Read on Twitter
Someone tweeted that they were not voting for the person they liked the most but rather their preferred adversary and I can't un-think it.
It completely cuts through the bullshit, "lesser of two evil framings."
Which candidate do you think you can most rationally push/fight/cajole into your preferred policy position?
Which candidate do you think you can most rationally push/fight/cajole into your preferred policy position?
The reason I really like this framing is that it extends the notion of democracy beyond the vote.
There's a ton of lip service to "holding politicians accountable," but very little about what that *practically* means.
There's a ton of lip service to "holding politicians accountable," but very little about what that *practically* means.
This says that your vote is the *first* step. That civic engagement is a process - that advocacy, and citizenry activism, is part of that process.
It minimizes the idea of "voting your conscience" because it's about way more than your vote. It's about the whole process.
It minimizes the idea of "voting your conscience" because it's about way more than your vote. It's about the whole process.
