If a sufficient portion of the voting population made clear they would not support her based on those policies she would have to change her policies if she wanted to win.
Like isn't that fairly evident and just how elections work? I don't see how libs don't get that.
I made the ill-advised decision of getting into a discussion on r/politics under a remark that "if you don't vote, you don't have the right to complain" with the comment "and what does the complaining accomplish?"
The responses I got were:
Complaints signaled dissatisfaction with the person they won, which will persuade voters in the next election (we were completely stymied on "what if the person I voted for won and I am not happy with them?" It was all about 2016).
Complaints can result in pressure like Biden stepping down and now we have the chance to vote for someone Totally New (pointing out that it seems like the reason Biden stepped down was because polling showed people weren't going to vote for him resulted in the interlocutor throwing up his hands and saying "Fine, vote for the fascist")
People seem completely stuck in 2016. It's all about "Hillary would've won if more people would've voted" and "voting is the only way to interact with the system in a way that achieves political change." The Biden administration might as well have not happened outside of the IRA (pointing out that the IRA sucked does not help)
Idk why I bothered, I guess I'm still trying to process the apparent euphoria going on in lib spaces and trying to figure out how shallow and easily punctured it is.
Honestly, I've embraced elitism regarding these kinds of people. If they're terminally stuck in 2016 but also don't realize that Hillary won by 3 million and the populace was actually screwed by the Electoral College, then they're a waste of time to try and educate; plan to come back around when their personal world is actually falling about their ears.
If a sufficient portion of the voting population made clear they would not support her based on those policies she would have to change her policies if she wanted to win.
Like isn't that fairly evident and just how elections work? I don't see how libs don't get that.
I made the ill-advised decision of getting into a discussion on r/politics under a remark that "if you don't vote, you don't have the right to complain" with the comment "and what does the complaining accomplish?"
The responses I got were:
People seem completely stuck in 2016. It's all about "Hillary would've won if more people would've voted" and "voting is the only way to interact with the system in a way that achieves political change." The Biden administration might as well have not happened outside of the IRA (pointing out that the IRA sucked does not help)
Idk why I bothered, I guess I'm still trying to process the apparent euphoria going on in lib spaces and trying to figure out how shallow and easily punctured it is.
Honestly, I've embraced elitism regarding these kinds of people. If they're terminally stuck in 2016 but also don't realize that Hillary won by 3 million and the populace was actually screwed by the Electoral College, then they're a waste of time to try and educate; plan to come back around when their personal world is actually falling about their ears.
I'd really prefer that things don't get that bad, but it sure seems like that's where we're headed