JFC this may be the most depressing thing I’ve ever read.
I feel similarly. The both sidesers won’t care though. They’ll just mumble something about genocide so they can pretend there’s no difference in the parties
Ah yes blame the people that won’t submit to tribalism and want to hold our politicians to a higher standard than “slightly less worse than the other guy” and feel smug in the knowledge that the people you’re defending, who have allowed all this to happen under their watch, have brought us to the point where our votes are completely meaningless. Good job, buddy. You got what you wanted.
You have two choices. There’s nothing anyone can do about that in the next 48 hours. If you refuse to vote for the “lesser evil” because of your “higher standards,” you end up with the greater evil. And in four years you might not get a choice at all.
Shove your standards up your ass and vote using logic instead of emotion.
Shove your standards up your ass and vote using logic instead of emotion
And that’s precisely why this country is so fucked. Neither party is accountable to the electorate because of people like you with this mentality. Both have contributed to the position we’re in now and have zero reason to actually fix anything because theyre both guaranteed to retain power. You’re just perpetuating the status quo with your faulty ‘logic’ of doing absolutely nothing other than attacking anyone who speaks out against this insanity and rewarding those who perpetuate it.
And in 3 days we will suddenly stop hearing from CmdrShepard42 about holding politicians accountable.
Based on what exactly?
Based on the fact that for some reason it is only once every 4 years, around October, that there appears to be an interest in a 3rd party from Americans…
Neither party is accountable to the electorate because of people like you with this mentality.
Wrong. We’re here because the electoral college gives Wyoming voters 400% more weight than California voters; because of gerrymandering and the cap on the number of representatives in the House; and because of a FPTP system that always results in two-party rule. My “mentality” isn’t going to magically change that.
Both … have zero reason to actually fix anything because theyre [sic] both guaranteed to retain power.
Ok, so yet again you can’t compare two things that are the same to make a decision. You have to use different criteria in order to tip the scale one way or the other.
doing absolutely nothing other than attacking anyone who speaks out against this insanity and rewarding those who perpetuate it.
And you think your emotional pleas on the internet are somehow making a difference? You think not voting will send some sort of message?
You have no strategy beyond making angry comments. I, on the other hand, casted my vote for ranked choice voting in my state, which will help third party candidates have a greater chance of winning state elections. I voted previously for a new method of dividing districts that avoids gerrymandering by any one party, and it passed. And I voted for the presidential candidate who believes in science and reality over the one who thinks windmills cause cancer. I’m making my vote count for the critical issues that underly the problems we face. I don’t get my way on every single issue, but that’s how democracy works.
If you want to throw away your vote, that’s your choice. But don’t act like it’s some morally superior act when in reality you’re not making any difference and you’ll just end up with the worst outcome instead of the less desirable outcome.
Just because your tribe is less popular doesn’t absolve it of its thought prevention. You decide everything bad and then just follow the other sheep to the slaughter
A really overthought “solution” that could’ve only come from a room of politicians. I mean, your made-up “equity election” didn’t work, so you have another set of elected officials further remove selection of this powerful, even then, position from the people instead of just failing back to the popular count. Fucking lawyers.
deleted by creator
Absolutely horrifying. And very, very plausible.
The new House isn’t sworn in until January 3… By the time we get to January 6, the electors are supposed to have voted. December 11 is the deadline for appointing electors, December 25 the deadline for voting. Mike Johnson will still be in charge on both of those days.
Since we’re not playing by the rules anymore, could the new house speaker (assuming Democratic majority) just extend/accept things on Jan 3rd?
Since we’ll know that sooner they would just need to signal that they intend to accept late appointments and voting.
I suppose that too would go to the Supreme Court, but it seems worth trying.
