Please check the rules before commenting. Rule 7 in particular.
deleted by creator
apologies if this isn’t the place for this, but after bernie lost his nomination, I had become disenfranchised and sat out 2 elections. Now I’m seeing all the work that went into making me feel disenfranchised as mechanisms to control my vote; I don’t understand it, but if so much work is going into controlling peoples ability to vote… it must matter more than I can comprehend.
Online, you have no way of knowing what someone does instead of voting.
deleted by creator
my saying “revolution is actually better, proceeds to never do revolution”
Saying this in isolation, is painting all anti-electoralists with as do-nothings and paints non-electoralist praxis as ineffective. If you don’t want to violate rule 7, word things more accurately.
deleted by creator
You did say it isolation. You randomly shared this statement just to pile-in.
maybe I would have been better to say “dual power is better, proceeds to never attempt to build dual power”
It’s the same thing with different phrasing. So not better.
Obviously it’s hyperbole, one that violates rule 7, given that it shames anti-electoralism.
deleted by creator
Is there a rule against shaming people for making stupid rules?
deleted by creator
Nope. Give it a shot, let’s see how those gears turn.
Mmm praxis
For a community based on anarchy there sure are a bunch of rules on what you can and cannot say… 😂
Freedom of association
you’re right. the philosophy of anarchy is equivalent to chaotic dungeons and dragons alignment.
The anarchism understander has logged on
Anarchy implies a lack of hierarchy, not a lack of rules.
Shouldn’t we all be mods here then?
Well, I suppose not if we elect mods and can revoke their mod status. Anarchy also doesn’t imply a lack of representation, broadly speaking, so much as it usually implies a revocable delegate model rather than a representative model. I’m not an expert though, if I’m wrong someone else please feel free to correct me or articulate this better.
Every single time I’m here I get more confused how it’s supposed to work. 😂 One day I’ll understand you fine folks!
Stay awhile. Nothing clears up confusion like immersing oneself. @butwhyishischinabook@anarchist.nexus is broadly on point.
Lol think something along the lines of “we give you permission to do X on our behalf, unless and until we vote that your right to do so is revoked,” as opposed to “we elect you to do as you see fit in the name of our interests for X years.” Oversimplification obviously, but hopefully that clarifies it a bit.
deleted by creator
A vote for Harris was a vote to keep federal criminal prosecutions and convictions of Trump, his brownshirts, and his apparatchiks.
When does not voting start working? People have been doing that way longer than 2018
When does voting?
Uh, Mamdani has been improving things quite a lot.
The amount of people like Mamdami who got used their local success to get voted higher and then achieved nothing of note because the system makes that impossible, is longer than the word count limit here. It is, in fact, proof that voting achieves nothing. 100 years of voting for the lesser evil, and you’ll at Trump and project 2025.
Uh, no, that’s ridiculous. It worked. You can’t use the fact that it didn’t work other times to negate the clear and present evidence that it can, in fact, work and did, in fact, work in this case.
It’s not ridiculous. It’s ridiculous to expect something different from the past 100 years of worldwide history.
We’ve been voting for lesser evil for 100 years because people don’t show up to vote. Mamdani showed that when people show up to the primaries, they get better candidates, and when they then show up to the general, those better candidates can win. Mamdani is something different than the past, and he got there by votes. It’s not ridiculous to believe in something you watched happen.
The problem with your argument is that it’s unfalsifiable. When the lesser evil wins, you don’t see how much worse the greater evil would have been. What if just a few more left-leaning Floridians had voted in 2000 and Al Gore had won? You think climate change would be this bad? You think we would’ve gone into Iraq and Afghanistan? You think we would’ve gotten Trump and Project 2025? It’s a perfect example of your strategy directly leading to what we have today.
You do realize that they could just drop the pretence of democracy and install a dictator if they do not get their way right? The CIA has been evading congress oversight for years.
We’ve been voting for lesser evil for 100 years because people don’t show up to vote.
I urge to look at the many many times people turned up to vote for socialist (and sometimes even marxist) candidates in many many countries,and ended up betrayed with the same old capitalism anyway. It’s just absolutely naive this time it will be different.
Vote anyway.
Yes, they suck. They suck a lot less than Trump and the Republican party though, and in a choice between two you absolutely should be voting for the less shit choice.
I’ll remind that a vote for anyone doesn’t prevent you from taking other actions. Considering the way that this administration has gone so far, not voting might drastically limit other actions that can be taken.
From best option in voting to worst:
- Voting for a good candidate
- Voting for a better candidate than you have
- Voting for the least shit choice
- Not voting
- Voting for the worst possible choice
My options will not be great in all races, but you can damn well bet I’ll be voting.
I’ll also note that they wouldn’t be working so hard to try and take away peoples right to vote if they didn’t think it risked their plans.
Please, put their plans at risk. Take every path to a better option.
Before “voting for a good candidate” there’s also “mass protests” and “general strike”
Those aren’t election items though, and please read the last line again.
Voting takes five minutes. Do those too, but they are not mutually exclusive to voting. If you have the time and energy to participate (let alone organize) those then do them! It certainly means you have five minutes spare to vote too.
Yes, they suck. They suck a lot less than Trump and the Republican party though, and in a choice between two you absolutely should be voting for the less shit choice.
the less shit choice is any third party candidate on your ballot. You didn’t draw the line at genocide.
I can’t wait for you to realize your voting option list is literally this for many people:
Voting for a good candidate -> trump!
Voting for a better candidate than you have -> trump!
Voting for the least shit choice -> trump!
Not Voting -> fuck this noise
Voting for the worst possible choice -> what troll dems are running!Once you start putting magnitudes on directionality you wont get the outcome you think you’ll get. see literally the campaigns of harris/clinton.
When people tell you your candidate sucks and they wont vote for them, that’s a problem for you and your candidate to resolve not the voter who is informing you of their disdain for your candidate.
Please, put their plans at risk.
Yes, this is exactly what I’m doing when I’m withholding my vote from shitty dem and repub candidates who have been enabling this behavior for decades. (see above)
So what’s your solution? Pouting in the corner and saying “I’m not playing”?
Removed by mod
Plenty have been targetted with propaganda.
I have a related degree, but it’s no secret that you target those who are never going to vote for you with propaganda to make them cynical and abstain from voting. It’s what Cambridge Analytica was infamous for (Brexit, first Trump campaign, etc.), but there are others.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Cynicism was a significant factor in the downfall of the Weimar Republic. That cynicism was in large part fostered and exacerbated by Nazi propaganda.
Everyone is susceptible to propaganda, but especially those who think they aren’t. Propaganda is especially effective when it contains a kernel of truth.
Its funny that the propaganda you refer to is always ‘well they werent going to do anything for you anyways’ and have it be true. last time i heard a mainstream democrat run on a decent platform was obama. since then its been nothing but ‘well we cant do that! its not capitalist!’
Yes that is just as bad as Trump and Co actively dismantling institutions and lining their pockets at our expense. What a tough choice.
My dad is worse than your dad! I Never said it was a tough choice. just that my choice is not to vote for either shit pile. you’re free to continue voting for whatever idiot you want to. I’ll occassional toss my vote in when it offers material change on the ground. if it doesnt, then i wont.
Here is a list of things that will get that check box:
- candidate needs to full throatedly support single payer.
- candidate needs to shut their whore mouths about ‘supporting {minority group} is costing us the elections!’
- full throated prolabour positions: minimum paid / sick leave / paternity leave / living wage automatic inflation adjustments / forcing companies to bring labor position back or UBI.
- full throated support for monopoly busting.
I’ll take any one of those bullet points and I’ll be arsed to roll out of bed for your candidate. There are other things as well but I dont think an exhaustive list is necessary.
American politics is an emotive subject if you’re American, which I assume you are.
Apply your argument to the brexit referendum, where many of the same arguments you’re making were made by pro-brexit campaigners, and where mainstream politicians on both sides of the aisle have also failed many British people, especially the working classes.
While the latter was and still is absolutely true, it was also used by Cambridge Analytica, to decrease voter turn-out in targetted demographic groups.
Would you have voted in that referendum?
The end result was arguably emboldened racists, a divided Europe, lack lustre economic and job growth, poor treatment of migrants, a country closer to far-right rule than it has been in a long time, and a select elite getting richer. But then life would have gotten worse for many people even if the UK had voted to stay in the EU, and the leave result did give the establishment a much necessary bloody nose, so you could argue there wasn’t much point voting either way.
This is a genuine question. I don’t have easy answers.
I apologize I didnt mean you ignore you.
Would you have voted in that referendum?
yes, and I would have voted against brexit. just like i actively engage in activities that prevent isreali from murdering palestinians.
Classifying shit as propaganda isnt useful. its basically just the dissemination of information at its core good or bad.
The reason activities like cambridge analytica work is because the information is often true and verifiable. We have a long history of moderate dems never delivering on workers interest by always having just enough votes not to.
The only way to get it to not work is for the democrats to start fucking delivering to the working class. but that wont happen until your remove the corporate mouth pieces.
Kamala never would have lost if she came out hard for workers and gaza. instead she gave us… drumroll legalized weed. something 80% of the population already has.
I dont vote for genocide however you wish to classify the scope as more or less.
Removed by mod
Who said I’m pouting/not playing. just because i dont for your candidate doesnt mean Im not taking actions. Sorry I’m currently busy running a network protecting my local community from the jackboots. LMK when you have a candidate who isnt running on ‘planning to murder friends and family in the middle east’ and ‘going to continue promoting corporate interests at the expense of working americans’ and I’ll vote for them.
You’re literally doing the same thing the person who I called out is doing. inferring incorrect motives from a noisy signal.
I’m just curious if you’re getting involved in grassroots activism, promoting candidates you agree with, canvassing the neighborhood to try to drum up support, etc. Because these are the sorts of things that need to happen in order to produce a candidate you agree with. It’s completely disienguous to put the entire onus of finding a candidate you agree with on other people.
I want you to vote. I care less about who you vote for than I do you voting at all. Exercising your civic right to choose your representation is a big deal, and I encourage you to stop getting mad at other people for not doing your own legwork, and instead get out there and promote a candidate you agree with. Hell, maybe you should run yourself. I don’t know, but I do know that sitting around getting mad because you don’t like the major candidates without doing anything about it gets us all nowhere.
Oh so now someone has to promote candidates they agree with in order to be involved in grassroots organizing
this is an anarchist space
Why is it so hard for people to get that the problem is the system, that by promoting any candidate for any role is promoting the system itself? There will never be a candidate I agree with because the people who are empowered by the American constitution to dissolve the union aren’t elected officials.
“I tried nothing and it didn’t work” isn’t a strategy that works for me.
I’m not going to sit on my butt and complain into the void. I will do everything I can to get to where I want the world to where I hope it can go.
Organizing is not in conflict with anarchism.
Pretending the system doesn’t exist or that not participating in any way will change it is a fool’s errand.
Feel free to find another way to participate, but trying to push others to not do what they can, to me, is (at best) an effort to continue the downward trend.
This is absurd. Electoral organizing isn’t the only kind of organizing. Organizing outside of electoral campaigns is not doing nothing. Telling people the only way to organize or do anything to influence politics is through election campaigns is absolutely in conflict with anarchism.
I’m not going to sit on my butt and complain into the void.
This is literally what you’re doing, right now.
I’m just curious if you’re getting involved in grassroots activism, promoting candidates you agree with, canvassing the neighborhood to try to drum up support, etc. … It’s completely disienguous to put the entire onus of finding a candidate you agree with on other people.
Talk about being disingenuous. not to mention holier than thou.
Sorry I’m currently busy running a network protecting my local community from the jackboots.
What part of this statement makes you think I havent/dont do all the above. I’m mad that you chuckle fucks keep riding the vote harder while continuing to give your support to candidates neither of us, allegedly, want instead of letting those candidates just lose because they literally suck.
I’m mad that you chuckle fucks keep riding the vote harder while continuing to give your support to candidates neither of us, allegedly, want instead of letting those candidates just lose because they literally suck.
What would that accomplish? Sincerely, no one has been able to explain to me how the slightly-less-bad candidate losing provides any benefit whatsoever.
It’s not like the other mainstream candidate doesn’t also suck, and moreso in fact.
It’s not like if enough people sit out the election it triggers some secret clause written into the Constitution in invisible magic ink. One of the candidates that suck still wins.
I’m genuinely curious, what is supposed to happen if we let them lose? Who does that help besides the slightly shittier candidate?
Sincerely, no one has been able to explain to me how the slightly-less-bad candidate losing provides any benefit whatsoever.
sounds like a you problem. I’ve addressed this literal question repeatedly.
I mean, the DSA is doing a half way decent job of that in at least a few electorates…
Indeed they are. guess what candidates I’ve done work for…
Yeah… Reading your other comments, I think you actually have a decent take on this, but I think the way you’re communicating it isn’t working for the audience…
Reading comprehension on their end isnt my problem to solve. They are either incapable or unwilling to comprehend.
You are confusing individual action to limit further harm with a candidate’s strategy to win votes. They are not the same thing. No one is saying “we want apathetic do-nothings to win” they’re saying “I’d rather not have the villians win, if possible”
Oi, god people are so dense. Please tell me, which one did I think was not a villian? If you want your candidate to win, please put forward one who isnt a villian and I’ll glad vote for them.
I wasn’t the person you replied to here, but I think we are talking about Palpatine vs Team Rocket here.
I’d vote for Team Rocket over Palpatine any day of the week.
This isnt about you. I’ve told you this repeatedly. Its about the people you’re trying to get to vote and they dont care about your preferences. LMK when you have a point that isnt ‘other people should vote like i do’
I don’t believe I said that at any point, and I’d encourage you to not try and put words in my mouth.
Vote anyway.
Yes, they suck. They suck a lot less than Trump and the Republican party though, and in a choice between two you >absolutely should be voting for the less shit choice.
I’ll remind that a vote for anyone doesn’t prevent you from taking other actions. Considering the way that this administration >has gone so far, not voting might drastically limit other actions that can be taken.
From best option in voting to worst:
literally the initial comment I responded to w/ you. lol. if you can’t find a candidate you can say ‘hey this is the person you can vote for because of …’ thats a candidates problem. not the voter who has 0 interest in voting for them because they’re shitty.
you’re entire post is ‘vote for this less genocidal candidate’ as if its incentive. fuck off.
I think you grossly underestimate my understanding.
No, my answer does not change. If you take the time to read it rather than blindly respond to me recommending to vote anyway, you may discover why.
you think not voting is different from voting for the least shit choice. where is my corporate needs you to find the differences photo… if you want someones vote you need to find a candidate that has a platform they’ll vote for. simple as that.
Yes.
It is. And I consider it foolish to pretend otherwise.
Exactly, I understood your point precisely. The problem is you dont understand human behavior and its why you end up losing. repeatedly. to trump.
You: I dont have to change! You have to change!.
Other person: walks away
You: shocked pikachuNo, you clearly did not understand.
“Not voting” is a message of apathy, not discontent.
“Not voting” is being OK with things as they are.
“Not voting” is not taking every avenue possible.
“Not voting” is nothing more than giving up.
You should try reading my comment again.
Removed by mod
As I said. you’re not understanding.
“Not voting” is nothing more than giving up.
false. I vote every election, I dont vote for everything on the ballot, sometimes i leave the ballot empty. two very different things. all you need to do is look at mandami’s results for the distinction. spend some time there and understand that there are many people willing to show up for the right candidate but wont show up for the shitshow that is the dem party currently.
You need to stop putting your values into your distinctions between the tiers.
Lol, then walk away bro. All I see if you here struggling to prove yourself right.
All I see if you here struggling to prove yourself right.
That sounds like a you problem. ;)
functionally I’m grateful harris lost it woke a lot of people up. sadly not you though. you’ll continue trucking on with your ‘at least I voted for the least horrible fucking option!’ path blindly until the ground falls out below you into fascism.
Came back to check on🧵 after my downranks.
Find out 50501 billionaires still want to pretend to be grassroots.
If only electoralists spent more time demolishing deathcamps than canvassing on the net.Removed by mod
No it doesnt. stop telling yourself this lie all you’re doing is preventing real solutions being brought to the fore.
Realize that democratic moderates are shit candidates and many people dont support them and move on the faster shit will get fixed. No more - ‘they’re more electable!’ ‘X wont win’ ‘harm reduction’ no one cares.
If your shitty candidate is more electable than mine then you dont need my vote. if they’re not, then your candidate better have something i support and not things you imagine i should support. heads up libs gavin/peter/etc are not on my 2028 card.
Removed by mod
That’s what primaries are for. If you elected a bad Democrat, that’s your fault.
Man I have a super powerful vote! lol. No primaries are to try to influence the result in the general. The general election is something I’m more than willing to sit out on if the primary decides to put in a shit candidate.
You really ought to just sit down. Was trump/Biden your first general?
Ah yes, infantilizing someone who didnt vote for your preferred candidate. but no it wasnt. I stopped voting for dem presidents back in 1992 with a small hiccup in 2008 when it looked like we might get universal healthcare at a minimum.
Well, if you’re not gonna express your political opinions in any relevant way, kinda sounds like we shouldn’t listen to ya at all.
what are you on about lol. this thread has never been about me. Its literally been about people not listening to what voters want from the get go and demanding votes for nothing.
this thread has never been about me
If your shitty candidate is more electable than mine then you dont need my vote. if they’re not, then your candidate better have something i support and not things you imagine i should support. heads up libs gavin/peter/etc are not on my 2028 card.
yes and? dunces keep making it about me. so I’m making it very clear on where i stand regardless. but the generality of the conversation has nothing to do with me. learn to separate issues. the fact they can’t separate my personal views from why not voting isnt the same as consent isnt my problem.
If enough people don’t believe in either party, real revolution becomes a possibility.
And most of us won’t live through that.
Best get on removing those shitty dems then now.
What’s a real solution?
- Stop voting for shit stain moderate dems entirely general/primary or otherwise.
- organize locally for someone / run for office yourself. <— you’re failing here.
falling for db0’s click bait isnt effective use of your time. unfortunately if your local area failed on 1 & 2 you’re semi stuck for this cycle and do whats in your best interest this cycle. stop looking to others.
As if wasting your time is doing any sort of electoralism is going to achieve anything. Hint of your “socialist” candidates are going to just do Capitalism again.
laugh hey bud. =) wondered when you’d check back in to sweep up the fishies.
The trick is you still need to protest against the government you voted for.
We only have two parties, so our choices are limited. Dems are no picnic, but they are still better than MAGAs. All we had in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024 were all the same Corpo-Establishment Dems that helped MAGA rise to power.
But since 2024, things have been changing, and the Progressive/ Socialists have been taking over the Dems, so 2026 will be much different.
If we can get through 2026 and 2028, and establish new leadership in the party and Congress, then we might be able to save our country.
If we just end up with the same Corpo-Establishment losers like Schmuck & Jeffries, then yeah, we might as well burn it all down.
Way more than 2 parties in the US. The problem is that elections seem to be a measure of unity more than a measure of popularity. You can’t split the vote for the “not hitler” candidate when all the racists, modern-day slavers, religious wackos, and generally the bottom half of humanity, are unified behind one candidate. There is a time and place for everything, and people need to learn pragmatism and how to pick their battles.
deleted by creator
Like dems had power under Biden, no changes made
Eh, not really. Kinda for the first 2 years, but that included people like Manchin, Sinema, Golden from Maine (the only one to vote against the Floyd Justice in Policing Act and the Covid19 stimulus), along with Gottheimer, Schrader, Costa, Case, Murphy, Rice, Vela, Bordeaux, and Cueller who were the most right leaning of the bunch in the house, pretty much all members of the shitheels known as the Blue Dog Coalition.
That last group is why the tax hikes for the wealthy and capital gains increases didn’t go through. Along with a lot of the infrastructure bill getting yoinked and drug pricing reform bill getting reduced down.
they always have just enough manchins to never have to do anything good
15 years as a Senator made it really easy to have that Manchin, yes.
Almost like you need to deal with Manchin before he’s back on the ballot again through a primary.
I know, its crazy stuff. Very complicated.
Buddy, I’m old enough to remember when Obama had 60 votes in the Senate while they were doing Obamacare. The vaunted public option, we were told, was a non-starter, because we only had 55 or so votes in support of it.
Then, a while later, they decided to do it via reconciliation, so they would only need 51 votes. But! The public option was still a no-go, because we only had like 48 or so votes in support of it. The other 7, we were told, still supported the public option–but not via reconciliation.
This is how the Democrats operate, and why voting for them never achieves anything meaningful: they are lying to you about what policies they support.
So am I.
Lieberman, Nelson, Conrad, Carper, Lincoln and Baucus iirc were the problems.
Who were the consistent problems at the time.
This is how the Democrats operate, and why voting for them never achieves anything meaningful: they are lying to you about what policies they support.
I think you are misunderstanding what I said.
I’m saying the “kinda” had a majority.
At no point did I say I think Democrats are what I want or think they have policies I want.
Do they have policies I prefer over the Republicans? Yes.
Are they a better option than the republicans right now? Also yes.
Are they who I want in a government I want? Absolutely the fuck not.
These are different things, dont confuse them.
Keeping Dem incumbents in power by slavishly voting for them every time they come up for re-election is exactly how the party has stayed as limited as it has. Your solution works exactly as long as it takes for shitty centrist Dems to fuck everything up (with help from climate change and the generally awful state of the world right now), at which point the country swings back to the fascists. Your whole argument was made in 2020, and your side won then. Would you say “harm reduction” has worked? I wouldn’t.
PS: I don’t vote for genociders, full stop.
Keeping Dem incumbents in power by slavishly voting for them every time they come up for re-election is exactly how the party has stayed as limited as it has.
Confusing the general elections and primaries are also an issue.
You aren’t changing the ticket a month and change before the election.
Work to do that starts earlier. I worked with some DSA and WFP folks to get some socialists minded folks on more local tickets, unfortunately there was nothing for the larger positions this time around.
If you don’t like the people on the ballot, you will need to start making efforts much, much earlier than weeks before voting begins.
PS: I don’t vote for speeding up the destruction of the world. Full stop.
when it wasnt manchin, it was lieberman or whoever. somehow, magically, there’s always just enough of them at any given time
In liberal democracy money is power. The parties are different, but Democrats and Republicans are funded by the similar sources.
"Change takes time” ok why can trump do change overnight?
Because Republican voters actually vote, and that means Republicans have actual numbers in both houses of Congress. Also crimes, but mostly controlling Congress since Republicans actually vote.
Eh, they did convict him of dozens of felonies, though. Didn’t matter. The supposedly tough on crime party elected a felon.
The people actively making the world a worse place to live in for everyone are the ones who benefit by people not voting out of protest. They aren’t going to stop if Americans sit by and leave them in power, so wouldn’t the better option be to vote out the jokers who are in and make the powers that be bribe new politicians? At least make them work.
If left in power, the ones not getting voted out will mistake complacency for capitulation and consent and both for support of what they are doing. And, they won’t be entirely wrong if the people don’t do what’s in their power and within the law to do.
Voting has a relatively low individual cost even if the power from the wealthy remains intact. Americans can slow down the decline of liberal democracy by making political races more expensive. In the end, voting is like throwing a chair in front of Michael Myers. He is still going to stab you, but you can slow him down. Voting against incumbents is a civic duty.
In the meantime, take care of those around you. Create some horizontal power by building community. Maybe get some cardio, growing and preparing food, securing water, outdoor skills and marksmanship.
You know what the definition of insanity is right?
Yes:
“unsoundness of mind or lack of the ability to understand that prevents someone from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or that releases someone from criminal or civil responsibility”
No, it is doing something over and over expecting a different result (according to the late great psychologist Alfred Einstein MD who didn’t even say that).
That’s interesting too though because it’s the definition of a factoid, which is an erroneous statement presented as fact because of broad repetition.
Do people actually think that’s the real definition of insanity? I literally thought it was a bit and had no idea of who could have said it.
Looks like another psyop to me, boss
It’s crucial that everyone vote because it needs to be a landslide, to overcome whatever rigging they have in store.
Obama could have dismantled ICE and ended support for Israel and closed Guantanamo and ended the siege on Cuba and didnt. Biden could have and didnt. And those are just things that could be done by executive order. Why do you still have any faith in the moderate fascists?
It occurred to me that Biden was totally overshadowed by a panel of aged clerics nonstop interpreting religious scripture into law, as the republicans had stuffed the supreme court with their political appointees. And yet after two terms of Clinton and two of Obama you were supposed to believe that nothing could possibly have been engineered to stop that.
I don’t really, I’m just clinging to false hope like everyone else
Well the first step to actually doing anything is to understand nobody can stop any of this on their own and nobody is going to save us but us.
They aren’t even threatening to imprison Trump or the nazi party for their crimes anymore. They aren’t using their power to inspect ICE facilities or making a coordinated, public effort to document all the crimes. There are over 250 Dem reps in Washington and most of them are silent, taking the extended leave the nazi party granted; occasionally virtue signaling on the nazi xitter platform; settling into the kleptocracy and taking part in the corruption, the same as the Dem majority always has.
Voting for right wing Democrats encourages the behavior.
