We vote for candidates which claim to enact polices we support. The candidates do not enact said polices and in some cases actively work against them. Your solution is to keep voting for them anyways?
I see both sides of this argument. Assuming we take the lesser of two evils option like you suggest. Is there ever a point the populace should stand up and say, "No"? At what point do we use that leverage?
I'm genuinely conflicted on the issue.
One could say you are the psyop to get people to continue supporting candidates that do fuck all.
I would say that one should not limit the scope to only voting in elections. Vote in elections, but also vote with ones dollar everyday. Politicians loyalty is clearly bought and paid for by xyz whoever, so don't give those people/companies money. Then they will have less money to spend on politicians.
Rome was not built in a day, or some really proactive people could get very rich and just start buying the politicians but for the side of good. Adopt the enemy tactics.
I definitely believe JUST voting won't solve anything by itself, but not voting won't help either.
If Vivek Ramaswamy wins the primary in Ohio I will most certainly not be voting for him. The GOP needs to do better. Vivek is not acceptable.


(post is archived)