- cross-posted to:
- texas@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- texas@lemmy.world
These are just polls, so vote!
Hopefully these trends will inspire people in states that have been consistently red that a flip this election is possible!
You must log in or register to comment.
If the apathetic voted it’d be over.
If all these leftists that don’t vote in protest actually voted, it’d be over. Not just this election, for decades. It would have been a wildly different history.
That too. My buddy is still angry not voting even after 2016. Because he’s still pissed about the two party system. Fair, but you’re not fixing anything.
What a fool. Anyone not voting has no voice and has no right to complain. Nobody will pay attention to them because they offer no action. At that point they may as well be a foreign citizen for the amount of power they hold in the US elections.
Well some foreign powers wield a decent amount of influence on US elections and politics…
He can bemoan the two party system. But if they want to move anything they need to vote. Assuming he wants to move things left, then it’s vote for Dems.
Does he at least vote in the Primary? Love it or hate it, that’s our version of ranked choice voting. Vote for the preferred candidate (someone who supports actual RCV I assume) and then see if you can stomach the winner of the party.
Not fixing anything indeed.
Refreshing that Lemmy seems to understand first past the post.
Which is why it is very important to understand that tankies are not leftists.
They are agents (willing or stupid) of foreign powers who advocate for fascism. And it is in the interests of their masters (mostly Xinnie the pooh and putin) to encourage leftists to disenfranchise themselves.
No, it wouldn’t. It’s very difficult to quantify how many people don’t vote as a protest vs. don’t vote out of apathy, but the Green Party, Libertarian Party, and all other third parties combined took home less than 2% of the total vote in the last Presidential election. Even if we assumed that just as many people were staying home in protest, and that they were entirely made up of disgruntled leftists, that would only maybe affect the outcome of some swing states if the numbers are unevenly distributed. It certainly wouldn’t remake history.
The internet (and Lemmy especially) might be full of high-minded leftists claiming they stay home on moral principle, but the majority of people who don’t vote are just tired, working class people who have to squeeze voting in around work and family on a random Tuesday. If you want them to turn out, you have to give them a candidate that speaks to them enough that they’ll take time out of their day vote. (Well, that or a make mail-in voting universal in all 50 states, or make voting day a federal holiday, or a bunch of other things that will never get through Congress.)
I think president Gore would have been a very different (and better) history. Ditto Hilary.
Well, again, it’s pretty hard to quantify how many people are not voting on principle, but again, if we use third-party voters as a guide, that’s probably not true. For Hillary, analysis shows that even if every single Jill Stien voter had gone to Clinton, she still would have needed to win over 50% of Gary Johnson’s voters (who were obviously unlikely to consider themselves leftists) to win..
Bush and Gore is different, since Bush won by 537 votes in Florida, so sure, if the Nader voters had gone to Gore, he would have won. You could probably also assume that there were 537 disgruntled leftists who decided to stay home as well, but with a margin that small, almost anything could have changed the outcome. If all the voters who stayed home with a cold went out and voted Gore might have won.
You’re working from a premise that there’s a large contingent of leftists who are withholding their vote on principle, and if they just voted, the Democrats would always win. But there’s no data to assume that’s true, and it’s just as likely that there are as many conservatives doing the exact same thing. So what’s point here? If only all the leftists who didn’t vote on principle came out, but all the conservatives who didn’t vote on principle still stayed home, things would be different? You could blame pretty much any group for your candidates’ loss with logic like that.
it’s just as likely that there are as many conservatives doing the exact same thing
Ever heard the saying conservatives fall in line? So no I don’t think conservatives are doing the exact same thing.
Well, if it’s a platitude it must be true.
Singer of my band in 2000,
“well if my green party vote gets a Republican elected, the pendulum swings further right which forces the left to activate,”
surprised Pikachu at GOP stealing election,
status quo shifts right in all levels of the courts for quarter century,
leftists learn Gaza exists,
rinse, repeat
Literally accelerationism.
I don’t know what that is
Letting the right win, because they’ll make things so bad that the revolution has to happen. Doesn’t work. What actually happens is that the right squeezes tighter to maintain control until the country is in ruins.
Yeah, that sounds accurate
As a person from country with multiple-party parliamentary system, I have bad news for you. It is not really guarantee of anything.
most of the far left perpetually online leftists are just part of the horseshoe theory.
Gee, if only there were some way to get them excited to vote. Moving to the right hasn’t worked and neither has shouting abuse at them, so I guess nothing will make them happy.
Gee if only they could think about how their vote would move the Overton window.
But you just said, they rely on their feeeeelllliinngggs. Guess they aren’t so logical huh.
deleted by creator
Ok you’re today’s explanation.
Let’s evaluate the last say 24 years and when the Dems had all 3 of the House of Representatives, Senate, and Presidency. They need all 3 to pass pretty much anything.
Obama had it for 2 out of 8 years. Biden had it for 2 out of 4 years. Let’s add it: That means Dems had control for 4 out of 24 years. Read that again: Dems had control for 4 years of the last 24 years. For filibuster proof control, Dems had control for 4 MONTHS of the last 24 years.
This is why Dems compromise and why they go after the center voter, because they basically never have control. To get literally anything done they need to compromise. Take your pick, either 4 years of the last 24 fucking years, or the 4 months or the last 24 years. And you wonder why they go to the center to find voters?
If you want things to go to the left, you have to give Dems overwhelming and consistent victories. Because when they lose, like how they’ve lost for 20 years out of the last 24 years, they go to the center to find voters.
A Mexican standoff will not work because they have an out (the center voter who shows up) and the leftist voter doesn’t. So the way the leftist voter gradually gets them to move left is by ensuring that the Dems win consistently and overwhelmingly, so that they don’t have to go to the center to find voters.
deleted by creator
Ok let’s go through this chronologically.
Bill Clinton: After successive losses Bill figured out “it’s the economy stupid”. And when you run against an incumbent (Bush senior) you run from the center. So that’s what he did. And he won.
Gore: After the population hopefully warmed up with Bill Clinton, he stuck his head out left with climate change. And bam he lost the election. Thanks 3rd party protest voters! Aka the left never shows up.
Obama: So guess what Obama learned? Don’t stick your head out. He ran on vague “hope”, hoping the ambiguity would be enough considering Bush’s disastrous wars. And he won.
More on Obama: so he enacted ACA. That’s great, right? The thanks Obama got for that was to lose the house of representatives for year 3 and 4. Then lost the House of reps again for years 5 and 6. Then he lost both the House of reps and the Senate for years 7 and 8. Thanks voters that can’t be assed to show up after the first election! Aka: the left never shows up.
Hillary Clinton: So what did Hilary learn from the last 6 years of Obama? She learned that the left never shows up. So she ran a mostly center platform, with a nod to left on climate change (that thing all the leftists care about right?). And guess what happened? Bam she lost. Thanks protest non-voters! Aka: the left never shows up.
On to Biden. Just like Obama learned from Gore, Biden learned from Hillary that you don’t stick your head out left. And he was running against an incumbent, so once again when you do that you run center. He’s actually been governing more from the left, but he ran center.
And people are amazed that they don’t run a big left platform? Every time they stick their head left they lose. And the next guy learns to go to the center to win.
So how do you get them to move left? By giving them victories first. Consistent and overwhelming victories. Because when they lose, like they’ve lost 20 years out of the last 24 years, they will go to the center to find votes.
With this history, you’d be an absolute fool to cater to the left. Because they never show up.
(Edit)Why do leftists need to move right
They don’t need to move right. They need to show up and give dems consistent and overwhelming victories first. Show the dems that they can win without having to go further and further to the center. Because every time the dems lose, because the left never shows up, they will go to the center to find voters. Voters which BTW actually do show up!
Center voters are worth double, because it’s a vote you get and vote the other party loses. They aren’t going to cater to the left (worth half the vote) when history shows time and time again that they never show up.
Kamala’s groundswell of support is proof that listening, not demanding, generates enthusiasm. You choose not to pay attention because you don’t want the party moving to the left, regardless of what they could gain by doing so.
Is her groundswell of support coming from the left, or from the center? It’s from the center, who yes rely on impression and feelings and energy.
I’m talking about this supposed logical leftist voter, who thinks logically, because they are so logical, and they will logically not vote in protest, and you are saying this supposed logical left actually relies on feeeelllinngss, then they are not so fucking logical then are they?
Who said I don’t want the party to move left? Nice (fake) jab.
Politics isn’t a logical endeavor. All political positions are based on assumptions that are feelings based. Conservatives feel that hierarchy is important, leftest value equality.
Nobody prefers equality over hierarchy because they did the homework.
A person who wanted to make all of their decisions based on logic and reason would be paralyzed and incompetent.
Is her groundswell of support coming from the left, or from the center? It’s from the center, who yes rely on impression and feelings and energy.
I’m sure you can provide a source for that, since you’re not just saying whatever you think justifies moving to the right.
I’m talking about this supposed logical leftist voter, who thinks logically, because they are so logical, and they will logically not vote in protest, and you are saying this supposed logical left actually relies on feeeelllinngss, then they are not so fucking logical then are they?
Where did I say that? Everyone likes having their concerns addressed, and being ignored inspires apathy. I’m not sure why the party understands this about the Republicans they keep trying to court but not their own left flank.
Who said I don’t want the party to move left?
I did.
I’m sure you can provide a source for that, since you’re not just saying whatever you think justifies moving to the right.
Can you source that “you think justifies moving to the right.”? Someone here certainly is making things up and it’s you.
So far has she announced something like medicare for all that the leftists can point to as a policy to logically support? No. So far she’s relying very heavily on energy, vibes, “won’t go back” emotion, freedom, which all appeals to center voters who rely on impressions and emotion. The closest to any specific progressive policy is a general idea to tax billionaires.
Where did I say that?
“excited to vote” is an emotional feeeelllliiiinnggg. You didn’t default to say policy to support, you defaulted to the feeling of emotion of excitement and it’s very telling. Enthusiasm is an emotional feeellliinnggg. And you’re basically on it again, apathy is an emotional feeellllliiinnngg.
If that’s what these supposed logical leftist voters need to feed their feeelllinnngs, then fine. But then it’s not this case of them being so logical, and they are logically not voting, because logically that will do something (in reality nothing), because they are the embodiment of logic.
I did.
Yeah, you. Not me. You. You’re making shit up. All the time just so you have something to attack.
I’ve just said this recently (like earlier today), but its not necessarily apathy.
Many people had to work multiple jobs, couldn’t get a vote by mail option, their local polling place had too few voting booths relative to the number of voters, etc, etc.
As soon as mail in voting became accessible, the number of voters actually voting jumped massively.
Preventing access to voting is an international act, and dismissing people as just being apathetic for not having the time to wait a few hours to vote (because kids, work, etc) is part of that intention.
Don’t just be dismissive. Support a national holiday for election day. Support politicians who want to keep mail in voting for all. And don’t look down on people who are put into situations where voting instead of showing up to work could make them lose their jobs.
Exactly. People share articles every week about Republican voter suppression tactics like limiting polling locations and creating voter ID laws, then turn around and whine when voters don’t show up for their candidates. Even if you aren’t a victim of these laws, if you have to vote in person, you usually have 12 hours on a weekday to vote. If you work 8 hours a day, and you commute an hour each way, that’s 2 hours to vote. For a working-class person with a family, that’s a big ask. That’s time they normally spend making dinner for their kids and getting ready for the next day. Voting is a right, but having the time to do it a luxury.
Your voting experience really needs an upgrade.
We have a holiday to go vote - well, 3 hours off - and our setup is so simple that we have polling stations everywhere. When we get there it’s usually a 5-minute process. The whole thing is over by that night.
This whole “standing in line for hours” thing is just weird, y’all.
It’s usually a 5 minute process in TX too, people just wait until the very last minute to cast a vote.
We have had a 2 week voting period since 1980, we were actually the first state to allow an early voting period. The polls are Aldo legally required to be open at least 9 hours the first week and at least 12 hours the second week and final day of voting. If there’s even a line during the first 2 weeks, it’s 10 minutes max. People just drag their feet and then complain to everyone else, which keeps people from voting.
Agreed.
My polling station is great, I’m in and out in 15 minutes. I work from home, and in the past when I didn’t, I just used mail in voting.
Not everyone is lucky enough to have those options.
TX has 2 weeks to vote. There’s never a line longer than 10 minutes if there’s a line at all, except for the final day. It’s definitely apathy, waiting until the last day.
This year, polls will be open from Oct 21- Nov 1, with a final day to cast a vote on Nov 5. Polls will be open at least 9 hours the first week and at least 12 hours (typically 7AM-7PM) during the second week and final day of voting. Polling hours and locations can be checked at www.votetexas.gov once they are released in October. Some polls may be open on the weekend as well!
Great info for Texas, thank you. Early voting during that second week is my favorite. The first few days, there may be some small lines (depending on local population, etc). But that’s usually a good sign. If Texans voted appropriately, could even demand (gasp) mail-in ballots. For now, just thankful they haven’t taken early voting…
If they got rid of early voting, then TX wouldn’t be able to brag about being the first state to allow early voting (established 1980).
We could even demand rank-choice voting or flip the State Supreme Court (there are 3 seats up for election this year). Given that all US and TX representatives are up for election, as well as 1 US senator and 15 state senators, we could be close to flipping the legislative branch blue too.
Here’s a full list of offices for election this year: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/2024/offices2024.shtml
Ah, who cares about them.
Yelling at people to be excited will fix that!
It kind of does yea. Hey, be hopeful, help your neighbor, and the future is bright is a much better message than “we hate everyone”
People have real concerns that the party refuses to address. No amount of yelling at them will generate enthusiasm if their concerns are being ignored. “Shut up and be happy” is not a compelling message. It’s just the laziest, bluntest form of toxic positivity.
I don’t know if you were paying attention this week, probably not by sounds of it, but Kamala did indeed go through the platform in her acceptance speech.
She addressed said concerns for better or worse depending on your world view…and wrapped it in a bow of hope.
I’ll take toxic positivity over regular toxicity every day of the week.
I don’t know if you were paying attention this week, probably not by sounds of it, but Kamala did indeed go through the platform in her acceptance speech.
So, the speech she gave after my comment. She certainly reaffirmed her support for Netanyahu.
Well…vote for Trump then and see how it turns out for Palestine I guess.
I wonder if centrists will ever understand that it’s possible to be upset about genocide while still voting for Democrats.
Can you even imagine opposing genocide at all?
Honestly though, can you imagine the absolutely apocalyptic meltdown the RNC establishment would have if fucking Texas can be flipped?
They’d just call it ultimate proof of election theft :/
no doubt the federally indicted ken paxton would be more than willing to commit more crimes to stop a democratic victory in texas.
You mean Ken Paxton who was impeached by his own party. While Ken was acquitted, you really have to fuck up have your Republican party vote to impeach you.
Even Hillary almost flipped the state. If only 5% more of the registered voters had cast a vote for her, she would have won! The problem is that people just won’t go to the polls. We were the first state to have an early voting period (since 1980) but people just won’t take 15 minutes to stop by a polling station on their way somewhere. There’s never a line during the 2 weeks weeks of early voting.
Check voter registration and polling location/hours (won’t be posted until October) at www.votetexas.gov
Polls open Oct 21-Nov 1, with one final day to vote on Nov 5. Don’t procrastinate and you won’t have to wait in line!
Some counties even have live wait time meters on the map. I’ve found locations on the way to work without scheduling and been on time haha.
I hadn’t seen that before! That’s cool
texas isn’t a red state; texas is a voter suppression state.
More than people realize. Between the Civil War and this century, the Texas delegation to the US House of Representatives was Majority-Democrat. We had a Democratic governor just 3 Governors ago.
But in 2003 the Texas legislature went majority-Republican for the first time in over a century, and the first thing they did was massively gerrymander the state just a year after it had been redistricted for the 2000 census.
In the 2002 election, 17 Democrats and 15 Republicans were elected to the US House. Following the redistricting, the 2004 election had 21 Republicans and 11 Republicans elected to the House.
With a single map change they went from a minority to a 2:1 majority.
Same is true for Georgia
Texas is also a voter apathy state. A lot of the apathy comes from gerrymandering, which I’d call a form of voter suppression, so your point still stands.
Also reminder for every state except Maine and Nebraska: your voting district has NO effect on who gets the electoral college vote for your state. Even if your state is gerrymandered to all hell and there’s no chance your district will go blue, that has literally zero affect on whether your vote is counted for president.
So go vote, even if it’s hopeless for the local races. Your vote can help flip a state!
Yeah, I had a 5 minute wait to vote in my (majority red) area. 30 minutes away in (majority blue) Dallas, wait times were in the hours, because they keep closing polling locations in blue areas.
I’ve moved from Denton County to Dallas since the last election. I’m curious to see the difference in voting. Lewisville was staunch Republican area. Voting took about thirty minutes surrounded by red hats with scowling faces in line.
That’s very hopeful. A five-point spread can be overcome. And I’m still wondering what the polling error will be this year. For the last few years, Democrats have handily out-performed the polls, and it’s not like people under 50 are getting easier to poll.
But don’t get complacent. It’s possible the polls this year are over-correcting for that. We won’t know for sure until the election is over.
But don’t get complacent. It’s possible the polls this year are over-correcting for that. We won’t know for sure until the election is over.
Not only that. You may need a quite healthy margin to overcome the various voter suppression and other plans the Rs have in place to steal the election. A Texas sized margin might do.
I’m hoping that Harris/Walz spends a few resources here, to make Republicans nervous. Not a LOT of resources, but enough to make the Republicans nervous. We need Dems to turn out in all 50 states, Safe Red, Safe Blue, or whatever, to ensure that we have a resounding victory. Fellow voters, you shouldn’t need to be told this, but if a few million here or there in Texas and Florida gets Dems out to vote while putting the fear of Dog into Republicans and force THEM to spend resources there, it’s a good strategy in my book.
Same, Repugs forced to defend in TX is a victory in and of itself.
It helps that it’s a Cruz year.
Allred vs Cruz is currently 45/47, it’s pretty close. Might be a pretty important Senate race if the Democrats lose one of the closer ones.
i haven’t see cruz this mad since jetblue said checked bags to mexico would cost $50 extra
Ted Cruz puts on eye shadow every morning but then loses his courage and wipes it off before going out. Pass it on.
Unironically Dems winning Texas may be one of their best shots at keeping the Senate. They face a VERY uphill battle. If they keep Ohio (huge if) they will still need to keep Montana, or win another red state like Texas.
I have some fingers crossed Missouri will flip scumbag coward traitor Josh Hawley. I’m worried folks might be too apathetic but Lord knows we’ve got a better candidate for the Dems this time than a billionaire Bud Light heiress
The state even being close nationally will boost a lot a down-ballot races, and hopefully deny extremists from local government seats.
That’s how I feel. I don’t think Texas will actually flip (not impossible though!), it is the message these types of polls are sending that’s important.
I’ll be voting blue, and I look forward to the state invalidating all the votes in my county.
A long, long time ago way back in the 90s Texas had a Democrat governor. And it was awesome. One of the best states to live in at the time.
Not for the last 25 years though. Not since the Republicans took over every aspect of the state.
Ann Richards didn’t manage to get a lot done though, did she? I wasn’t super politically aware in the early 90s, but I was under the impression that Texas was pretty red back then too.
She was a democrat along the same lines as LBJ. And a Texas Democrat, so very moderate by today’s standards.
But she was well loved, respected, and surprisingly, did accomplish a decent amount, including prison reform, drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs, significantly improved the educational system, etc.
But her big black mark was signing the anti-homosexuality act into law, even though she campaigned against it as Mayor.
Still, after her came George W. Bush, so in my mind, she was the last good governor Texas has had in almost 30 years.
True enough.
Better than we had when I lived in Illinois, where all the governors seem to end up as the target of federal investigations or prosecutions.
At the very least, it will cause Republicans to expend more resources in what was a previously safe state.
I’m not getting my hopes up yet, but if Ted Cruz finally gets fired I’ll being enough schadenfreude for the whole class.
Dude, really? I have schadenfrade prepared for the class for that occasion too…
I’ll eat my hat if Harris wins Texas. The voter apathy there is palpable.
Unfortunately, not just voter apathy but voter suppression. Texas is a lot closer to blue than they want to admit, but have done an excellent job with disenfranchisement.
And gerrymandering.
Which is disenfranchisement.
Apathy, suppression, and a state party that is interested only in shutting out progressives.
First two are spot on. Gonna need a source for the third.
Consider 2022 in the Rio Grande Valley. Jessica Cisneros was a progressive primarying the incumbent Henry Cuellar. The party called in help from the national party to make sure the progressive lost to the anti-choice NRA stooge Cuellar. Cuellar won by 289 votes. In the neighboring district, Michelle Vallejo, a progressive, actually won her primary and was up against the MAGA chud Monica de la Cruz. The party pulled Vallejo’s ad funding during the final month of the campaign.
This was during the 2022 election when the party was doing ad buys for MAGA candidates.
Don’t forget that had just 5% more of the registered voters in 2016 voted for Hillary, TX would have been blue.
Biden was even closer to winning TX in 2020.
Your vote matters! Do not wait until the last minute to vote! We can not only turn TX blue for Harris, but we have another opportunity to rid ourselves of Cruz this year. There are also 3 seats on the TX Supreme Court, all US and TX reps, 15 state senators, railroad commissioners, 3 members of the criminal court of appeals, 7 members of the state board of education, and many more judges, sherrifs, and local officials among other positions at stake this election. Check all the offices here:
https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/2024/offices2024.shtml
Polls will open Oct 21-Nov 1, with one final day to vote on Nov 5. Polls will be open at least 9 hours the first week and at least 12 hours a day (typically 7 AM-7PM with no wait) during the second week, and at least 12 hours with a wait on the final day of voting.
Check your voter registration, important election dates, polling locations and hours (won’t be posted until sometime in October), and more at votetexas.gov
Can someone please explain why a railroad commissioner is an elected position?
At the time of their invention, railroads were huge for industry. We could now transport a lot of heavy goods quickly across the state and country. We needed someone to be in charge of the railroads, trains, and their regulations.
Nowadays, the railroad commission doesn’t have jurosdiction over rails in TX, instead they have primary regulatory jurisdiction over the oil and natural gas industry, pipeline transporters, natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline industry, natural gas utilities, the LP-gas industry, critical natural gas infrastructure, and coal and uranium surface mining operations.
https://www.rrc.texas.gov/about-us/
I think the idead behind it being an elected position, rather than an appointed position, is to mitigate corruption. If the citizens see corruption taking place in the department, they can elect a new railroad commissioner in a few years that will set it all straight.
Totally worth a stop for the Joy Campaign. Imagine if they get the RNC to spend more money there and have to underfund swing states lmao
The RNC wont, and honestly Kamala should not waste time in Texas. Abbott, Paxton and Patrick will 100% make sure Kamala doesnt get the delegates from Texas come hell or high water. Kamala can do much better in closer states where she wont get fucked over like Arizona, Nevada, and the blue wall states.
Needs to be closer for a campaign stop. I’d love to see Trump fight for it, though.
Idk, drumming up excitement can help people get to the polls to vote Cruz out. The Presidential race can help shore up the down ballot races. I’m hoping at least Walz shows up in MT. I would love to see them both but in particular he would appeal to people here and could boost Tester’s numbers.
Trump won Texas by 5 1/2 points in 2020 - 52% to 46.5%. So this poll is consistent with the direction of Texas partisanship. Time and money spent to campaign Texas can be better used elsewhere.
Ted Cruz won in 2018 by like 2%. So getting people out to vote absolutely can make a difference. And you don’t just turn a state overnight, it takes time and work.
Allred is going to need a blue wave to win in any case. Harris needs to get there before she can even think about Texas
“Every poll since the unconstitutional Harris coup over Biden is fake.”
–#magaIf Trump manages to lose Texas, will the Republicans expel him from their party? If so, will he run as an independent in 2028? (Will he still be alive?)
Who wins Texas is less important than who wins overall.
Doubt he’ll still be able to walk in 2028, let alone run.
Yeah, I think he’s going to age like milk if he loses and has to spend 4 more years of his private life dealing with his felonies.
That lazy bum was the only President that didn’t age a day during his 4 years in office. But after 4 years fighting to stay out of prison, and he’s melting and rambling way more.
If Trump loses Texas there’s no chance he wins overall.
That’s fine, but it’ll be the loss overall that kicks Turnip, not the loss of Texas specifically. Thus, Texas is not essential for him getting the boot.
Doubt it. He and his cronies control the party now.
Still doesn’t matter if you don’t vote.
