You vote for the yellow by not letting red think they have a chance of winning, making room for a candidate better than blue in the future elections. Democracy is an ongoing effort, not a magic thing that happens on election day.
Then you're not doing enough political activism to make people confident that their vote matters, and that a vote for blue is the only effective way to vote for Ranked Choice voting, which is in turn the only way of giving anyone other than red or blue a real chance in the future.
Or... And hear me out here: Biden, the president of the United States, is more responsible than I am for his chances in the general election. I know that's a hot take for some of you.
I firmly believe it is possible …. Or was. We may already be past the agreed limit to temperature rise trying to avoid the worst consequences.
If the target are the political ovens, like all electric personal vehicles by 2035 and net zero carbon by 2050, yes it can be done. It’s not, but it can be. We’re at a good state of technology now where we can get most of the way there just by rolling it out.
There’s no way the public would go along with or be able to afford replacing every single ICE vehicle in the country with an electric car in the next 10 years. As for industry, that would require a truly massive effort starting now to replace every gas or coal electric plant with nuclear, wind or solar… plus container ships and electrifying the entire domestic truck fleet, and also somehow bringing about an end to cattle flatulence.
Biden tried to do quite a lot better than the blue line initially, and Manchin unexpectedly blocked the first bill in the senate after it passed the house. They had to go back and redo a whole scaled-back version that was the actual blue-line-predicted version.
My overall feeling is, even the yellow line is nowhere near enough, but our current political class is bent on self-destruction because they don't actually grasp how bad it is (and will not, until it's even more too late than the too late it already is). But still, reducing it to the blue line is fuckin amazing within the current environment in Washington. The question should be "how do we get it lower than that now" as opposed to "how exhaustively can we shit on the guy who got the first round of changes done."
The actual answer is to vote in local elections because they matter more to the country than presidential elections. If you have a house and Senate that vote the way you want the president doesn't actually matter that much. That's how Republicans undermine a Democratic president, and why they gerrymander.
this post is so embarrassing and so is that response tweet. how did you want her to present this information? or did you just want her to shut up about the very topics which you self admittedly find to be critical?
reactionary posturing. not even a meme. for the love of everything you care for don’t let this shit affect your vote.
Like it or not, right or wrong, Hillary is a pariah. They are asking why a person that knows they are polarizing figure in their own party would step up onto a podium when that party is trying to scrape together every vote it can.
Even tho she's right, there's more democrats likely to be put off by the delivery than there is on the fence voters being swayed.
lovely. and by boosting this message, reposting it across social media sites, her divisive-pariah message is getting a greater traction than if OP left it alone.
i don’t follow her on twitter do you? why are we cool with dredging up shit we know is going to be divisive?
honestly thanks for this insight, i’m embarrassed even more by this post now.
Do you know you could just write what it means instead of asking? Then you can explain how that invalidates any of what I said. I guess you prefer dragging things out, like how democrats prefer dragging out solutions because "other guy".
You obviously don't know, because you have failed to explain why it matters for what I have said. Keep pleasuring yourself over your smug non-helpfulness like your democrat idols.
She's still salty that she lost. Meanwhile Bernie, cheated by her and her squad of idiots, is still in Congress so in his actual job. What's Hilary doing these days? Shilling?
Hillary didnt lose because she wasnt far enough left. She lost because she's unlikeable, couldnt generate enthusiasm like Obama could and because not enough people understood the danger Trump posed. The polls had her at around a 90% chance of winning and a lot of people didnt vote because "why bother? We have it in the bag anyway and I dont like her." Bernie's problem OTOH is that even if he got it, which was exceedingly unlikely DNC meddling or not, congress would have to be left enough not to completely derail and water down most of the things he wanted to do. Which there was a zero percent chance of. He's not a dictator. He has to actually work with like minded congress critters to get most things done.
I guess staying quiet enough so less people talk about her and her husband's connections to the sex trafficker who didn't kill himself, while still trying to keep relevancy in the political space.
First, a true principle and anything built on true principles are timeless. If pepperoni pizza is the Truth then quite frankly we should be eating it for the rest of our life.
Second, the founding fathers never said this. They created the Constitution as a living document. Also, almost every major problem in this country can be traced back to deviation from what the constitution set forth. "Congress shall issue money." J/k we're gonna have a private, un-auditable Federal Reserve print money out of thin air and loan it at interest.
So long as both sides suck capitalism's cock, that's what you get. Plus most of the 300+ million are too tired, dumb, or blinded to care about anything other than meaningless talking points. So we are left to vote for an imperfect candidate that is less likely to make the hellscape worse. The stakes are high, but i can see why fatalism just sets in and people say "fuck it."
Welcome to two-party America. You get to choose between a malicious tyrant, an apparently less malicious tyrant, or waste your vote. Those are your options. Choose carefully, you're stuck with them for four years!
And probably 8 years. Also have to decide which party you'd rather have in office at the end of those 8 years, since we seem to switch back and forth between presidents.
The first election I voted in was a vote for the 'lesser evil'. It's been that way since. Maybe we could try, idk, a non-evil candidate? The evil has somehow grown steadily every time we've elected a 'lesser evil'. Maybe there is something better we could do than legitimize evil. I'm not saying not vote, but clearly we need a rework of this whole thing.
Need to get to get the money out of politics. Theres so much corruption finding the starting point is dounting but I think a good start is heavy participation in getting rid of our worst senators and maybe making a real chance at undoing the damage of all the legalized bribery. Then maybe, just maybe, we can start to make real change happen.
If Repubs would quit voting for white supremacist totalitarianism I would be able to quit voting for white supremacist corporatism and vote instead for someone who is actually progressive. Or if we had score voting or something sane. Unfortunately the only rational option is to vote against the totalitarianism.
The only way to maintain relevance and funding as a major political party is to court people with all of the money, so both major parties represent the small minority that makes up the wealthy and ultra-wealthy.
Leftist ideas are popular but we cannot vote for them because both major parties stand for different variations of Capitalism.
3rd option, use excellent conversation and discussion skills to convince Americans the severity of this problem. This will scare the politicians and they will start getting serious about climate change.
But if that doesn't work out, vote for Biden cuz he's closer to the Target. This will result in less casualties to climate change for the time being.
