• assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 个月前

    So, what exactly do I call a young person who heard a politician speaking to their issues, and at that a politician who consistently showed courage and was genuine, and sat out?

    Sanders was exactly what’s described. Someone to vote for. I understand cynicism, but if you actually want to see people who tackle issues you care about, you have to take the first step of voting for them. It isn’t going to happen otherwise.

    How else do you expect to stop being disillusioned by politicians unless you give someone the chance? It is absolutely correct to call them apathetic, and they shot themselves in the foot. We don’t have the luxury of running five different Bernie Sanders types before they finally get off their ass.

    It’s harsh, but it seems like harsh is what they need to actually affect change. Roe being overturned generated much larger electoral consequences than candidates who would’ve kept Roe.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 个月前

        The DNC isn’t going to change unless there’s an overwhelming outpouring of support for an insurgent candidate, like Sanders in 2020. You can only put your thumb on the scale so much. If all young people went out and voted, the numbers would’ve been too overwhelming for them to do anything.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 个月前

            I doubt it will either. But that doesn’t change that it’s counterproductive and pointless to be apathetic. Things don’t change for the better unless you stop being apathetic. You have to do the best you can with the resources you have available.

              • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 个月前

                The issue with compulsory voting is that an uninformed vote is more dangerous than the lack of a vote. I get what you’re saying though, I want something that’ll achieve 100% turnout. I just don’t know the best and healthiest way to do that.

                I think you’re onto something though. Maybe there could be an additional incentive to take and pass a quiz about the issues and where candidates stand. No harm if you fail it, but if you pass, there’s even better gift cards and coupons.