Some people out there seem to be confused, but I always vote in every local and every national election for every office and every ballot initiative since I was 18 years old. Some of my greatest civil rights heroes have fought and died so that we can all vote and I honor their memory in the ballot box every single time.
To some of us, especially those of us like myself who have been scheduling secretaries for US senators, it often seems like a morally reprehensible choice between compromised corporate Democrats and fascist-minded Republicans. Where I live in California, I have the luxury of voting my conscience for president for third-party candidates that better align with my ideas of justice and equality.
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off, but don’t just exercise your right to vote. Exercise your right to fight for, organize for, struggle for, and manifest the kind of world you’d like to really see without compromise and without apologies before, during, and after election day. And let’s stop the fascists every which way we can. Power the people.
I hate this title - it’s a bit misleading with respect to the point he’s making.
It honestly seems downright disingenuous, as though the author of the article wanted to make a “both sides” article but then realized Tom isn’t a fucking moron.
It’s like the exact opposite of the article content.
A bit? Fuckers.
Tom Morello lives in California.
You don’t.
Vote strategically, dumbasses.
Yeah, he even explicitly makes that clear. It’s a pretty good take.
And educate people on ranked-choice voting.
Agreed! And open primaries, while we’re at it. These are all simple things that make our democracy more democratic and less prone to corruption and polarization.
I see it’s time to purity test Rage Against the Fucking Machine!
This is straight up conservative hit piece propaganda. The dude is a Harvard educated pol sci master, maybe if he says one single thing you disagree with, listen to what the cunt is saying.
They’re trying to just throw whatever little piece of shit they can on him so they can go- “hey, this guy disagrees with you on one point of all the thousand things you are both in FULL agreement of. See? Everything he says is fake.”
GTFO of here with this mainstream media psyop diarrhea.
This is a pretty good response. I wish there was more focus on that ‘inch of space’ and who gets harmed, and less on the disappointing sock puppet figureheads.
He does have a PhD from Harvard for poli sci. I would be surprised if he couldn’t put together a decent response. I’ve been surprised before though…
Seems reasonable to me. God knows no one in Pennsylvania has been any better off for voting John Fetterman. Play the game as best you can with the cards you have, and fold when that’s the right choice, and then work to make the game function better through organizing and other means.
You think Dr. Oz would have been better? I have my doubts.
It’s a ridiculous assertion. Dr. Oz would obviously have been worse. As terrible as Fetterman is, Oz would have been in full lockstep with Trump and the Senate would be under even firmer control of the GOP right now. Trump could have been more successful legislatively if they had another Senator to make winning votes easier. If nothing else, it would have provided another seat they could use to let Senators like Collins and Murkowski do their performative BS on more votes so its easier for them to win re-election.
People don’t realize that Fetterman votes with Democrats 90% of the time. That’s a lot better than having a Trump sycophant in that seat.
This is the answer.
Fetterman makes me want to punch my walls. But still better than something like Oz.
Same way manchin was far better in that wva seat. Now it’s that coal baron who doesn’t even bother to hide corruption and gleefully votes everything Republican.
It would not have made a difference. It’s like asking if you’d rather face the firing squad or face the wall and get shot in the back. Same outcome regardless of “choice”, but by choosing Fetterman, the whole democratic party is weakened by the exercise.
Fetterman votes with Democrats 90% of the time. Dr. Oz would have voted with Democrats 0% of the time. That’s a big difference.
The context here being that John fetterman votes against his party more often than any other senator, Democrat or Republican. And he breaks with them on larger issues. He breaks with the party pretty often in big ways when it comes to nominations too.
That 90% is including a lot of procedural votes. But still the point sorta stands and he voted in line with the Democrats more often than my gut reaction expected.
That’s also not to say that I think dr oz would be better than fetterman but the fact is fetterman being in office is a failure of the dnc.
Is it? Because they still haven’t passed or blocked anything meaningful. It’s really easy to “Vote with the party” when you know they’re going to lose regardless. Your metric may be true, but it’s ultimately meaningless.
You could say that about anyone in the minority party at any time. You’re assuming Fetterman would change his voting pattern with Democrats in the majority, with no data to back up that assertion.
I don’t like Fetterman either, but the time to fight him is in the primary. In the general election you pick the lesser evil, and the lesser evil is never the Republican.
I’m sorry, no evidence except every word that comes out of his mouth.
That’s self-contradictory. If he’s sneakily voting with Democrats now just to flip when they’re in the majority, why would he say that stuff and blow his cover? Is he being sneaky or not? Make up your mind.
I think it’s far more likely that he disagrees with Democrats on some high profile stuff, but still agrees and votes with the Democrats for a bunch of other stuff. That’s still better than having Dr. Oz, who would vote in lockstep with Republicans on absolutely everything.
There is no “folding” in life. There is no walking away. You can abstain from giving specific input, but you are still subject to and share responsibility for the results. What is needed is people that push to have the best possible choice for a given election and will vote for the best choice available. Doing only one is not enough.
There is a point at which the “best possible” is not sufficiently distinct from the worst possible that it becomes irrelevant for the individual in question. There was literally no benefit to Fetterman over Oz for most people. The only option was to work to make sure neither of them ever get another chance and to try to mitigate the harm that was going to be done when either one wins. I want to be clear, I don’t think this applies to the party as a whole but this is why (from the perspective of many) it does, because in their specific case the outcome is the same regardless. It’s a perfectly rational choice at the scale of the individual, because their interests, aren’t even on the ballot.
You and anyone else that doesn’t think Oz would have been significantly worse, or thinks it “doesn’t affect them”, is naive or arguing in bad faith. The better option can suck, but both-sidesing the situation to excuse not voting at all serves nobody but the worse option.
To pull from the quote from the OP:
But in any and every contested race, as my mom Mary Morello always said, we have to fight the fascist every which way we can, recognizing that even if there’s but an inch of difference between two candidates, there are a lot of vulnerable people who could be greatly harmed in that inch. So vote your ass off…
Chomsky said much the same - he has spilled all kinds of ink chronicling how terrible the Democrats have been over the course of multiple decades (in addition to Republicans of course), but he’s been quite clear on the fact that there is indeed a difference, and a difference that matters.
Name one bill that Is would have changed the outcome on? Go ahead, I’ll wait.
Nice tautology. You can’t justify not voting by of the predictably bad results of not voting.
Holy hell, misleading title, JFC.
How so?
It is technically the truth, but skips the lede.
He does vote that way, but clarifies California is a place where he can, and if your situation is more competitive, you need to vote with that inch in mind.
Thank you, it annoys me greatly when people don’t actually say what they mean. I appreciate the effort you took to point out it. Your comment is much better than just saying something happened without explaining it.
Much better comment than the ones I replied to Eric is pretty useless on its own. It took you and me to make it something worth reading
For one, he says he doesn’t vote for fascists just as much as he says he doesn’t vote for corporate Democrats. But then he goes on to say while he thinks you should vote for third-party candidates who you really would like to see get elected in some elections, sometimes you need to be practical and vote for a candidate that is not ideal, but better, and could actually be elected, for elections where that matters. Which is also what I’ve always said.
Anytime a left-wing person talks about being disappointed with their lesser-of-two-evil options, people get all up in arms about the idea that we owe the Democratic Party our fealty.
Nobody owes anyone anything, but when given the choice between a fascist who wouldn’t mind seeing me dead vs. an establishment Democrat who doesn’t mind if I manage to survive just as long as the oligarchs get their tax breaks, I’ll go with the one who doesn’t want to actively take away my human rights every time, if for no other reason that it’s the better choice at that point.
So what the fuck are you doing BEFORE the general election? Or are you blowing the entire process off and then feeling smug about not voting for the lesser-of-two-evil THEREBY HELPING THE GREATER EVIL WIN.
So what the fuck are you doing BEFORE the general election?
Voting in the general election is how you vote in the real primary - the money primary. The money primary is the first real contest of an election. The “primaries” you tell us to focus on really aren’t the first contest. The money primary is. And the donors pick candidates they hope can win. And since Kamala lost in 2024, pro-genocide Democrats are going to have a hell of a harder time winning the money primary in 2028 than they did in 2024.
By the time you get to the ballot in the primary, the real contest is already over.
So you’d vote for Hitler as long as he didn’t hurt you specifically.
Its okay, their moral code is just “whatever is slightly better than the worst thing”.
The circles people run in trying to justify supporting awful people is hysterical.
Well it’s fine that he didn’t vote for shit Democrats but honestly wish he would have been this outspoken DURING the campaign, when it mattered, instead of now.
Notwithstanding but FFS, organize and make the statement during the election for not voting for crappy candidates.
Given the plurality voting system, voting Democrat is the only meaningful way to take power away from the Republican fascists.
You can vote third party all you want in the PRIMARIES. When it comes to the general, you vote Democrat or you’re helping the fascists.
Why would someone vote third party in the primaries? Most third parties don’t get the funding or support from states to even host primaries. And there’s pretty much no reason to withhold a third party vote in noncompetitive states.
Buddy what?
Primaries are party specific.
The fuck are you smoking?
Participating in a third party primary doesn’t stop you from voting Democratic in the general.
Think that statement through for me real quick
Boo hoo you got morals. How dare you vote by your morals if it inconvenience me?
If Kamala Harris would have gotten a primary she would have come last? If Dems had a proper primary instead of panding to a senior buffon there would have been an actual promising candidate. Dems lost not because of people not voting; they lost because they didn’t represent anyone, other than the donor class.
The democrats & republicans have been spending the better part of a century making sure voters are too dumb to figure them out. Making sure other options are never picked, making Communism and Socialism are taboo words…
Those 2 or 3 DNC glazing posters on Lemmy: “sO yOuRe a FaScIsT tHeN.”
I’ve seen those.
I’m sure I’ve been called those, but my point is two-fold:
- Act BEFORE the general election to support better candidates
- But when the choice is between lesser-evil and greater-evil, NOT voting for lesser-evil IS VOTING FOR GREATER EVIL. That’s not opinion, it’s simple math.
If the only thing someone does with politics is refrain from voting in the general election, they absolutely are supporting fascism. If the only thing someone does is vote in the general election, they are not supporting progressive candidates if their only option is between a fascist and an establishment Democrat.
You must act BEFORE the primary to support who you want to SEE in the primary. Vote for the best option. In the general, vote for the least-bad option. Not doing those things supports the greater evil of fascist.
How much of the country do you think lives in a swing state?
I’d expect nothing else from him.
I voted for Kamala Harris but I was originally going to vote Cornel West. I thought Cornel West would’ve saved this country.
Imagine if instead of supporting two useless people doomed to lose, you had campaigned for an actual progressive with broad appeal?
“an actual progressive with broad appeal”
Who? Be specific.
The electoral process overrides the voice of people anyways. It’s all a shit show to keep us all fighting.
deleted by creator
