808
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
808 points (85.9% liked)
Political Memes
8959 readers
2873 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Apparently not voting in America is "voting for Trump", but it's "not voting for Harris".
One can only conclude that either:
I'm curious if the "not voting in America is 'voting for Trump'" people ever thanked the non-voters for their support of Biden in 2020?
If "not voting in America is 'voting for Trump'", is true, then "not voting in 2020 America is 'voting for Biden'", right?
Accepting that "if it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander" would require them not to be hypocrites.
Thank them? Why would we thank them for doing less than the bare minimum just because it's in our favor?
I felt it was pretty clear but...
If you think that not voting in the last election means that they voted for Trump, then logically it stands that not voting in the election before that means that they voted for Biden.
I'm simply pointing out how people who make that argument only like it when the argument is used in their favor, but they don't actually believe it.
Yes. And?
Fucking what.
The bare minimum is doing nothing and they did that this time. There is no requirement to vote.
I somehow fucking doubt you would be saying that if it was an anti-Israel candidate running.
Your principles amount to campism, and not much more.
2024 wasnt about voting for Harris. It was about voting against Trump. If you didn't vote for Harris, then you didn't vote against trump.
Yeah, that was exactly the strategy that the Democrat leadership followed: no need to try and appeal to voters or even be seen as somebody who can represent them, just convince people that they have to vote Democrat to defeat Trump.
Tell me again how well did that work ...
Yet here come once again the Democrat Party tribalists parroting the "blame the people who the Democrat Party leaders didn't even try to appeal to for not voting Democrat" political propaganda that exonerates from blame the assholes in the Democrat Party leadership who wanted to cheat at Democracy by getting votes without even trying to represent voters.
Congrats for keeping on setting the groundwork for the exact same shit as the current electoral result to happen again: until the Democrat Party actually starts trying to represent anybody other than the moneyed elites, it will always be susceptible to losing to populists promising change.
Keep on blaming the plebes for the results of the choices of your masters.
There is a long list of people I would prefer to have as president over Harris. She was not my ideal candidate. But, Democracy is a compromise, and she was the only option that was viable to beat trump on election day. Regardless of how you feel about her, trump is objectively a far worse option. There was one clear and correct course of action on election day to beat trump and prevent this nightmare from happening, and people couldn't get off their asses or get over their ego and fucking do it.
Only a vote for the leading contender can beat the other leading candidate in our voting system. This is not a difficult concept except to the willfully ignorant.
Uh, yeah, the republican is the default because their voters ALWAYS fall in line. It's why they win any time we let any infighting have electoral consequences
Not voting is effectively half a vote for whoever ultimately wins. That's how a fucking FPTP system works, Jesus Christ.
That makes total sense in a world were people can see the Future and hence know when they're choosing not to vote who is going to end up winning.
In the real world, that's not the case - in the absence of foreknowledge of the outcome, not voting is logically nothing more than leaving the choice to others.
Which brings us neatly around to it being up to politicians to make people want to actually chose them (which amongst other things means converting people unwilling to make a choice into people who chose them), which the Democrat leadership failed miserably to do compare to the Republicans, hence the outcome.
There are only two groups of people to blame for Trump:
This is actually an insane take with no relation to reality. The fact is the majority of americans live in states that will vote for their party regardless of any other factors. If you are in one of these states, im sorry but your vote in a general election doesn't matter.
The dems have worked hard to make sure your vote in the primary doesn't matter much either, just ask Bernie. (Im sure the Republicans have done the same but I don't really care as I don't vote in that primary. Maybe ask Ron Paul, i have no idea.)
Fuck's sake, Bernie lost by double digits both primaries. Fuck off with this 'rigged primary, votes don't matter!' nonsense that useful idiots for the DNC peddle to reduce progressive turnout.
You paid no attention to the actual race then, otherwise you would be aware Bernie won in California then the DNC played its typically game by promising every moderate a cabinet position if they dropped out and endorsed Biden, but let the progressives stay divided.
Just pay attention to what happens with Mamdani if you don't believe me. They already started their games with Cuomo running as third party now and people like Schumer and Jeffries not endorsing him.
And thus crumpling every progressive ballot from that point forward, right?
No?
It just meant that the moderates united around a single candidate?
Great point. I didnt get to talk about how the DNC didnt allow a primary in 2024. Should we talk about that or would you be willing to admit the DNC is pretty fucked up sometimes?
I've never denied that the DNC is fucked up, genius. Sorry that you think criticizing people for purity politics-ing minorities into death camps is mutually exclusive with having any other opinions.
It's almost like having actual values and fighting for them is important. It's almost like the Republicans are the ones who are putting minorities in death camps.
I applaud your constant attempts to shift the blame to leftists though, I'm sure it'll help the democrats win next time when they put up Gavin Newsom or some other centrist fuck wit.
Don't worry, when Trump runs for a third term promising to put Black folk into the death camps and deporting the corpses of the already-dead to the developing world as a means of spreading disease, I'm sure you'll fail to show up to the primaries, act surprised when a centrist ghoul is nominated, and then say "Critical support for Nazis!" just like you are now.
I'm sure you'll be here to tell us it's the lefts fault.
If you're saying "Critical support for the Nazis" like you are now, yes, you do share blame for supporting the fucking Nazis. Sorry if that concept is too complex for you to parse.