Some people out there seem to be confused, but I always vote in every local and every national election for every office and every ballot initiative since I was 18 years old. Some of my greatest civil rights heroes have fought and died so that we can all vote and I honor their memory in the ballot box every single time.
To some of us, especially those of us like myself who have been scheduling secretaries for US senators, it often seems like a morally reprehensible choice between compromised corporate Democrats and fascist-minded Republicans. Where I live in California, I have the luxury of voting my conscience for president for third-party candidates that better align with my ideas of justice and equality.
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off, but don’t just exercise your right to vote. Exercise your right to fight for, organize for, struggle for, and manifest the kind of world you’d like to really see without compromise and without apologies before, during, and after election day. And let’s stop the fascists every which way we can. Power the people.
Vote with your heart in the primary. Vote with your head in the general.
“ if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch.”
Perfectly put and this is all I have been saying.
I can’t square this with his previous statement that he didn’t vote for Kamala. I don’t care if it’s California. He has a platform and in my personal opinion it is irresponsible to use that platform to provide cover for people who could have helped stop this, and found a reason not to.
Sorry if I blasphemed Lord Tom. I eagerly await my downvotes for having done so.
Is it the platform that makes the difference for you?
I live in a contested state and voted for the democratic socialist candidate in the primary but I will, of course, vote for the mainstream dem in the general.
As a counterpoint, my uncle lives in a blue state and voted for a third party candidate in that last presidential election. My mom has basically gone no-contact with him over it. I think she’s just about equally as angry that I didn’t vote for the mainstream candidate in the primary but gives me a bit of a pass because I’m her son?
I think you make a good point about Tom having a platform that I hadn’t considered before. Did he use his platform to encourage people not to vote for her?
Anytime a left-wing person talks about being disappointed with their lesser-of-two-evil options, people get all up in arms about the idea that we owe the Democratic Party our fealty.
Nobody owes anyone anything, but when given the choice between a fascist who wouldn’t mind seeing me dead vs. an establishment Democrat who doesn’t mind if I manage to survive just as long as the oligarchs get their tax breaks, I’ll go with the one who doesn’t want to actively take away my human rights every time, if for no other reason that it’s the better choice at that point.
So what the fuck are you doing BEFORE the general election? Or are you blowing the entire process off and then feeling smug about not voting for the lesser-of-two-evil THEREBY HELPING THE GREATER EVIL WIN.
I see it’s time to purity test Rage Against the Fucking Machine!
This is straight up conservative hit piece propaganda. The dude is a Harvard educated pol sci master, maybe if he says one single thing you disagree with, listen to what the cunt is saying.
They’re trying to just throw whatever little piece of shit they can on him so they can go- “hey, this guy disagrees with you on one point of all the thousand things you are both in FULL agreement of. See? Everything he says is fake.”
GTFO of here with this mainstream media psyop diarrhea.
Those 2 or 3 DNC glazing posters on Lemmy: “sO yOuRe a FaScIsT tHeN.”
I’ve seen those.
I’m sure I’ve been called those, but my point is two-fold:
- Act BEFORE the general election to support better candidates
- But when the choice is between lesser-evil and greater-evil, NOT voting for lesser-evil IS VOTING FOR GREATER EVIL. That’s not opinion, it’s simple math.
If the only thing someone does with politics is refrain from voting in the general election, they absolutely are supporting fascism. If the only thing someone does is vote in the general election, they are not supporting progressive candidates if their only option is between a fascist and an establishment Democrat.
You must act BEFORE the primary to support who you want to SEE in the primary. Vote for the best option. In the general, vote for the least-bad option. Not doing those things supports the greater evil of fascist.
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off
I think this is reasonable. A “corporate Democrat”, even if bad, can be better than a Republican in many cases. The Democrat might end up being less bad, for lots of disadvantaged people, than a Republican would be. These aren’t ideal choices to make, but you have to deal with reality as it is.
What gets lost in that argument is the fact that the battle is already lost when you nominate the corporate democrats. Kamala lost in July 2024.
The non voters were not incorrect all along, far from it. I speak as someone that still votes democratic to keep republicans out, but my vote is not guaranteed. I will not vote for an Israel hawk at this moment.
What gets lost in the debate is that there’s two parts to it:
- If you are voting in a general election, vote for the lesser evil choice
- If you are not working to support better choices BEFORE the general… BEFORE the primary… then you are allowing others to make that choice for you
You must be the guardian angel of the establishment dems on lemmy.
Ha ha, don’t let me tell you what I think of you being their bitch.
You say that, yet, I would present our democrats.
Really?
Vote in primaries if you are happy with the candidates. Primaries on average have about 10% voter turn out.
Obviously ignorant of what the two parties have voted for and done. Fascism appreciates your rabid support.
Even if establishment Dems do suck.
I thought I already responded to the uniparty hack, but you did two of them. Piss off. No one, no one of solid mind, agrees with your bullshit. You are the reason we lost in fact.
You fucking piss off. You either are part of the fascist agenda trying to help them win, or you swallowed their shit and are helping them win.
Get the fuck off it. We all know it’s pointless in the general long term. Stop lying and make truthful arguments and maybe you will get somewhere.
Go fucking research what the two parties have voted for and passed and get the fuck off it yourself, fascism supporter - whether you intend to be or not. Which is not to say establishment Dems don’t suck because of course they do. But it still matters.
Wtf are you on about? Some Dem establishment talking points.
You saw the dem establishment arguing and took it. Huh. Doesn’t speak well to your understanding though does it? No.
Feel free to look at my comment history and learn a little.
Thanks god former colonized people and people who formally lived in dictatorship didn’t have American mentality and didn’t accept the reality. Americans are bunch of cowards
Always easy to armchair from a distance with nothing on the line.
Come, show us how it’s done by doing whatever it is you mean.
Where do you live, by the way?
I’m not American. I get what you’re saying though. But the quote of Tom Morello in the article, after the bit I quoted with “vote your ass off”, then says:
…but don’t just exercise your right to vote. Exercise your right to fight for, organize for, struggle for, and manifest the kind of world you’d like to really see…
This is a pretty good response. I wish there was more focus on that ‘inch of space’ and who gets harmed, and less on the disappointing sock puppet figureheads.
He does have a PhD from Harvard for poli sci. I would be surprised if he couldn’t put together a decent response. I’ve been surprised before though…
Dude is my personal hero and he’s showing why again here.
He’s doing exactly the right thing. Voting Democrat when the only alternative is a Repugnican who WILL hurt more people than the Corpocrat, but always, always and with all his power trying to move things to the left of corporate Democrats whenever he can without hurting vulnerable people.
Except he claimed he didn’t vote for Kamala vs Trump. Therefore allowing and be in agreement with the outcome. Any outcome.
He’s in a blue state. If we didn’t have our asinine and backward EC, it’d be a different story.
I’m absolutely exhausted with snowflakes being so very precious and that think they need a specially curated and artisanal candidate to cater to them, most especially to their purity tests, and if they hear one wrong note, they’ll stamp their feet, cross their arms, and do absolutely nothing to help. Stay home, vote for some absurdist clown-show bullshit like the Green Party. Even maybe vote for Republicans.
You know, “to send a message”. Because everyone needs to listen to THEM, and of course, everyone is going to be able to look at this ridiculous childish behavior and respond according to what these types want, because obviously mind-reading is possible. 🙄
Talk about narcissistic bullshit of the highest fucking order. Hell, we all can remember being late teens/early 20s, but most people grow out of this kind of selfishness.
But I think he’s pointing out he’s in a safe district and so basically his vote for Kamala would not even matter.
It pains me that the kids these days don’t have similar idols. Like Kneecap is righteous, but they’re not RATM playing a show on wall street despite being told they cannot play a show on wall street.
Icons.
I hate this title - it’s a bit misleading with respect to the point he’s making.
It’s like the exact opposite of the article content.
It honestly seems downright disingenuous, as though the author of the article wanted to make a “both sides” article but then realized Tom isn’t a fucking moron.
A bit? Fuckers.
Ready for a warzone in here?
Holy hell, misleading title, JFC.
How so?
Seems reasonable to me. God knows no one in Pennsylvania has been any better off for voting John Fetterman. Play the game as best you can with the cards you have, and fold when that’s the right choice, and then work to make the game function better through organizing and other means.
You think Dr. Oz would have been better? I have my doubts.
It’s a ridiculous assertion. Dr. Oz would obviously have been worse. As terrible as Fetterman is, Oz would have been in full lockstep with Trump and the Senate would be under even firmer control of the GOP right now. Trump could have been more successful legislatively if they had another Senator to make winning votes easier. If nothing else, it would have provided another seat they could use to let Senators like Collins and Murkowski do their performative BS on more votes so its easier for them to win re-election.
People don’t realize that Fetterman votes with Democrats 90% of the time. That’s a lot better than having a Trump sycophant in that seat.
This is the answer.
Fetterman makes me want to punch my walls. But still better than something like Oz.
It would not have made a difference. It’s like asking if you’d rather face the firing squad or face the wall and get shot in the back. Same outcome regardless of “choice”, but by choosing Fetterman, the whole democratic party is weakened by the exercise.
Fetterman votes with Democrats 90% of the time. Dr. Oz would have voted with Democrats 0% of the time. That’s a big difference.
The context here being that John fetterman votes against his party more often than any other senator, Democrat or Republican. And he breaks with them on larger issues. He breaks with the party pretty often in big ways when it comes to nominations too.
That 90% is including a lot of procedural votes. But still the point sorta stands and he voted in line with the Democrats more often than my gut reaction expected.
That’s also not to say that I think dr oz would be better than fetterman but the fact is fetterman being in office is a failure of the dnc.
My understanding is people who followed Fetterman’s career judge that he dramatically changed after his stroke, which happened after the primary. The party voters chose his pre-stroke self. The dnc has a lot of failures under their belt, but I don’t think not trying to invalidate the primary voter’s choice because the guy had a stroke was one of them.
Is it? Because they still haven’t passed or blocked anything meaningful. It’s really easy to “Vote with the party” when you know they’re going to lose regardless. Your metric may be true, but it’s ultimately meaningless.
You could say that about anyone in the minority party at any time. You’re assuming Fetterman would change his voting pattern with Democrats in the majority, with no data to back up that assertion.
I don’t like Fetterman either, but the time to fight him is in the primary. In the general election you pick the lesser evil, and the lesser evil is never the Republican.
There is no “folding” in life. There is no walking away. You can abstain from giving specific input, but you are still subject to and share responsibility for the results. What is needed is people that push to have the best possible choice for a given election and will vote for the best choice available. Doing only one is not enough.
No, there’s definitely “folding” in life. Or “logging out”, or whatever euphemism you can think of.
You just don’t get to deal back into the game after you fold.
The problem with fascism is that it will take an interest in you even if you don’t take an interest in politics. People that are folding are not able to really opt out.
There is a point at which the “best possible” is not sufficiently distinct from the worst possible that it becomes irrelevant for the individual in question. There was literally no benefit to Fetterman over Oz for most people. The only option was to work to make sure neither of them ever get another chance and to try to mitigate the harm that was going to be done when either one wins. I want to be clear, I don’t think this applies to the party as a whole but this is why (from the perspective of many) it does, because in their specific case the outcome is the same regardless. It’s a perfectly rational choice at the scale of the individual, because their interests, aren’t even on the ballot.
You and anyone else that doesn’t think Oz would have been significantly worse, or thinks it “doesn’t affect them”, is naive or arguing in bad faith. The better option can suck, but both-sidesing the situation to excuse not voting at all serves nobody but the worse option.
To pull from the quote from the OP:
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off…
Chomsky said much the same - he has spilled all kinds of ink chronicling how terrible the Democrats have been over the course of multiple decades (in addition to Republicans of course), but he’s been quite clear on the fact that there is indeed a difference, and a difference that matters.
I’d expect nothing else from him.
This dude knows how to rage against the machine!
Where I live in California, I have the luxury of voting my conscience for president for third-party candidates that better align with my ideas of justice and equality.
Which 3rd party candidate is he talking about? Because if he’s talking about Jill Stein, then he may as well be voting Republican. 3rd party candidates are just another scam being run on the public. They’re nothing more than astroturf laid out by the opposition, intended to lead voters away from one of the two main parties.
A state that is pretty much guaranteed a democratic win is the only place where voting 3rd party isn’t a gop spoiler and can actually mean something…
You both have a point. And I agree with you both. If only you could agree with each other. Yes when you’re in a blue State like california. You absolutely have the privilege and luxury of voting for someone other than the two major parties. Because your States vote will safely be delivered to one of them consistently. But it was an actual issue on top of the bigger issue of Democrats being professional losers. Because let’s not forget that a lot of the loss Biden and Harris fought for hard.
But if I had a dime for every privileged blue stater’s vitriolic statements against those of us in red or purple States. Trying to promote some sort of solidarity against Trump. I’d have hundreds of dollars or more. All the condescending holier-than thou bullshit. Bullshit that’s ramping up again might I add.
Here in a red state, my vote is meaningless in a statewide election as well. And I might express that in close company of neighbors. National Democrats don’t even invest or try here most of the time. But if I am in mixed or unknown company, ie online. I would never attack others for implying otherwise, or stating that the people should show solidarity. (Like many on fedi actively do) They’re right. Everyone doesn’t have identical circumstances. And as Tom said, in consequential elections we need to stand together. Even if the candidate is imperfect.
I also live in a red state (I guess it used to be purple, but last time it was blue was before I was even born both at the presidential and Congress level). Voting for Dems on any level outside of the couple city districts basically does nothing. It’s why I find my vote better spent on third parties at every level. I’d rather be happy my vote went to someone I liked than wasted on someone I don’t.
So, it’s ok to promote spoilers, as long as you’re in an area where it won’t have any impact on the outcome?
You get how that still has the overall effect of legitimizing their role in other areas, right? You’re basically doing unpaid advertising for the opposition, and proving that this strategy is effective…while doing literally nothing to benefit your own position.
Which is exactly what 3rd parties are for in the US. At best, they are entirely ineffective. At worse, they help the opposition to maintain power.
At best they’re an indication of a demographic that wants a change that isn’t the other major party, signalling to the party that they might benefit from pivoting at least a little in that direction. That signal is usually ignored, of course, but we are talking about “at best”.
Nobody should vote, you can’t destroy the system by participating in it,
How DARE he not vote Blue no MATTER who!
-People who voted for INDEPENDENT ANDREW CUOMO!
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off
Despite the misleading title, he is saying “vote blue no matter who” just without the (cringe) soundbite. Sure he’s not explicitly specifying what party to vote for but the intent of the two messages is the same - at a certain point in the election process, there are only two people who have any shot at winning. You must vote for one even if you hate them both. Abstaining may as well be a vote for the worst candidate.
