Taylor Rehmet, a Democrat and local union leader, won a runoff for a state Senate seat that’s been held by Republicans since 1992. What’s more, he bested the Republican Leigh Wambsganss despite having one-tenth as much money. Much of Wambsganss’s funding came from Dunn and the Wilks brothers.
Republicans blamed low turnout for Rehmet’s victory, while pundits opined that the Trump administration’s unpopularity was to blame.
In America today, these are the same thing. The way you win is by encouraging certain people to vote and discouraging other people from voting. Trump has been taking care of discouraging Republicans and MAGA from voting all by himself.
I really think America needs mandatory voting to stop this behavior, but it’s much easier to encourage or discourage people to vote than it is to actually carry out the will of the people.
America needs mandatory voting to stop this behavior
As much as that seems like a good solution, it’s unlikely to win many supporters. You’d be better off making voting day a federal holiday.
Federal holidays do not guarantee a day off of work (edit: unless you’re a government employee or work in a field that needs the market to be open). There are, however, state-level laws in some states that do guarantee time off to vote.
Good point; I was unaware of the state-level laws. Regardless, I will stand by my statement: it’s better than what we’ve currently got.
Presidential election should be a holiday. And move it to a Monday. Not sure why it’s so difficult. I’m sure there’s some deep seeded evil explanation.
I think it should actually be moved to Wednesday if made a holiday. It should be pushed as far as possible from being an opportunity for a long weekend where people choose leisure over civic participation.
Bone Apple tea! Its deep seated, haha.
Damnit!
it’s unlikely to win many supporters
If I could just somehow get permission to amend the constitution for one day, I’d fucking shove democracy down people’s throats so hard, totally against their will.
I really think America needs mandatory voting to stop this behavior
Yeah, forcing people to perform an act to legitimize an unjust system is really a great way to achieve reform.
Please explain how that’s supposed to work?
forcing people to perform an act to legitimize an unjust system
I assume this means that you don’t believe votes are properly counted and that all of our elections are “rigged.”
If you have that belief, then what reforms do you think are possible? Most people who I’ve heard express those opinions are far right wing people who want to discard democracy.
Not the one you responded to but if I may hazard a guess I’d say they see non-voting as a protest against the two party representative democracy currently in place.
If you’re forced to vote and there is no blank alternative, you are being forced to legitimise it whether you like it or not.
In Australia, for example, which has mandatory voting, the only requirement is that you participate. So, you can do the equivalent of submitting a completely empty ballot if you want to protest.
Mandatory voting creates more room for independent and minor parties to collect your vote, instead of just abstaining in the booth. The preference system tends to avoid outcomes that don’t reflect the electorate.
In Australia, far left and far right politicians and candidates can and do bloviate all they want, but ultimately mandatory voting pulls politics back to the centre.
By at the same time also requiring some form of ranked choice for every election, and to have a “none of the above” option, and if over 50% of the votes have “none of the above” as the #1 choice the election must be redone with all new candidates. Everyone is thus able to truly vote for who and what they believe we have the turnout to never have to discuss the legitimacy of the winner.
Taylor Rehmet, a Democrat and local union leader, won a runoff for a state Senate seat that’s been held by Republicans since 1992. What’s more, he bested the Republican Leigh Wambsganss despite having one-tenth as much money. Much of Wambsganss’s funding came from Dunn and the Wilks brothers.
Here’s the DNC chair talking about it two weeks ago:
https://youtu.be/J9Nk7RcZh7k?t=46
We’re not “over performing” this is the natural result of undoing the damage of 30 years of neoliberalism and especially the “victory fund”. Up until a year ago the goal of the party wasn’t “as many seats as possible” it was just to have a neoliberal president and at most House or Senate, but never both.
It’s like going from a pitcher who wants to win but not cover the spread, to one who just wants to win by as many runs as possible.
Dems aren’t intentionally holding themselves back, so we’re going to keep seeing massive gains.
Dems aren’t intentionally holding themselves back, so we’re going to keep seeing massive gains.
Tbf, MOST of them aren’t holding themselves back. Jeffries, Schumer, and a couple others are definitely trying their best to keep things as terrible as possible.
The more progressives enter the party, the more untenable are the positions of people like Jeffries and Schumer.
Well, I was saying Dems “as a party”…
You’re referencing the House and Senate leadership, who notably got elected a week or two before Martin, when the old DNCs threats of “vote neolib or we defumd your state party and let Republicans take all the seats” was a valid and well proven threat.
They’ve been lame ducks this entire congress and everyone knows it. The media just won’t say it because they’re still trying to prop up neoliberals as effective and in control. Just because that will depress dem.primary turnout and help neoliberal candidates.
Like, Jeffries and Schumer are literally trying to be as terrible as possible intentionally
If a progressive Dem becomes president, they name the next DNC chair and neoliberals lose the party for good. They’d 100% rather a Republican wins 2028 if it’s not a neoliberal, because that gives them a chance to take the party back.
Like, I dunno man. I overestimate people a lot, but I really feel like all of this should be common sense and easy for people to figure out on their own.
But it’s seems like despite most people realizing billionaires are the problem, they still only listen to what billionaire owned propaganda says on the TV
We’re not “over performing” this is the natural result of undoing the damage of 30 years of neoliberalism and especially the “victory fund”.
Anywhere you can point me to read more about this?
Meanwhile in California, a MAGA governor seems inevitable. Never underestimate the ignorance of the average American.
