Nobody was chained with 2 options. The options were chosen and rallied for by representatives picked by the people who actually thought about and participated in local government elections. (I’m dropping the metaphor, since it glosses over the process by which these 2 options came about in the first place)
Except none of that happened this election. You can pretend it has happened as described before with some plausibility, but it absolutely did not happen this time.
Nobody’s pretending; Trump was only considered a legitimate presidential candidate when other GOP representatives from various states - who were elected in through local government elections - endorsed him. Were they influenced by 3rd parties looking to benefit from having a corrupt president in office? Absolutely, yes. But they only had that foothold because the local (elected!) representatives were interested in such deals. Kamala rose through the ranks to presidential candidate naturally, going through district and attorney general positions before heading to senate, all of which were elections that the people of California voted for (not many, because they were mostly-ignored local elections, but that’s the point I’m trying to make here - VOTE!!). If people wanted to stop her, that’s where they would have had the power to do it.
Our presidential candidates didn’t pop into existence a few years ago, they were either elected themselves in local government elections before heading to presidential candidacy, or were elevated to presidential candidacy status by such locally-elected politicians. Corruption doesn’t start at the presidency, it starts with an individual who works their way up from the bottom to seize more and more power, or in Trump’s case, payments and promises made to such individuals to essentially “cut in line.” Either way, the reason they weren’t stopped is because people weren’t paying enough attention to ensure local representatives had their country’s best interests in mind.
We flush out corruption at the same source that it starts - at the local election level, preventing power-hungry hopeful politicians from starting their career in the first place. THAT is the work that people are advocating for us to pay better attention to between the presidential elections. THAT is what we would be able to do with the time that Kamala would buy us, but Trump wouldn’t. THAT is how we fix this country without losing most of the population in a civil war. If you agree that the presidential candidates don’t have your best interests in mind, then pay better attention to the elections of the local representatives that gave them that power, and vote for one you think would make a better choice.
The options were chosen and rallied for by representatives picked by the people who actually thought about and participated in local government elections.
Except one of the options was foisted onto us and no one voted for her, and the last time she ran she was so unpopular that she dropped out before the primaries.
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you live in a place with rampant voter suppression that makes voting difficult.
I spent all of 60 seconds voting by mail. But even if I were to go vote in person, it’s never taken me more than ten or fifteen minutes, including travel time.
But I know there are some places where people are forced to stand in lines for hours. This is why we need voter protection laws.
Edit: Just saw your comment that says you’re not American. My comment still stands.
Getting the nonvoter to vote may be a bit harder, but I believe much more fruitful endeavor than trying to court someone that is “undecided” at this point in that game.
I think it’s more how bothered can I be to go vote
E:
Should’ve written it like this
I think for the people living there it’s more “how bothered can I be to vote”
I see, so you’re letting somebody else decide on what you eat for breakfast.
And what you’re gonna eat tomorrow And what you’re going eat the next day And the next day…. For four years, and possibly longer.
Hope you like garbage chicken.🍗 🍗 🍗
Your breakfast was decided for you when you were chained to the two options presented
You can’t even make a hypothetical scenario where your point is true… sad
Nobody was chained with 2 options. The options were chosen and rallied for by representatives picked by the people who actually thought about and participated in local government elections. (I’m dropping the metaphor, since it glosses over the process by which these 2 options came about in the first place)
Except none of that happened this election. You can pretend it has happened as described before with some plausibility, but it absolutely did not happen this time.
Nobody’s pretending; Trump was only considered a legitimate presidential candidate when other GOP representatives from various states - who were elected in through local government elections - endorsed him. Were they influenced by 3rd parties looking to benefit from having a corrupt president in office? Absolutely, yes. But they only had that foothold because the local (elected!) representatives were interested in such deals. Kamala rose through the ranks to presidential candidate naturally, going through district and attorney general positions before heading to senate, all of which were elections that the people of California voted for (not many, because they were mostly-ignored local elections, but that’s the point I’m trying to make here - VOTE!!). If people wanted to stop her, that’s where they would have had the power to do it.
Our presidential candidates didn’t pop into existence a few years ago, they were either elected themselves in local government elections before heading to presidential candidacy, or were elevated to presidential candidacy status by such locally-elected politicians. Corruption doesn’t start at the presidency, it starts with an individual who works their way up from the bottom to seize more and more power, or in Trump’s case, payments and promises made to such individuals to essentially “cut in line.” Either way, the reason they weren’t stopped is because people weren’t paying enough attention to ensure local representatives had their country’s best interests in mind.
We flush out corruption at the same source that it starts - at the local election level, preventing power-hungry hopeful politicians from starting their career in the first place. THAT is the work that people are advocating for us to pay better attention to between the presidential elections. THAT is what we would be able to do with the time that Kamala would buy us, but Trump wouldn’t. THAT is how we fix this country without losing most of the population in a civil war. If you agree that the presidential candidates don’t have your best interests in mind, then pay better attention to the elections of the local representatives that gave them that power, and vote for one you think would make a better choice.
Except one of the options was foisted onto us and no one voted for her, and the last time she ran she was so unpopular that she dropped out before the primaries.
I’m not American
Oh, you probably should have opened with that.
Look around you.
Every thing in your life is from a political decision. How much money you earn, how much tax you pay, what the roads are like.
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you live in a place with rampant voter suppression that makes voting difficult.
I spent all of 60 seconds voting by mail. But even if I were to go vote in person, it’s never taken me more than ten or fifteen minutes, including travel time.
But I know there are some places where people are forced to stand in lines for hours. This is why we need voter protection laws.
Edit: Just saw your comment that says you’re not American. My comment still stands.
Voting is compulsory where I live
Getting the nonvoter to vote may be a bit harder, but I believe much more fruitful endeavor than trying to court someone that is “undecided” at this point in that game.
Go vote, peeps