Democratic process. Voter suppression, purges, intimidation, voter ID laws, all of that began with Reagan.

        Bush the elder was the last to win a “democratic” victory. If it weren’t for 9/11, Bush wouldn’t have been able to win his second election either. That fact always blows my mind. Like people rallied around the incompetent fool who managed to ignore warnings and let a terrorist strike happen only to then go on and invade the wrong country multiple times and spend trillions of dollars on nothing.

        • FoxBJK@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          10 months ago

          I don’t disagree. I’m just calling out the whole “things will change when conservatives start dying off” trope because people have been banking on that for 20 years.

        • pigup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          " ya don’t change horses midstream 🤠" was a literal campaign ad phrase back then I remember

          Boomers have a lot of lead accumulated in their brains, not entirely their fault

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            That was so dumb. We literally had a President die in office during the biggest war humanity has ever seen, and we still won. Not only that, but Truman was kept out of the loop on a lot of things (“What’s the Manhattan Project all about?”).

      • Diplomjodler@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        If the US president got elected by getting the most votes, there wouldn’t have been a Republican since Bush senior. I really don’t understand why electoral reform is not higher on the political agenda in the US.

        • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          Having it based purely on a popular vote will still wind up with a 2 party system. Ranked voting needs to be implemented. All of the benefits of a popular vote, with actual checks and balances to elevate 3rd parties.

        • Lad@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          The Democratic party and Republican party are united in their opposition to electoral reform because they both benefit the most from it.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          This was the deal with the devil that people in the North made with people in the South to convince people in the South to join them in a government specifically set up to defy the British. The US as a democracy has always failed because it was designed to give ultimate executive power to the states rather than to the people.

          • Clent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            That’s right wing spin.

            Only the politically ignorant believe it.

            • I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              10 months ago

              Lol. No. Only the politically ignorant think that the DNC is anything but a power hungry juggernaut, set on choosing candidates based on their own agenda regardless of the will of the people. They don’t even really seem to care if their candidate gets elected.

              I really don’t understand how more of a fuss wasn’t made when they cheated Bernie out of a fair shot, were sued by donors and used the defense “We were so blatantly favoring our favorite that anyone who thought we were being impartial wasn’t paying attention and deserved to be swindled out of their money! Yes, we broke rules to get Sanders out of the running, but we were very obvious about it and they were our own rules and we can break them if we want, so get fucked.” And the court was like… “Yeah… sounds good.”

              https://observer.com/2017/08/court-admits-dnc-and-debbie-wasserman-schulz-rigged-primaries-against-sanders/

              • Clent@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                10 months ago

                You’re still hurting over Bernie. That’s cute.

                Politically that was a long time ago and you’re still holding a grudge over it. This is why the Democrats lose.

                Many on the left needs to be placated with something new every election cycle while the right votes without any hesitation.

          • stoly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            The DNC would actually benefit here because the popular vote would always bring in a Democrat. It’s the small, red states that will never let change happen because Wyoming enjoys having more direct representation than California.

            • SeaJ@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              The PEOPLE would benefit since they are the ones doing the voting, not the states. It is just as ridiculous that Republicans in California have little say in the presidency as Democrats in Wyoming.

              • nybble41@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                It is just as ridiculous that Republicans in California have little say in the presidency as Democrats in Wyoming.

                The Republicans in California have a better chance of seeing a Republican president with the electoral college than they would with a national popular vote, even if their particular votes carry less weight. In a sense that gives them more representation in the end, not less—their voices are ignored but they get what they wanted anyway.

          • SeaJ@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Or because it would take a constitutional amendment. The only way around that would be making the electoral college irrelevant via the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact which has largely only been signed by democratic leaning states. In fact, of the states that have passed it, zero have been right leaning.

            There are certainly shitty corporate democrats that do fall into your category but to say the party as a whole is that way is ignorant.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            That must be why Republican-dominated states have passed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. /s

      • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah this has been a thing forever. DeSantis was the strong culture war candidate too and… yeah. Trump has a clear role in culture war but he doesn’t seem to care personally, he flip flops all the time on many culture war issues depending on what is convenient or funny to say in the moment.

        • Clent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          It’s almost like he’s playing both sides of many issues; as a conman does and as the mark allows.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s important to remember that collapse doesn’t happen overnight, and then suddenly it does. It takes a great deal of times for cracks to form and a structure to fall, but once it goes, it goes.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      10 months ago

      There are still plenty of ignorant and angry Gen X and Millenials. I agree that the GOP is finished, and it’s only a matter of time. There will always be stupid people to pick up their mantle, however.

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Plenty ignorant Gen Z while we’re on the top, ain’t nothing special about y’all. Vote democrat or you’re just helping Trump turn America fascists and then the reeducation camps will start

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m Gen X, but thanks. I work with university students and trust me that everyone else is a dinosaur.

    • daemoz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Tdont kid yourself, look at the numbers, Trump is propped up by gen x. The demographic loudest against biden are gunna be around a long time.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        demographic loudest against biden

        And add in the “Biden = genocide but I have no alternative to offer so I guess I want Trump to win” crowd and you can be in trouble.

        • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          As terrible as Biden’s stance on the Israel/Palestine conflict is, he’s still the lesser of two evils. Another Trump presidency would not spell good things for Palestinian civilians.

          • stoly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            And that’s my point. Trump CERTAINLY will be worse, but people have decided that they will let the greater of two evils in by default rather than work to bring in the lesser of the two.

            People who think that Biden is genocidal have seen nothing yet compared to Trump being in that role agian.

            • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              It’s like they forgot all of the pro-Israel moments of Donald Trump’s 4 years in office. But since October 7th 2023, people have actually started to receive an education in Israeli/Palestinian relations. Most people thought it started on October 7th 2023 and not, you know, 75 years before that.

              • stoly@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                10 months ago

                It is the first real conflict in a generation or so, there are probably many people who never thought of it before and are suddenly interested.

        • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          The fact that crowd exists is a scary reminder of the power of propaganda, advertising, and manipulation. It’s a clear and devastating example of using people’s values against them. It’s an entirely artificially created demographic. To people who didn’t get caught on that particular baited hook, it looks insane.

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

            The fundamentals of how to wage information/cognitive warfare should be part of public schools’ curriculum so our kids will recognize when its happening.

    • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      They nearly overrode the vote last time around. They faced no consequences and they’re very close to being in a position to do it again and make lasting changes to seize power forever. Nothing good is guaranteed.

      And they’re rewriting education including made up history to ensure that more kids are conservative in future generations. Things aren’t looking good.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        They faced no consequences

        Except the 200+ people who were convicted and are currently sitting in jail.

        And, as cynical as we might be, we have to remember that Trump’s various trials are not over yet.

        • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Ues. The pawns were convicted and the people with actual power faced no consequences. The ringleader could very well be elected president where he ignored the law consistently. His trials keep getting delayed and the corrupt judge he appointed keeps helping him. It’s very scary times.

      • proudblond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Hopefully the Democrats. No seriously, I hope the Dems become our more conservative party and we get a more progressive party. But… I’m not holding my breath, honestly. Feels like wishful thinking.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        A new party will pop up. The Federalist Party died out after Hamilton was shot and also the War of 1812. They fielded their last Presidential candidate in 1816 with 30.9% of the vote.

        Then the National Republican Party (different from the current Republican party) evolved out of the Democratic-Republican Party.

        Personally, I’d love it if Democrats became the right-most party by staying exactly as they are, and a new party breaks off of them or evolves out to their left.

        • nybble41@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Personally, I’d love it if Democrats became the right-most party by staying exactly as they are, and a new party breaks off of them or evolves out to their left.

          I’d say it’s more likely to go the other way, with the more moderate or right-leaning Democrats breaking off to form their own party and perhaps steal away the more moderate Republican voters. There are a lot of voters who would naturally align more closely with traditional Republican political views voting Democrat only because the Republican party has been taken over by a radical faction. Having laissez-faire fiscal conservatives and outright socialists in the same party isn’t really sustainable long-term; there are too many critical points of disagreement.

        • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Democrats aren’t exactly a healthy representation of moderation. They’re too authoritarian for me to want the other party to be the actually-socialist party. Socialist and libertarian would be a balance, but it requires a big chunk of the Democrat platform to burn alongside MAGA. Honestly actually-socialist and actually-libertarian would be the two parties we really need today.

          • Delta_V@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            actually-socialist and actually-libertarian would be the two parties we really need today

            they’re the same party

            • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Which one is that? I’m not sure you understand the difference if you think both can possibly be represented by the same party.

  • robocall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    10 months ago

    Republicans know this, and push culture war issues to drive certain voters out of their states/area.

  • Raz@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m LGBTQ…AND republican. Although that means something vastly different where I live, haha (I live in a kingdom).

      • Zloubida@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        In my republic (France), Republicans suck too. It looks like you’re right: cool Republicans only exist in monarchies.

        • CashewNut 🏴󠁢󠁥󠁧󠁿@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Isn’t everyone in The France republican? Do you have monarchist French that want to resurrect King Louis? Or do they want to crown Macarone the new King?

          P.S. I had an almond croissant earlier today and took a picture of some frozen snails.

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

            Almost everyone is Republican, but we also have a Republican Party, which isn’t more Republican than the others, this name makes zero sense. It’s the successor of the party of De Gaulle, but I’m quite sure De Gaulle wouldn’t like what this party became.

            There are a few monarchist movements, generally far-right-leaning, like the French Action. But they are very small and divided (there are two candidates for the throne, and different kinds of monarchies), so nobody takes them seriously.

            PS: croissants are good; snails aren’t.

            • CashewNut 🏴󠁢󠁥󠁧󠁿@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              De Gaulle

              He really hated the English - which is a bit rich considering we sheltered him during the war. He was proven right on the EU though. We did nothing but cause trouble while in, then left. Precisely what he predicted. :(

              PS: croissants are good; snails aren’t.

              A civilised French! A rare, but welcome, breed. I forgive you for Patay, Formigny, and Castillon. Joan of Arc was obviously suffering the Snail Madness and didn’t realise English rule was superior.

              • Zloubida@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                I don’t think De Gaulle hated the English, but he surely despised them. He despised almost everyone though, and maybe he despised the French more than anyone else, calling us “calves” or mocking our love for cheese, for example. Yeah, he was an asshole.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    10 months ago

    Wow, a news story that makes me think my kid could actually live in a better political climate than me in a few decades. I forgot what this feeling was like.

  • hereisoblivion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m a bit confused by this.

    Does this imply that the human race is drastically more sexually fluid than most species when allowed to be without oppression? Or that the culture gen z has grown up in helps cultivate a more fluid preference?

    I grew up in the 80s, so I’m trying to understand, but it’s tough meshing statements like this with my experiences.

    Please don’t misunderstand this post as disapproval. Just confusion.

        • _dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’ve got an older bro who is ambidextrous due to not being allowed to be left-handed in kindergarten (and beyond). He got held back due to “developmental” problems. I can’t believe the teachers and principal were so dumb that they couldn’t connect the dots as to what was really going on.

          • TheLowestStone@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            10 months ago

            I’m cross dominant. I do some things left handed, some things right handed, and a select few I can do with either. Elementary school was weird. My teachers couldn’t comprehend that I write with my right hand but use scissors with my left. For years I was forced to use right handed scissors held awkwardly in my left hand. To this day, I’m not particularly good with scissors.

            • evidences@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              I’m cross dominant but consider myself left handed mainly because I do the fine motor stuff writing, eating, etc. with my left hand. Out side of scissors I don’t think I’ve ever felt forced to use a hand that didn’t feel comfortable, stupid scissors.

        • zigmus64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          10 months ago

          Baseball (and sports in general) are wonderful man made examples of evolution and how selection pressure can force the expression of certain traits. About 25% of MLB players are left handed, versus about 10% in the general population.

          A similar thing has occurred in the NBA where the average height is about 6’6” (or 198.6cm for those opposed to Freedom Units), which is about 8 inches taller than the average American male.

          Doubtless, you can look at any top level professional sport league and find some physical trait (or set of traits) that is wholly disproportionate compared to the general population due to those traits providing some advantage(s) that is unique to that game.

          • LoraxEleven@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            That’s true… And what I was (jokingly) referencing…

            But, my Dad’s mother, my Granny…

            She was a natural Lefty…

            And musically inclined…

            Her Daddy slacked the strings on the family guitar before he left for work…

            She figured out how to tune that instrument…

            Those in her church, later, made fun of her for playing backwards chords, because she was a lefty. .

            She learned to play the other way, too… And she taught me both…

            There’s so many sides and nuances to every thought in our lives…

            It was a harmless joke, but it has roots in my reality…

            This shit is so often much deeper than we think…

            You made a fuckin hell of a statement, but it’s without context or understanding…

            I was just making an off-handed joke…

            There is a fucking shitload of lefties in baseball… Because it fucks with the righties when they’re batting…

            • Welt@lazysoci.al
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              When people use that many ellipses it makes it look like they haven’t made up their mind, so their opinions can be ignored.

              • poppy@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                10 months ago

                Oh I thought it was like a poem or something because of all the line breaks and ellipses. But it’s just a regular comment?

    • bus_factor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think it’s mostly that very few of them identify as Republican.

      But also, the less stigma around gender expression, the more kids will be open to explore theirs.

    • DirkMcCallahan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      10 months ago

      The best explanation I’ve heard is that it’s similar to the stats for left-handed people. Way back in the day, almost no one “identified” as being left-handed. But once the stigma against left-handedness was eliminated, the numbers went up.

      So in other words, yes, it’s a reflection of LGBTQ+ becoming more acceptable, particularly among Gen Z. There could be other factors, but that’s probably the main one.

      • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        28% seems huge, though. Are there any other animals like that? I’m kind of confused how it’s that high even with acceptance lol.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          10 months ago

          It’s mostly bisexuals. You know like Julius Caesar, Alexander of Macedon, and large swaths of people in cultures where same gender romance or sex is acceptable in certain circumstances so long as you also marry and have children.

          • PugJesus@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            10 months ago

            Julius Caesar, described by a contemporary as “Every woman’s man, and every man’s woman”

            We stan a bicon in this house

          • ripcord@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Is there data to back that claim up?

            Not arguing but also something I hadn’t heard before. That there has been an absolutely massive increase in # of people identifying as bi and that that is the majority of LGBTQ+

            • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              I can’t recall any off the top of my head and it’s definitely anecdotally been my experience as someone who came out about a decade ago and has been a geek about queer history for about that long. Like there are definitely more homosexuals and a lot more open trans people (but trans people are estimated at absolute highest to be 1% of the population, and more realistic high end estimates last I checked are .3%-.5%), but bi folks have been coming out of the woodwork.

        • drdiddlybadger@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          10 months ago

          We are the only animal with cultural locks on gender expression. If we didn’t have such hang ups about gender norms we would not really notice someone being LGBT. Paradoxically the more regressive and strict people are about gender roles the more people you have that don’t fit within those gender roles.

        • spaduf@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Theres long been a camp that argues the vast majority of people are bisexual (myself included). That’s also where pretty much all of the recent growth comes from. Interestingly, most of that comes from bisexual women, while bisexual men consistently self report at levels lower than gay men.

          • andros_rex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            There are lots of men who identify as straight but have sex with other men. So much so that medical literature often uses MSM as a category instead of gay. There’s an entire DL subculture among African American men.

            Anywhere you go you can download Grindr and find oodles of guys who are in heterosexual marriages. The stigma is pretty strong, they probably can’t even internally recognize themselves as somewhat bisexual.

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

              This is particularly relevant as it relates to how silly this topic and its reactions are. We absolutely KNOW that the current number is an undercount, and yet it’s still really hard for people to grasp that the percentage is that high.

          • Syrc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            I mean, sexuality is a spectrum. It’s statistically unlikely that a large part of the population is at the exact borders of the spectrum and not even slightly in between.

            Especially since afaik physical attraction is just a matter of appearance, and there’s very masculine women or very feminine men.

    • Carvex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I believe it’s your first option, acceptance for being yourself is the normal instead of a beating from your parents like pre 2000.

    • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It’s a confluence of factors. LGBTQIA+ is sort of a gender/sexuallity/ phenotype physicality solidarity alliance and the actual boundries has grown in scope since the 80’s.

      Like take for instance asexual people. Asexuallity became a part of the solidarity when people reached out over the internet and and started realizing that there were a lot of people who just don’t feel sexual attraction and that there are certain widely accepted forms of social coercion that revolve around pushing people towards sexual attraction. But asexuallity as a part of the LGBTQIA only really became a thing in the early 2000’s. Non-binary trans identities are much the same. A lot of people were feeling the way they did about themselves in isolation but they had no frame of reference to think that they were not just the odd person out.

      The other half is a society wide re-examination of compulsory heterosexuallity/cis gender hegemony. There are way more people out there who no longer define themselves by who they’ve chosen to have physical sexual experience with and now a lot more people are more frank about defining themselves by the range of people they are attracted to. Like if the majority of people artificially penalize a bi-person for choosing a same sex relationship a lot of people will just take the easier path and just narrow their choices or keep their liasons with the restricted choice secret and not assume the label.

      I before I came out as trans initially figured I didn’t count as trans because I both wasn’t physically transitioning and my industry is somewhat hostile to trans people so I was very closeted ao I figured the label only really belonged to the people brave enough to live out of the closet… But eventually someone found me and was like “No, it’s not aspirational. Even deep in the closet you are still trans.”

      This combination of destigmatization, solidarity messaging, the inclusion of whole other groups (like intersex people, gender minorities, asexuals) broadening the scope and outreach to the closeted means that more people generally self identify as LGBTQIA or queer.

      Animal kingdom wise we’re still less observably sexual fluid than other primates. Bisexuality is actually pretty ubiquitous particularly amongst male primates with it actually being the overwhelming norm in some species so chances are we are probably actually haven’t seen the curve level off from suppressive stigma.

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think most species are more fluid than you realize, and humans are just normal. Especially for apes that share a common ancestor with bonobos.

    • DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I would assume they are more honestly/aware of their preference.

      I am a gay dude, and I have had friends/coworkers who identified as straight say things like “Why does everyone need to label things? I am 100% straight, but sometimes on a road trip, you just wanna suck the other guy off. Both of us are still straight though”

      Every time I have heard thigns like this, it’s GenX, or older Millennial. Older than that, they don’t bring up “queer” things, younger than that, they just say that they are “mostly straight”, or “barely-bi”, or “up for whatever”.

    • Fudoshin ️🏳️‍🌈@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      drastically more sexually fluid than most species

      Have you heard about bonobos? They shag anyone for anything and they’re one of our closest relatives. Friends have mutual wanks. Enemies have makeup sex. Threesomes, foursomes. Horny bunch of fuckers.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      The 11% dip for the GOP makes sense. Their policies are just not in line with what young people value.

      That said, the +24% gain in LGBTQ+ identification is fascinating and I would love to know how nature, nurture, taboo, and oppression play impact that. This would be a really cool time to be in university and studying human sexuality and gender.

    • jackalope@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      LGBT as a category has been increased a lot over the years. Asexual or people who don’t feel they conform to super strict gender norms are all included as “queer” now. So I imagine it’s a combo of things, some people being trendy, some people being freer and not feeling the need to hide, some people who previously didn’t identify being included.

      Left handedness was persecuted and after it stopped being persecuted there was a massive rise in people who were left handed. But it plateaued and has remained pretty stable since then.

    • ReallyKinda@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      My (admittedly relatively hot) take as a younger millennial indoctrinated by the 2nd wave feminists (who weren’t huge on the third wave) is that what gender means has shifted. I didn’t experience myself as particularly gendered growing up in the 90s and early 00s and certainly wouldn’t consider it part of my inner essence. I don’t give a shit how strangers refer to me or whether they think I’m a dude or not. I found it to be a slightly annoying category imposed by everyone else. Something I needed to understand because it impacted how I was received by others, but not something that was core to my self-understanding. In school I studied the humanities which reaffirmed to me that gender was an annoying external category that put people in boxes—we didn’t want gay female CEOs, we wanted to get rid of gender altogether.

      I think gen Z actually has a similar thought but instead of doing away with the gender categories many have chosen, on an individual level, to make them their own a bit more in line with 3rd wave ‘boss bitch’ vibes. This still undermines the oppressive nature of the gender roles because it it kind of divorces gender from the societal gender role.

    • sethboy66@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      We are indeed more sexually fluid than most species and given it’s “most” and not “all”, this isn’t unprecedented. It’s also not a new phenomena, in Ancient Greek and early-mid Ancient Roman societies queerness was quite common. In fact homosexuality was so prevalent that that the Romans didn’t even have a word for heterosexual/homosexual; instead one was either dominant or submissive (e.g. giving or receiving) with the assumption being that most were bisexual and would take partners as they saw fit.

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

        There would still be a stigma around being the receptive partner. The idea being that a higher status man can penetrate lower status people (younger men, slaves, women). A high status man being penetrated by a lower status person would be worthy of mockery.

        Samurai were gay as fuck though. Sengoku period you could even be romantic with other dudes, women are for making babies. I have an 1940s (iirc) English translation of a book of 16th century gay samurai love stories - the guy who wrote the forward thought it was because “mongoloid” people look more feminine 😅

    • Crow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Putting sexuality in such a defined state is relatively new in human culture. So most often no one would have the worlds to talk about it or even know it could be classified differently.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Our closest related species gets it on so much in so many ways it is one STD away from extinction. It might be that we really are like this. Maybe the norm for humans was to have random homosexual and hetrosexual orgies everywhere. It was only because it became important to know who the daddy was that things changed? Or the sampling of the survey wasn’t great. You know groundbreaking or meaningless.

    • dbilitated@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      fingers crossed it means there’s five gen z Republicans and they don’t know how to vote

    • jak@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think about cultures that have a focus on same sex sexual contact- most people, if they had been born there would probably participate. If they’re born somewhere where it’s forbidden, most people don’t engage in it.

      Some people are hardwired about it in either direction, but the majority are more flexible

    • OpenStars@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      Some of it is a rejection of previous values - toxic masculinity and toxic femininity. Some of it may be standing with their peers even if it does not apply directly to them. Some of it is trendiness. Some doctors are even predatory, seeking to sell their extraordinarily expensive surgeries for tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Older, established trans communities in Europe even are shocked at how young we allow surgeries in the USA, before someone knows who they truly are.

      Mainly we just have an extremist society here, egged on in large part by our predatory clickbait media that always has to come up with something to say sell, so it ignores the >80% in the middle and focuses exclusively on the flashiest content it can find. And then kids hear that and wonder how they fit into it - ofc they never see the “middle ground”, b/c in the media it just isn’t there.

      Take a look also at how shockingly high rates of suicide and opioid and other drug use are. The younger generations are desperate to become anything else besides what boomers are telling them they must be: literal slaves to the corporate empires.:-(

  • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    Not buying it. Probably just scared of the well deserved ridicule received if they identify as Republican. We’ll see how the vote goes.

    • lingh0e@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      You’re dubious because why? Do you think there were only two options? Do you identify as republican or LGBTQ?

      • Cicraft@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        What they’re saying is it’s more embarrassing for a teen to come out as republican than LGBTQ+ (obviously depends on the area)

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      This is actually quite interesting. For me, answering a questionaire like this is frustrating because the true answer is much more nuanced than what the given options are and I feel like I know what they’re trying to ask but my honest answer is going to give them confusing results from which they’re going to pull incorrect conclusions from.

      For example: Politically I’m slightly right from centre but I’ve always voted left. I’m also non-straight but I don’t identify as LGBTQ (I literally had to look up the correct way to type that)

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’m also non-straight but I don’t identify as LGBTQ (I literally had to look up the correct way to type that)

        If you identify as non-straight then you’re identifying as LGBTQ. Don’t get hung up on the specific letters in the acronym, that sort of changes from year to year. You can pretty much sum it up to literally mean anything that isn’t straight which is what you said you are.

        • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          If you identify as non-straight then you’re identifying as LGBTQ.

          No I don’t. That’s the point; if this is asked on a questionaire my answer will be no. It’s irrelevant if other people want to label me like that - I don’t.

          • stoly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            It’s irrelevant if other people want to label me like that

            Correct. You get to label yourself and no person on Earth has a right to comment on that. You’re choosing not to and it’s unclear why or to what end.

            • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              …it’s unclear why or to what end.

              The abbreviation in question has negative cannotations in my mind and thus I don’t want to be accociated with it. I prefer the term sexual minority if I absolutely need to be put into a category.

              • stoly@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                10 months ago

                has negative cannotations in my mind

                I feel like you may have just demonstrated the importance of the study being reported here. The people responding affirmatively do not carry that burden.

                As a piece of advice: this is a “you” thing. Whatever you need to do to get there, learn to be ok with yourself and stop worrying about what others think of you.

                • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  My point is that people answer these kind of questionaires differently. Just like I may not check a box others might think I should have, some other person checks a box others might think they shouldn’t have. Just because one thinks of themselves as native american for example doesn’t mean others do. That nearly 30% LGBTQ rate indicates, to me atleast, that something like this is going on here aswell.

                  I don’t consider myself to be especially worried about what other people think of me. I don’t know what makes you feel like I do.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            You labeled yourself non-straight. That falls under LGBTQ.

            Edit: I’m not trying to force you to use the acronym, I’m just saying “non-straight” most definitely falls under it.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        non-straight but I don’t identify as LGBTQ

        This is pretty much what the “Q” part is. Queer in this context refers to not conforming to standard roles in some way or another.

      • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Weird that your response got downvoted, but that seems to be how things go on here. Weird, but not surprising. If you’re slightly right from center, you sound like a centrist Dem.

  • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    As it should be. FUCKING VOTE! And remember, by not voting for Biden, you are voting for Trump whether or not you actually cast a vote. ALL of the Trump supporters WILL show up on the day.

    • licherally@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Either way you’re voting for a Palestinian genocide and the continuation of neoliberal imperialism.

      Edit: the future is bleak either way, Biden has explicitly shown support for the continuation of support for Israel as well as the bombing campaign in Yemen and Syria. All this is to say that there is genuinely nothing we can do to help the middle east in this election.

      But sure, we can get a better minimum wage or whatever.

      • maxy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        But only one of the genocidal imperialists will peacefully step down in 2029.

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Grow up bro, we don’t care about your pet bleeding heart topic, either vote for Biden or be prepared to be persecuted in a Trumpian dictatorship.

    • Kentifer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      10 months ago

      No. You don’t get to tell me that I have to vote for Biden when he’s not doing anything to earn my vote. He’s allowing Israel to carry out a genocide. So he’s not actually less evil than Trump. You’re just upset because Trump’s shitty policies will impact you more than Biden’s shitty policies. Biden has the lower approval ratings than Trump did at this point. He has not earned a second term.

      How about the Dems run a candidate who isn’t dog shit? I vote for Dems as a form of harm reduction, but they aren’t reducing harm anymore. So what’s in it for me? Dems haven’t not done anything about the supreme court, student loans, or threats to democracy and they are largely supporting the actions of Israel. If I’m right, and this is a genocide (I am), then voting for anyone who supports it would be an evil act. They’re going to have to make some changes if they want to earn the votes of people who don’t want to see a genocide carried out on our watch with our bombs.

      That said, it would be a real problem if Trump won. So if that happens, I hope you’ll be willing to place the blame where it belongs: with the Democrats. They are the ones doing nothing to earn our votes. Biden isn’t even campaigning.

        • Kentifer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Okay. But Palestine still gonna be fucked. I get that you don’t care if Palestinians die. But I do. So I get to not vote for the guy currently enabling their genocide. “Trump would do it too” so you admit it’s bad? Demand better from your politicians you weakling.

          • ultranaut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            If you think Palestine is still fucked either way then choosing to empowerer Trump makes even less sense. I think it’s a fact that Trump will be far worse for Palestinians than Biden, but even if we assume they will both be just as terrible on this issue, Trump is also terrible on every issue. If your choice is terrible and completely terrible, logically you should go with terrible. The other choice is even worse.

            • Kentifer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              How could trump be worse?what is worse than arming the Israelies while they engage in genocide? Unless you don’t believe that’s what is happening. In which case,you have been misinformed. Genocide is genocide. Why am I the asshole here for not wanting to vote for someone who is enabling a genocide? Why isn’t Biden the asshole for enabling the genocide or not stepping down?

              • Not arming the Israeli’s and letting Iran try to start a war it cannot win, which would result in a domino effect of failed middle eastern states, tens of millions of deaths, and tens of millions of war refugees.

                Oh but by all means burn the fucking planet down and destroy democracy for 350,000,000 Americans because you want everyone to know how super sad you are over 25,000 avoidable deaths.

                • Kentifer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  The fuck? So just let Israel kill civilians. Cool. I was wrong. You’re not a psychopath. You’re someone who would have gone along with the Nazis.

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

                How could trump be worse?

                Trump (to black Americans) in 2016: What do you have to lose?

                You’re basically just spouting Trump talking points.

                Trump would obviously not only support Israel’s position he would sell them more weapons…wouldn’t care at all about the Palestinian human rights angle and he would allow Russia to walk into Ukraine and that’s just the “foreign relations” plan…domestically, he’s planning on setting up concentration camps for the homeless and undocumented.

                • Kentifer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  So he would do what Biden is doing but more… Justify voting for him however you want. Biden is just as supportive of Israel as Trump would be.

          • Zink@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Some might say it’s the weakling that can’t make the right decision to vote for the lesser evil even if they don’t like them.

            Like I said in the last reply, you get to vote however you like. But if you publicly share your choice, others are free to comment on it.

            • Kentifer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              There it is! The right decision! See and I think you’re making the wrong decision. Aren’t perspectives fun?

                • Kentifer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Letting genocide continue is the objectively wrong decision. So I have two objectively wrong decisions. What do?

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Of course nobody can tell you who you have to vote for.

        But regardless of your choice and your reasons, the math of the votes in our stupid system does mean that voting for anybody but Biden, including voting for nobody, helps Trump or his Republican replacement.

        If you don’t care about that, that’s fine. Some might argue that you SHOULD care, but that’s a different conversation. The voting decision is a private one that’s yours alone, but understanding how the choices affect the outcome is good for everybody.

        • Kentifer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          I do care about those things. But I also care about Biden not being president for different, equally valid, equally moral, reasons. Also for pettiness sake, he fucking said he’d be a one term president before he ran in 2020 and we should fucking hold him to that but no one fucking remembers it. I cannot bring myself to vote for a man who has said and done the things he had said and done. So if I care about those things as I “should” and if I also care about doing something about the runaway supreme court and not arming a genocidal right wing government (just to name a couple of my objections to Biden’s presidency), who do I vote for? Do I just give Biden another 4 years because the other guy sucks? Even though I know that it means that he will allow a genocide to be carried out and join wars to defend that genocide which will lead to untold deaths?

          Like, even in your comment, while you tell me it’s a personal decision, you’re still laying it on a bit thick and its clear what you think I should do with my vote.

          • Zink@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Since we’re talking about the general election, I’m looking at it in a pragmatic cause and effect way. We ARE going to get either the R or D nominee at the end of the election. If you literally do not care who gets elected, and you morally can’t throw support behind either, then a third party or non-vote is the right choice for you.

            And while I’m not really trying to hide that I would 100% vote against Trump if he’s the nominee, I’m trying to phrase this all in a way that is very neutral. I’ve gone out of my way to not say you’re a fool or that you’re throwing away your vote. Like I said above, if they are literally the same to you, then voting for neither is the correct choice to represent your views.

            When it comes to my personal views and voting decision, I’m not a Biden fan, but the difference between the conservative status quo Democrats we’ve been offered lately, and the MAGA controlled Republican Party, is so great in my eyes that I have no question about voting against Trump regardless of how exciting or lame the Democrat is. This isn’t how I want it to be. The two party death grip is the result of how our elections are structured. Changing that system is the dream, but we need the two parties to implement it, so yeah.

            I feel like the folks in the good timeline got Bernie in 2016 and saw some of the benefits people in other developed countries enjoy.

          • ultranaut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Do I just give Biden another 4 years because the other guy sucks?

            Yes. The choice is one or the other so you pick the least bad option. You’re not voting on whether or not to do a genocide, that’s not what this election is deciding. If you genuinely care about the Supreme Court, it’s fucked up because of Trump and if he wins he will stack it even further. And do you really think Trump is going to sell fewer weapons to murderous right wing governments than Biden will? Again, the choice is one or the other so you either vote for Biden or you are serving to empower Trump. You don’t have to love Biden or feel good about voting for him, but please recognize that an even worse scenario will unfold if Trump wins.

            • Kentifer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              No. That is a false dichotomy, as I have said to literally everyone else who has tried to use that argument. There are other options here. The DNC’s and/or Joe Biden’s unwillingness to explore those options doesn’t make them not options. It just means we need to push them harder. Your unwillingness to do so does not mean that the options don’t exist. I am not required to subscribe to your way of viewing politics.

              • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                We live in a two party system. There are two candidates who have a real chance to win the presidential election. This has been true for the entire history of US politics. This is not a way of viewing politics, it’s historical fact. Alternate facts aren’t an opinion, they’re lies.

                • Kentifer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  And I’m saying if Dems want to win, they need to run a different guy. That’s not even me, its the polls.

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        okay, then welcome your next dictator Donald Trump and all that implies (Gilead like conditions, rescending civil and gender rights, requiring Christian worship or prison/execution, an end to all journalism and only Trumpian little red books where you pledge allegiance to him every day or get reported to the police)

        • Kentifer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          And I will thank dems for running centrists while Gilead kills me for a trans queer person. Dems aren’t helping prevent Gilead as much as you think.

      • fosho@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think it’s pretty obvious where the blame would be if Trump wins: the stupid folks who refused to vote out of principle. If it was possible that neither could win then your strategy could make sense. But there are ONLY 2 OUTCOMES. Requiring dems to earn your vote is unfortunately meaningless when the only other option is FAR WORSE YOU CRETIN OF INANE CONCLUSIONS.

        • Kentifer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s simply not true. Biden has the option to step down and let a Democrat who isn’t dog shit run in his place. He and the DNC are choosing not to do so. The election is months away. He can still back out if he wants. It is not Trump or Biden unless Dems refuse to listen to voters.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Talk about unrealistic.

            Has an incumbent ever just bowed out due to pressure from the fringe?

            Do you think a new, unknown candidate could drop into the race and have any chance against the right-wing cult that will 100% turn up to vote?

            • Kentifer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              You’re inability to imagine a scenario does not make it impossible. You gave me a false dichotomy, I gave you an explanation of why it was false. You don’t have to like it. Nobody does. But they would have months to campaign. The primaries aren’t even over yet, so it wouldn’t theoretically cost then anything. Dems just need to do it. They’ve had since October. They’re the ones making the choice here. They could make a different one.

              But they won’t. Because they care more about making sure the “right people” have power than representing their constituents or even doing what’s right. This isn’t the first time and it won’t be the last.

              • nomous@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                It’s called being realistic my dude. If you want further left politicians and policies, organize and turn out the vote. If you don’t you get the most milquetoast people-pleasing centrist democrat ever because the DNC is trying to placate as many people as they can.

                Have you seen what the right wing has done over the last decade or so with the Tea Party morphing into the Freedom Caucus? There are right wing groups showing up to school board meetings and running for city councils all across the country. They’ve mobilized and are going out and taking what they want and now the formerly “mainstream” Republicans are completely beholden to them and afraid of being primaried in the next off-year election.

                The left needs to do the same thing over the next decade or two (or three), that’s the only way we can actually win long term.

      • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        That said, it would be a real problem if Trump won. So if that happens, I hope you’ll be willing to place the blame where it belongs: with the Democrats. They are the ones doing nothing to earn our votes. Biden isn’t even campaigning.

        Biden is governing. He’s doing the job he was elected to do. Perhaps that’s enough to earn some votes? Or are votes only earnt by rallies and advertisements?

        In any case, it’s completely silly to blame the Democrats for losing if you don’t vote for them yourself. If you prefer Democrats over republicans, then you have to vote for them. Even though they aren’t perfect. If you don’t vote, then it is totally unreasonable to blame anyone else for getting an undesired outcome. Not voting implies that you have no preference.

        (And yet again, this is another case where ‘ranked choice’ voting / preferential / instant-runoff would make this whole situation a lot easier. USA could really use some serious electoral reform.)

        • Kentifer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          I don’t currently prefer democrats over Republicans. I think they are equally harmful in different ways. What do I do? I agree that Republicans are wrong on everything, but Dems are wrong on enough things, and majorly so, that I don’t think that they can be reformed. RCV is a pipe dream for the US at large. Especially with dems in positions of power. They haven’t historically been willing to give up power once they have it.

          • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Vote however you want. It’s your choice. If you prefer Republicans, then vote for them. I’m just saying that if you choose not to vote for Democrats, it’s silly to then go on to blame the Democrats for Trump being in power. ‘Blame’ implies that you are unhappy with the outcome, but it is effectively an outcome that you yourself chose with your vote.

            If you don’t want Trump to win, then you should choose to vote against him. If you don’t, you yourself are the one to blame. (That said, if you are happy to have that demented tyrant as your president, then go ahead and vote for him. It’s your choice.)

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

              If Dems need my vote to win, then they need to run a candidate that doesn’t support genocide in Palestine. If they can’t or won’t do that, then they are forfeiting my vote. If they do that and lose, then they are the one’s “at fault” for losing.

              • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                More Palestinians will die under Trump. The only logical choice is to choose the candidate whose election will result in fewer deaths.

                • Kentifer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Palestinians are dying under Biden right now. The logical choice is to try to get him to step down.

          • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I don’t currently prefer democrats over Republicans. I think they are equally harmful in different ways. What do I do? I agree that Republicans are wrong on everything, but Dems are wrong on enough things, and majorly so, that I don’t think that they can be reformed.

            Honestly? You grow up and read some books. Start with any of Bernie’s books. As you read, try and answer why Bernie, the most popular and longest serving third party politician in history, ran for president by seeking the Democratic nomination instead of running as an independent.

            The answer is that the DNC can be changed and has shifted significantly to the left in the last eight years, and will continue to do so. However if you idiotically allow Trump to win the presidency, it will likely be the last presidential election you ever get to vote. The DNC might be made illegal.

            The choice is hope for the future or no hope for the future.

            • Kentifer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              And Bernie failed to make any headway because the private club shut him out. How about you grow up and stop making excuses for voting for an old man who aids and abets genocide?

      • licherally@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Man it’s crazy how these people think they can instill some false duty onto any leftist to “do the right thing” without actually weighing each of the choices carefully. They just see a D next to someone’s name and think they must be the good guy, regardless of what they say.

        Did we all forget about the kids in cages on the border? Or the lack of free healthcare/college? Did we forget about the union busting? Biden is not a good guy, he’s just barely better than Trump. He’s certainly better at hiding the heinous shit from everyone.

        But yeah man, were all bad people and unamerican for wanting a better choice and hating our hand I guess?

          • licherally@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Explain to me how being reluctant to vote for one of two presidential candidates due to their policies and global politics is immature. Am I supposed to just say “well millions will die either way but at least sleepy Joe relieved some student debt?”

            What’s impractical is running a country off of the lesser of two evils vote.

  • 1ostA5tro6yne@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    sees headine oh, that’s good news!

    sees source oh it’s gay fox, which means it’s probably sensationalized to the point that the headline is a lie, because that’s what they do over there.