Hacker News Reader

Comment by gushogg-blake | Hacker News Reader

https://x.com/Acyn/status/1817007890496102490

According to Snopes[0] he claims he was urging Christians specifically (who don't usually vote in high numbers) to vote "just this time", then they wouldn't have to vote anymore for four more years, or something (which they wouldn't anyway...)

He was definitely addressing Christians (he repeats it several times) but at the end of the video he says "[...] we'll have it fixed so good you're not gonna have to vote", which does sound a bit suspect to me, even in context and taking into account the fact that he's often loose with his choice of words and phrasing.

[0]: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/vote-four-years/

View on HN

Classic example of how the media and the uninformed combine to take him out of context / in bad faith.

The absolutely true fact is that that statement had nothing, even so much as a hint of a dog whistle, to do with that you’re saying. Like not even a shred.

He was speaking to a populace that doesn’t typically vote. So he’s saying that they can just vote this one election, because it’s important for them to for their own good. Then, he’s saying “just this once” because, again, they typically don’t vote. And again - after that he says “I’ll fix it so good you won’t have to again” - this is in reference to him fixing the government so well that they won’t need to vote again since it will be so well-functioning.

By the way, this was my take originally, on first listen. It was reinforced further my listening to it again. It’s completely clearly the true take, and I think if you have trouble accepting that it’s because you’re disturbingly mislead by bias, probably not your own fault entirely, but undeniably so.

I agree that he probably wasn't talking about getting rid of voting altogether, but I'm still not sure on the logic of him getting the government into such good shape that Christians wouldn't need to vote anymore -- surely it would still be possible for the populace to vote in a terrible government that would undo all his improvements after his 4 years? But yeah, I suppose he could simply be saying that with his improvements, things would be stabilised and the stakes wouldn't be so high for the next election.

> I suppose he could simply be saying that with his improvements, things would be stabilised and the stakes wouldn't be so high for the next election.

By stabilized we mean it is not possible to ensure rights for women through election process? Because that is what "good government" per Chrisitians is. How is that not autocracy? Christians do not want improvements as in "better democracy". They want improvements as in "closer to theocracy".

How does him addressing it to Christians makes anything better? Like, yes, hardcore Christians are his fans, because they want to get rid of abortions, liberals and generally resent anyone but themselves.

The fact that Christians generally don't like to vote (which I wasn't aware of until just now) is relevant to the question of why he said "we'll fix it so good, you won't have to vote".

Because it's not true that Christians don't like to vote. You're just believing the back spin after he said it and was called out for it.

Christians do vote and see voting as a way to push for the legal restrictions they want. Them not having to vote anymore, because the rest of us cant get abortion, anticonception whatever else allowed through political process anymore is literally definition of "going away with democracy".

Which is actual political goal of radical evangelical christians, if you actually read what they write and listen what they say. It is not about them being allowed to be lazy, it is about them successfully creating religious state.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com