Is voting useless in the US?

[Sanghyeok]

The 2020 US election has so far failed to materialise the changes that were expected. Therefore, I wanted to ask: is voting useless in the US for change and progressivism? Will people finally realise the futility of electoralism there, and begin to use methods of direct action such as general strike and disruption? Or do you still believe that voting isn't useless in their system?

I've argued that voting in the US has been useless for some time due to the broken and outdated electoral system, although I didn't post this yesterday to avoid accusations that I'm a Russian spy/Chinese saboteur/Kim Yo-Jung. I think the only way forward would be direct action such as large scale nonviolent protests and strikes. But that is my opinion, and I want to ask you in the words of comrade Lenin, "what is to be done?"

[Anatoliyanskiy]

currently, yep it definitely is. If you live in a safe state, your presidential candidate has virtually no chance of winning that state, and getting elected. House of Representatives and the Senate uses FPTP, so that is also somewhat pointless. If only the President was decided by the popular vote and PR was used instead.

Oh yay, first post!

[Mandicoria]

Yes it is because it's a ridiculously corrupt system that bottlenecks voters, and also constantly gerrymanders in order to secure the most votes. Then add in the fact you have rampant corporate lobbying, and RIDICULOUS corporate donors for presidential candidates. It's fucked.

Also add in the fact history's really proven that voting isn't what brings most change in the country, or worldwide in general, in the first place.

[Sanghyeok]

Yes it is because it's a ridiculously corrupt system that bottlenecks voters, and also constantly gerrymanders in order to secure the most votes. Then add in the fact you have rampant corporate lobbying, and RIDICULOUS corporate donors for presidential candidates. It's fucked.

Also add in the fact history's really proven that voting isn't what brings most change in the country, or worldwide in general, in the first place.

Then, in the words of Lenin: "what is to be done?"

[Plzen]

A good number of Americans live in noncompetitive electoral constituencies. For those people voting is useless except as a signalling gesture. Even for those that do live in competitive constituencies, the nature of plurality voting makes it very difficult for any change outside the two-party framework to materialise.

I don’t think, though, that even a fair voting system in which everyone’s votes matter equally would put progressivism seriously back on the table in the United States. Bernie Sanders’ failed 2016 and 2020 Democratic Presidential primary bids have shown us that while the US social-democratic movement is strong, it’s not strong enough to build majority coalitions. Even under a fair voting system, it will probably be centrists - like Kasich on one side or Biden on the other - who end up driving policy as kingmakers between the left and the right.

[Alvecia]

It seems to me that in most of the "safe" states, the difference tends to be in the realms of several hundred thousand.

It would not surprise me in the slightest if there were several hundred thousand people in those states who don't vote because they believe it to be "safe".

[Nuroblav]

Only really in swing states - as I see things from an onlooker's perspective - really matter somewhat. Otherwise, you could vote for anyone from Kanye to Hawkins and I doubt it would make a difference.

[Woldoina]

PLEASE WE NEED TERM LIMITS IN THE SENTATE!

[Feyrisshire]

Yes, voting is useless. You're just voting at what representative of the elite they now want you to oppress with.

[Senkaku]

Yes it is because it's a ridiculously corrupt system that bottlenecks voters, and also constantly gerrymanders in order to secure the most votes. Then add in the fact you have rampant corporate lobbying, and RIDICULOUS corporate donors for presidential candidates. It's fucked.

Also add in the fact history's really proven that voting isn't what brings most change in the country, or worldwide in general, in the first place.

Then, in the words of Lenin: "what is to be done?"

Eventually, if electoralism can't produce political changes, people will go from the ballot to the bullet. Let's hope it doesn't get to that.

[Feyrisshire]

Then, in the words of Lenin: "what is to be done?"

What is to be done is exactly what he did.

[Sanghyeok]

Then, in the words of Lenin: "what is to be done?"

What is to be done is exactly what he did.

....I don't see that happening in the US anytime soon.

[New Jewlan]

Yes, especially if for old men with dementia (in my NS world, Creepy Joe shines my shoes), or if voting by mail ballot.

That, and what with Joey being a glove puppet for the Chinese, we might as well roll out the red carpet for Winnie / Xi Jinping; GL USA!

JK

[Feyrisshire]

....I don't see that happening in the US anytime soon.

Well, who knows.... A lot of things have happened in the last years, and things would change in the years to come...

[Cordel One]

It absolutely is. I guess there's no reason not to vote, but it does nothing beyond deciding which corrupt face the boot has. At the end of the day the United States is still a poorly disguised oligarchy, and no one wins but the elite.

On top of that, we have the EC which makes it even more useless.

[Western Theram]

no, though the electoral system is outdated and is frankly is undemocratic voting is not useless, think of how much effort goes into voter suppression, why would they bother stopping people from voting if their vote doesn't count?

[Feyrisshire]

It absolutely is. I guess there's no reason not to vote, but it does nothing beyond deciding which corrupt face the boot has. At the end of the day the United States is still a poorly disguised oligarchy, and no one wins but the elite.

Well, one reason that voting can be interpreted as a political gesture no matter what effect it would be on the results is that it lends an acceptance of the legitimacy of the current political system.

[Cannot think of a name]

The 2020 US election has so far failed to materialise the changes that were expected.

Literally still counting the vote.

I submit that 'voting' is not the problem but this kind of bizarre expectation.

[Sanghyeok]

....I don't see that happening in the US anytime soon.

Well, who knows.... A lot of things have happened in the last years, and things would change in the years to come...

Do you think the US will have a "decades in moments" event this year?

[The Gold Mines]

I always wondered the point of the electoral college

[Feyrisshire]

Well, who knows.... A lot of things have happened in the last years, and things would change in the years to come...

Do you think the US will have a "decades in moments" event this year?

We already had in the past years.

[Esalia]

In safe states/electoral divisions, pretty much.

In competitive states/electoral divisions, not really.

[Sanghyeok]

Do you think the US will have a "decades in moments" event this year?

We already had in the past years.

But none of them have led to the results- systematic changes- that we were hoping for. Only small concessions here and there were given to us.

[Petrolheadia]

The 2020 US election has so far failed to materialise the changes that were expected. Therefore, I wanted to ask: is voting useless in the US for change and progressivism? Will people finally realise the futility of electoralism there, and begin to use methods of direct action such as general strike and disruption? Or do you still believe that voting isn't useless in their system?

I've argued that voting in the US has been useless for some time due to the broken and outdated electoral system, although I didn't post this yesterday to avoid accusations that I'm a Russian spy/Chinese saboteur/Kim Yo-Jung. I think the only way forward would be direct action such as large scale nonviolent protests and strikes. But that is my opinion, and I want to ask you in the words of comrade Lenin, "what is to be done?"

Failed to materialise the changes expected... by whom, exactly?

Biden won the Dem nomination because he had the most votes, and now he'll likely win the country while having the most votes. Seems like the changes expected by the majority will happen.

[Feyrisshire]

We already had in the past years.

But none of them have led to the results- systematic changes- that we were hoping for. Only small concessions here and there were given to us.

Well changes don't happen in a day.

Plus we're not really sure what would happen either next, but for example the Trump Presidency is a nadir moment plus the intensity of the George Floyd protests and struggles and CHAZ were not really seen before (maybe except the isolated 1992 Los Angeles riots) but it's also naive to assume that the current state of things will go forever