Sheri

its worth fighting for 🌷

Writer of word both truth and tale. Video producer, editor, artist, still human. Hire me?

Check #writeup for The Good Posts.

Slowly making a visual novel called We Will Not See Heaven, demo is free. Sometimes I stream, or post adult things. Boys' love novel enthusiast. Take care, yeah?

💟💟💟
TECH CAN ONLY BE AS KIND TO US AS WE ARE TO ONE ANOTHER.


🖥️ blog
sherishaw.net/blog

Sheri
@Sheri

I know what some of you are saying. If Democrats are so fixated on stopping Trump why are they sticking with an incumbent who’s deeply unpopular, receives scant credit for the resurgent economy and faces existential questions from voters about his fitness for a second term?

For starters, it’s too late to make a switch.

it's too late, you see guys. the election is tomorrow, i think! simply nothing can be done.

Last year, at exactly this time, more elected Democrats were saying in private that they hoped Biden would step aside. Few wanted to say it out loud for fear of aiding Trump and, even more delicate, being asked the inevitable follow-up question: So, are you for Vice President Kamala Harris?

Instead, most Democratic leaders kept quiet and hoped either Biden’s numbers would improve or he would, without being pushed, decide on his own terms not to run again.

-Jonathan Martin for Politico, Feb 2024

since the aging leader has decided not to vacate power, we must once again rally behind our incredibly unpopular government, as a dictator charges towards the polls which disproportionately bar voters who aren't les blancs qui adorent l'orange

if the biden camp's entire message is "not as bad as trump", if their primary motivator for turning people out in november is a vote not-for-me is a vote for trump: what exactly happens if trump is actually convicted and can't run? or is otherwise unable?

no, i'm not implying biden would lose a haley matchup although: he might! but what's more likely to happen would be trump voters either not turning out at all, or, uh, turning out anyways and demanding the item just removed from the menu.

hell, biden's camp set a fucking precedent for disqualified people still winning on the ballot.

is the situation we want for dems to feel safe if trump is convicted or coffin'd, and sit out the election in november since biden isn't selling himself but rather not trump? do we want a split vote from republican extremists voting for someone who cannot legally hold office, against a split vote from dems given no real reason to give a shit anymore?

we cannot rely on trump for anything other than getting more aggressive, angry people to vote. so why the fuck do democrats say trump is good for biden's campaign?!

New York Times article from Peter Baker on Feb 12th, 2024. Title: "Trump Steps Up, Helping Biden Just When the President Needs Him." Pictured is Biden smiling. "Donald J. Trump’s stunning statement supporting a Russian attack against “delinquent” NATO allies takes attention away from unwelcome questions about the president’s age and provides the Biden camp a useful contrast.

Mr. Trump played right into the Biden camp’s strategy during a rally in South Carolina on Saturday by castigating “delinquent” NATO members and saying that not only would he not come to their defense if attacked by the Russians, but he would also encourage the Russians “to do whatever the hell they want” against such allies.

-Peter Baker for NYT, Feb 2024

ahh! a former president of the united states during wartime run by the incumbent is threatening the world, your nation's allies, with russian invasion. this is a "good thing" for the current administration. this will help biden for su- why does the audience keep clapping for trump??

maybe we should keep publicizing trump's ideas, really get a platform going for all the bullshit donald says so everyone can hear. that'll help biden.

The stunner from Mr. Trump over the weekend not only drew attention away from the president’s memory problems, as detailed in a special counsel report, but also provided a convenient way for Mr. Biden’s defenders to reframe the issue:

Yes, they could now say, the incumbent may be an old man who sometimes forgets things, but his challenger is both aging and dangerously reckless.

-Peter Baker for NYT, Feb 2024

yes, the president may have dementia, but consider! what if he had dementia and wanted to bomb other countries? now that'd be bad, thankfully we've avoided acknowledging that

i'm convinced that all of last year and still some of this year, the DNC were planning around trump not being the GOP nominee. i also think they're so caught up on how the rules of an election are Supposed to work, they don't understand how little any of that matters to voters at this point.

voters are barely deciding on who they want to be president: they're deciding who to not be compulsively supporting. deciding "someone other than trump" or "someone other than biden". but both camps have made this race so specifically about this fight between elderly men, that if either were to suddenly drop out or dead the entire election would dramatically shift, and these touchpoints will retroactively become dead anchors

trump's message is: we need me in the white house because joe biden is currently in there fucking it all up, and since i'm your likeable strongman lemme handle it

biden's message is: we need someone other than trump in the white house because he's gonna fuck it all up again, and since i'm already here, lemme handle it

so if not voting in this election means whoever you like less will win, that not voting for someone you dislike is synonymous with voting for someone you hate- where does that leave voters who want a reason to vote instead of a requirement?

America Has Compulsory Voting, But Only If You Don't Vote

for the record, they're obvious roadblocks, but i think america should actually require voters to vote. the infrastructure necessary to do this must come first, lest we have the current bullshit system but with a gun held to our heads:

  • electoral college? outdated and meaningless, information and misinformation travels at equal pace leaving us at the same place of people you don't know making bullshit decisions based on what they personally believe instead of actual votes

  • election day? national fucking holiday. it's laughable we haven't even gotten close to this yet.

  • voter registration? more directly tied to actual residency instead of whether or not the cops put you in a funny box for a while.

  • primaries/caucuses? information speed again: we should really be doing all these on the same day! preferably further into the year so we all have more time to get to know all the candidates before getting out there

the current setup allows for rhetorically deploying "not voting is a vote for X" because not voting in america is the default. if you think that's bad, me too!!

however, the US is defined by its individualist communes. groups of people who come together to rally around a concept they all independently have a relationship towards. you're encouraged to stand out and be yourself without disrupting the crowd or status quo

trump is reliant on populism: that gets people to go to the polls.

biden is reliant on shame. that only gets people who would feel guilty not voting out there, which is a much smaller demographic.

telling the rest of the voters "you're basically voting for trump" reveals that our election system defaults to popularity contest, policy is entirely secondary. "democracy on the ballot" reveals we do not have democracy- because the medium of voting "for" democracy is voting "for" the one of the two racist old men who hasn't been personally bigoted to you yet

this year, voting "for" democracy is voting for bombing civilians in gaza. it's voting for imprisoning migrants at the border.

democracy, as defined by america, is apparently reconfirming every 2 years we don't want to be in a dictatorship. and if you don't vote exactly as your leader says you should then we will be, so stop asking for policy changes and just reelect me already. it's too late to do anything else, the election is only 9 months away. such little time unless you're literally any other nation.

with only one option for "democracy", choosing to abstain is therefor "antidemocratic". which, to me, sounds like we're defaulting to an autocratic collapsing business of a country that hits the "remind me later" button on actual change for another 2 to 4 to 8 years.

not voting in america is, apparently, voting for dictatorship. compulsory voting would make this entire rhetorical talking point a non-factor: which would be bad for democrats since they'd have to actually make policy changes which affect the bottom lines of their rich donors.

democrats, therefor, prefer voters who are guilted into voting. then you can tell them exactly what and who to vote for, which keeps your hold on power. any other vote would be a compulsory failing on the voters' part, rather than the system these people are in charge of.

this november, we're either voting for dictatorship, democracy, or abstaining which is tantamount to voting for dictatorship. how democratic!


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @Sheri's post:

bernie's also too old, fetterman absolutely unraveled himself, i have some problems with AOC but would at least like to see a shakeup and think she could get the young vote, but she's too young for this particular election

of people i think could actually run: i guess warren? she's also up there and oh so very lib. realistically, if the DNC wants to run another candidate suddenly that isn't harris, it'd probably be newsom. not a lot of great options here.

i do have to wonder if more candidates would show themselves if loudly calling for a ceasefire and for a change in administrative direction wasn't instantly snuffed out.