Not my country either. Not very enthusiastic at seeing what is probably the least bad superpower in the world narrowing the gap with the others though.
I’ll spell it out for you: the French Revolution worked because pretty much the entire country was dead set on overthrowing the government. Current US is very different, you’ll never get all the population to band together because a large chunk of people actually like who’s in power (or has the potential to be). You (or rather, an American that thinks like you) have next to zero chance of changing the system with a coup, the best bet is still to keep voting the least bad candidate hoping that maybe one day someone actually good will show up.
Which will be a 100% useless vote unless a ridiculously huge amount of people suddenly decide to do the same, because of gerrymandering and other shitty practices that ensure the two-party system stays in place. The third place at last election would’ve needed 40x the votes to get elected. It’s basically just giving a vote to the opponent of whoever you would’ve voted, unfortunately.
I absolutely support voting smaller parties in parliamentary systems where even getting 5% actually amounts to something, but in the US system it’s just counterproductive.
Not if your other foot is under the mud. You’re still getting a gun injury, only now it’s infected too. All because you wanted to shoot in the mud pool that has your foot inside and is the exact same size of your foot, hoping you wouldn’t hit your foot.
You’re saying you’d rather choose a meaningless option rather than a harmful one. Except in this case there’s no meaningless option, because the one you deem to be so will inevitably bring to the more harmful one. Unless 80 million Americans suddenly decide to try and “shoot in the mud”, one of your feet is still getting shot.
Not my country either. Not very enthusiastic at seeing what is probably the least bad superpower in the world narrowing the gap with the others though.
I’ll spell it out for you: the French Revolution worked because pretty much the entire country was dead set on overthrowing the government. Current US is very different, you’ll never get all the population to band together because a large chunk of people actually like who’s in power (or has the potential to be). You (or rather, an American that thinks like you) have next to zero chance of changing the system with a coup, the best bet is still to keep voting the least bad candidate hoping that maybe one day someone actually good will show up.
Or maybe vote whatever third party you can to stop supporting this human centipede of a political system
Which will be a 100% useless vote unless a ridiculously huge amount of people suddenly decide to do the same, because of gerrymandering and other shitty practices that ensure the two-party system stays in place. The third place at last election would’ve needed 40x the votes to get elected. It’s basically just giving a vote to the opponent of whoever you would’ve voted, unfortunately.
I absolutely support voting smaller parties in parliamentary systems where even getting 5% actually amounts to something, but in the US system it’s just counterproductive.
A bullet in the mud is better than a bullet in your own foot
Not if your other foot is under the mud. You’re still getting a gun injury, only now it’s infected too. All because you wanted to shoot in the mud pool that has your foot inside and is the exact same size of your foot, hoping you wouldn’t hit your foot.
How exactly does that metaphor apply to reality?
You’re saying you’d rather choose a meaningless option rather than a harmful one. Except in this case there’s no meaningless option, because the one you deem to be so will inevitably bring to the more harmful one. Unless 80 million Americans suddenly decide to try and “shoot in the mud”, one of your feet is still getting shot.
At least you don’t shoot at your foot directly
Is this about pride or about making sure your country doesn’t turn into a fascist stronghold? Because the second one seems more important.