Democracy, Mansplained: A Defense of Third Party Voting
In the wake of a corrupt Democratic Party having the majority of its leadership resign after coronating Hillary Clinton as their nominee, there has been a sudden turn by liberal-learning celebrities from lashing out at “BernieBros” - a pathetic attempt to cut leftist women and out of the political discourse and then having a meltdown at the backlash, Jen “Ken Jerkman” Kirkman being the most recent example - to stomping down at anyone even considering a third-party vote for Jill Stein or even Gloria LaRiva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation. Everyone from paid political opinion havers to washed out comedians past their prime are insisting on the same single, nonsensical, anti-democratic phrasing.
Let me reveal a little fact of civilized society to you: A vote for Jill Stein to be President is a vote for Jill Stein to be President of the United States. Nothing more. In an honest representative democracy, people vote for the candidate who they believe will best represent their views and fufill their needs as a leader. The candidate who manages to convince the most people they are this leader is the one who wins an election to become that leader. There is zero “three-dimensional chess” required to understand this simple fact.
This theory originates in the 2000 election, where liberals blame Ralph Nader’s 3rd-party run for President as the cause of George W. Bush taking the White House - when in reality it was that Gore was such a **** candidate more Democrats voted for Bush than votes that went towards Nader. The Democratic lineage will go to any length to erase any responsibility for their failures, just look at their entire “canon” starting back around the time of Ronald Reagan.
Back in the present, it is apparently a moral and ethical obligation that I vote for Hillary Clinton in November, even though I stand violently opposed to her policies and her incompetence, especially in regards to reckless foreign policy which has killed countless innocent people. If I exercise my democratic right to vote for someone who represents my views and whose politics would address my material needs, like leftist woman of color Gloria LaRiva, this is a symptom of my “white male privilege” and makes me a bad person who is actually voting for a fascist like Donald Trump to become President. I’m told I should cast aside my own democratic right and vote for someone who will do nothing to address the reality that half of America is currently living in poverty, and instead is being introduced at campaign events by a billionaire trailer park slumlord.
The largest problem with this premise is that Trump’s movement to normalize outspoken white supremacy will somehow *vanish* if he loses in November. The fascists will still be knocking at the gates, and in another four years, how can you be sure you, or more importantly, your neighbor, won’t fall for their rhetoric? If poverty in America continues to grow, will it even matter? How many Americans are struggling under the tyranny of the cycle of poverty for it to be a priority? Bouncing from job to job, being evicted and winding up homeless, fighting tooth and nail to get back up on their feet, the delusion that “hard work pays off in America” drilled so deeply into their soul they don’t know any other way, going days with only one meal in their stomach if any at all - a fascist being elected wouldn’t change this cruel indignity.
The fact of the matter is that it is the personal responsibility of a political candidate to get elected, especially when running against a threat like Trump. With all of the millions of dollars, Ivy League grads, and supposed political know-how at Hillary’s disposal to win in a landslide, why has she been woefully underperforming? Bernie was only supposed to win two states, only about half of his supporters plan to vote Hillary in November, and in the general has gone back and forth in the polls against a blabbering mass of fresh ****. If Hillary supporters cannot put out a genuine argument to convince undecideds to vote for her come November and are forced to lash out at “BernieBros,” preemptively blaming them for a Trump victory, then just how much faith do they really have in her ability to lead?
If outspoken Hillary supporters really want her to win in November, then their responsibility is twofold: understand Hillary’s policies and use them to convince people she is a good choice for President, and push Hillary to adopt policies that would directly benefit the lives of potential voters in order to convince them to elect Hillary Clinton as President of the United States. At this rate, it’s becoming clear that a vote for Hillary Clinton is nothing more than a vote for the next fascist that comes bashing at the gates in this modern era of American decline, as nearly every single public utility from education to water is privatized by greedy incompetents.
by Jeff Kunzler (@jeevesmeister) If you liked his piece please donate.
Left-wing/progressive/socialist media outlets/blogs resource list:
Let me reveal a little fact of civilized society to you: A vote for Jill Stein to be President is a vote for Jill Stein to be President of the United States. Nothing more. In an honest representative democracy, people vote for the candidate who they believe will best represent their views and fufill their needs as a leader. The candidate who manages to convince the most people they are this leader is the one who wins an election to become that leader. There is zero “three-dimensional chess” required to understand this simple fact.
This theory originates in the 2000 election, where liberals blame Ralph Nader’s 3rd-party run for President as the cause of George W. Bush taking the White House - when in reality it was that Gore was such a **** candidate more Democrats voted for Bush than votes that went towards Nader. The Democratic lineage will go to any length to erase any responsibility for their failures, just look at their entire “canon” starting back around the time of Ronald Reagan.
Back in the present, it is apparently a moral and ethical obligation that I vote for Hillary Clinton in November, even though I stand violently opposed to her policies and her incompetence, especially in regards to reckless foreign policy which has killed countless innocent people. If I exercise my democratic right to vote for someone who represents my views and whose politics would address my material needs, like leftist woman of color Gloria LaRiva, this is a symptom of my “white male privilege” and makes me a bad person who is actually voting for a fascist like Donald Trump to become President. I’m told I should cast aside my own democratic right and vote for someone who will do nothing to address the reality that half of America is currently living in poverty, and instead is being introduced at campaign events by a billionaire trailer park slumlord.
The largest problem with this premise is that Trump’s movement to normalize outspoken white supremacy will somehow *vanish* if he loses in November. The fascists will still be knocking at the gates, and in another four years, how can you be sure you, or more importantly, your neighbor, won’t fall for their rhetoric? If poverty in America continues to grow, will it even matter? How many Americans are struggling under the tyranny of the cycle of poverty for it to be a priority? Bouncing from job to job, being evicted and winding up homeless, fighting tooth and nail to get back up on their feet, the delusion that “hard work pays off in America” drilled so deeply into their soul they don’t know any other way, going days with only one meal in their stomach if any at all - a fascist being elected wouldn’t change this cruel indignity.
The fact of the matter is that it is the personal responsibility of a political candidate to get elected, especially when running against a threat like Trump. With all of the millions of dollars, Ivy League grads, and supposed political know-how at Hillary’s disposal to win in a landslide, why has she been woefully underperforming? Bernie was only supposed to win two states, only about half of his supporters plan to vote Hillary in November, and in the general has gone back and forth in the polls against a blabbering mass of fresh ****. If Hillary supporters cannot put out a genuine argument to convince undecideds to vote for her come November and are forced to lash out at “BernieBros,” preemptively blaming them for a Trump victory, then just how much faith do they really have in her ability to lead?
If outspoken Hillary supporters really want her to win in November, then their responsibility is twofold: understand Hillary’s policies and use them to convince people she is a good choice for President, and push Hillary to adopt policies that would directly benefit the lives of potential voters in order to convince them to elect Hillary Clinton as President of the United States. At this rate, it’s becoming clear that a vote for Hillary Clinton is nothing more than a vote for the next fascist that comes bashing at the gates in this modern era of American decline, as nearly every single public utility from education to water is privatized by greedy incompetents.
by Jeff Kunzler (@jeevesmeister) If you liked his piece please donate.
Left-wing/progressive/socialist media outlets/blogs resource list: