• 0 Posts
  • 54 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle













  • Y’all? Excuse me sir/madam, but it’s y’all that needs to cut it out with the rhetoric.

    The level of effort to cast a vote, even in states with aggressive voter suppression, is still lower than the impact that the next 4-6 years of policy will have. Every state has options for mail voting or early voting.

    You’d have a hard time convincing me that someone who intends to vote would decide not to unless they’re simply too lazy to be bothered. If mild shaming encourages even a single person to exercise their right to vote, it’s worth doing.

    In fact, I’d even go so far as to say that it’s people like you coming out here and coddling people with your sYsTeMiC iSsUeS that is enabling people to consider voting and instead think, “hmm, do I want to deal with the systemic voter suppression issue or should I just skip voting this time? Yeah, I don’t want to wait in a line or cast my vote early, so best to just sit this one out and complain about the outcome.”

    It’s not victim blaming, it’s reminding people that they have a CIVIC DUTY to vote, just like registering for the draft or getting called for jury duty.





  • Isn’t that the tough bit about American Exceptionalism? Americans can’t ALL be exceptional (by definition) and the messaging about how a rising tide lifts all boats simply doesn’t translate to most people.

    Tbf, Americans tend to be more than happy to work together (in short bursts) during moments of national crisis, but when everything is moving along normally policy debates become unnecessarily contentious.



  • Yes, this is not uncommon in US politics.

    Here’s what Wikipedia has to say about it:

    In U.S. politics, the period between (presidential and congressional) elections in November and the inauguration of officials early in the following year is commonly called the “lame-duck period”.

    A president elected to a second term is sometimes seen as a lame duck from early in the second term, since term limits prevent them from contesting re-election four years later. However, not personally having to face the electorate again makes a second-term president more powerful than they were in their first term as they are thus freer to take politically unpopular actions. However, this comes with caveats; as the de facto leader of their political party, the president’s actions affect how the party performs in the midterm elections two years into the second term, and, to some extent, the success of that party’s nominee in the next presidential election four years in the future. For these reasons, it can be argued that a president in their second term is not a lame duck at all.

    So while you’re right that the assertion the author is making is misguided, it’s a fallacy that is made often enough that some might conflate it with reality.