• kerrigan778@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    No… You and I and many of these protesters and yes, a lot of people could unite under an actual progressive. That doesn’t mean they could actually unite enough people to win a modern presidential race and even if they did it doesn’t mean they’d be able to get what we want done. Politics is strategic and is ALWAYS going to be about finding the common ground that is the better option, not the perfect option, and that option is never, ever going to be a black and white “not evil” option.

    Every chance you get vote for our left wing populist candidates and other progressives, by all means. And protest and cause a fuss to move the window as much as you’re able. But when it comes to final votes, be strategic or be irrelevant and impotent.

    • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I have never seen “strategic voting” to work. No in FPTP systems, not in relative systems with multiple parties.

      It is a divide and conquer tactic. At the end of the day there is no representation of which votes were “strategic” and which votes were in support of policy. So the party/candidate will always assume this to be his full mandate to do what he wants. All you do is invalidating your voice as something to be glossed over.

      Also notice how the fascists don’t vote strategically? They keep voting fascist and they keep pushing fascist and with that they move everything in the political window closer towards them. In my country in one state everybody voted the “conservative” far right populist party to avoid the fascist party to come out strongest. What is the result? 5 years of far right politics that strengthened the fascist parties positions and they are set to win that state “by a landslide” next time or alternatively the only coalition option to be fascists+“conservatives”.