• OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s not a false equivalence because I never claimed it was equivalent. The purpose of the hypothetical is to explain a concept, not to draw a direct comparison.

    Not voting for Biden is punishing Biden because it’s denying him something that he wants. I’m not allowing other people to make the decision for me, it’s not as if my vote passes to the next person in line or something.

    Primaries are not legitimate elections. There is no oversight and no legal requirement that they be conducted fairly, or even that they be conducted at all. The democratic establishment has the ability to influence the outcome or cancel them altogether, which it exercises regularly. What should I do if the democrats said, “We’re not doing primaries at all any more, we’re going back to the old days where party elites select candidates in smoke-filled rooms?” Should I just give them my full compliance?

    I reject lesser evilism for reasons I already explained.

    I am not responsible if withholding my vote leads to an increase in people being killed. That’s not how responsibility works. The responsibility is on the people doing the killing, the people ordering them to, and the people supplying them with the means to do so. It’s like if a serial killer tried to plead “not guilty” on the basis that one of his hostages refused to cooperate and that caused him to fly into a rage and kill more people so it’s really the hostage who should be tried for murder. It’s an absurdity, and frankly it betrays a refusal, in your psyche, to hold politicians accountable for their failures and misdeeds, instead trying to shift the blame onto ordinary people.

    • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      In a lot of countries you can be held legally accountable for not helping someone, and your negligence leads to death or injury. I think that’s quite similar to refusing to vote, when voting can save lives.

      Your vote does effectively pass to the next person in line, because you not voting means their vote becomes a larger proportion of the total. By not voting you are blindly accepting the will of others, without using your possibility of affecting the outcome.

      Saying that there are no legal requirements for a primary is not a good argument for abstaining from voting in them. By your own arguments, the candidates want votes, and the party wants to nominate a candidate that has wide support. Voting in primaries is, if nothing else, a clear way of signalling what candidates you want.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        In a lot of countries you can be held legally accountable for not helping someone, and your negligence leads to death or injury

        In every country, giving assistance to one criminal to stop a different criminal is still a crime.

        Your vote does effectively pass to the next person in line, because you not voting means their vote becomes a larger proportion of the total.

        No it doesn’t.

        An individual vote is extremely unlikely to affect the outcome, but what it does affect are the margins, which can be factored into future calculations. A non-voter or a third party voter is someone who could potentially be won over. My vote still exists regardless of whether I exercise it or not, and nobody else gets to use it if I don’t. I completely disagree with your framing, always have, and always will.

        Saying that there are no legal requirements for a primary is not a good argument for abstaining from voting in them.

        I didn’t mean that you shouldn’t vote in primaries. What I meant is that I don’t believe in relying on something that the DNC provides, controls, and could take away at any time, as a reliable method of opposition.