The problem is if you tell people they’re holding their noses to vote, they might just decide they can’t be bothered getting out there on the day.
…which given there’s no clue what Trump has planned to sabotage the count, the numbers, and where - could happen anywhere.
There are no safe seats this election, there are no safe states, no red states, no blue states, every vote from a real person makes it harder to deny the outcome. So until it’s over: let’s all agree to encourage people to vote!
You’re not holding your nose, you’re making a stand for something you believe is vitaly important to your future.
You’re not holding your nose, you’re making a stand for something you believe is vitaly important to your future.
It can be both…
Stopping fascism would be easier if we didn’t need people to hold their nose, but reality is reality
Denying it won’t change it.
We need people to hold their noses. And saying that what we need is a bar that Kamala can’t clear is what you should be complaining about. But youre not mad at the headline…
The people we need to hold their noses, are already aware of what my first comment said.
If you want their vote, then you need to convince them in a way that works.
That doesn’t include lying and getting mad at people for stating facts. It’s stating that Kamala needs to be better and we (as a party) will keep pulling her left instead of just accepting her flaws and never asking for more.
I think the reason that this happened is due to structual issues in the way US Presidential elections work (e.g. the Electoral College), hence I’m hopeful that the 127 DC States plan - https://www.vox.com/2020/1/14/21063591/modest-proposal-to-save-american-democracy-pack-the-union-harvard-law-review - will be in reach soon if Dems get all three Houses in this election, or at least after the 2026 midterms if Harris wins this year but Dems lose the Senate. Then we can fix all these issues via Constitutional amendment, and with fairer elections, more leftist candidates will have a better chance of winning the highest office.
No one is saying anything different…
But someone can hold their nose while still admitting a candidates shortcomings and pushing for them to follow US law is a pretty low fucking bar.
The problem is if you tell people they’re holding their noses to vote, they might just decide they can’t be bothered getting out there on the day.
…which given there’s no clue what Trump has planned to sabotage the count, the numbers, and where - could happen anywhere.
There are no safe seats this election, there are no safe states, no red states, no blue states, every vote from a real person makes it harder to deny the outcome. So until it’s over: let’s all agree to encourage people to vote!
You’re not holding your nose, you’re making a stand for something you believe is vitaly important to your future.
It can be both…
Stopping fascism would be easier if we didn’t need people to hold their nose, but reality is reality
Denying it won’t change it.
We need people to hold their noses. And saying that what we need is a bar that Kamala can’t clear is what you should be complaining about. But youre not mad at the headline…
The people we need to hold their noses, are already aware of what my first comment said.
If you want their vote, then you need to convince them in a way that works.
That doesn’t include lying and getting mad at people for stating facts. It’s stating that Kamala needs to be better and we (as a party) will keep pulling her left instead of just accepting her flaws and never asking for more.
I think the reason that this happened is due to structual issues in the way US Presidential elections work (e.g. the Electoral College), hence I’m hopeful that the 127 DC States plan - https://www.vox.com/2020/1/14/21063591/modest-proposal-to-save-american-democracy-pack-the-union-harvard-law-review - will be in reach soon if Dems get all three Houses in this election, or at least after the 2026 midterms if Harris wins this year but Dems lose the Senate. Then we can fix all these issues via Constitutional amendment, and with fairer elections, more leftist candidates will have a better chance of winning the highest office.