Hacker News Reader

Comment by exe34 | Hacker News Reader

it's almost as if American citizens were responsible for who they elected.

Yes but not all of them, no need to drag every person into this.

The majority did. That’s how democracy works; you take responsibility for the elected government, regardless of your personal opinion.

It was a slim majority of those who actually voted, so less than half of eligible voters. There are many, many people who are not happy with how things are going.

It doesn't matter. If it's not our (I'm from the U.S.) fault, then whose fault is it? We all, collectively, are ultimately responsible for the outcome of the election. It was our job to convince everyone, including those who didn't vote, to vote for the opposition instead. We failed.

People who are hurt by the policies of this administration aren't going to say "gee, one third of the United States really sucks." Nor should they. Right now, the United States sucks. The onus is on us, all of us, to fix it.

I voted, donated a ton of money, and canvassed in swing states. I'm not taking any of the blame for what happened.

Every time there's a school shooting, somebody defends gun rights "because muh well-armed militias" - I'm yet to see that put into action. Or maybe the well-armed militias are happy with the "progress".

> slim majority of those who actually voted, so less than half of eligible voters

Non voters implicitly endorse the status quo, even if they don’t understand the consequences of their choices.

No, surely non voters endorse the opinions of those who effectively vote on their behalf. To endorse the status quo you must vote for it.

Sure, we’re quibbling over when we measure the status quo. I’m measuring it across the election, pre and post. If you don’t vote you effectively endorsed the outcome even if you came up with some bizarre logic around why that isn’t the case. (Similarly, a vote for a third party in a swing state is de facto a vote for the major candidate you wouldn’t have voted for.)

To the point here, Americans who didn’t vote bear responsibility for our current political situation.

OK, good point.

> of those who actually voted

Sounds like they were happy to roll the dice. Play stupid games.

In this particular election, it doesn’t feel like non-voters get a pass. Even people outside the US were constantly inundated by what was at stake. In 2016, sure, everyone was caught by surprise. In 2024, non-voters don’t get to complain about the result, they have themselves to blame.

This is true for all elections where majority rules and voting is optional. Not voting effectively is an endorsement of whoever ends up winning. By not voting you are saying "I am OK with whoever wins."

Trump won the plurality, not the majority.

So?

You deal with the government as-in.

It's not like we say "Oh, Nalvany was a great guy so we shouldn't sanction Russia".

I'm just pushing against this idea that some overwhelming majority of Americans voted for and support Trump, when that's not true.

Not voting means supporting the winner. You don’t get to just sit out of the game (for the vast majority of non voters who have no excuse other than apathy or laziness).

well, meny did not choose democracy in the first place, it's "inherited". and even if they choosen, did not choose the FPP voting system. even if they accepted FPP, can not express weighted favor to individual policies of either of the total sum of 2 parties programm. and even if one fully agreed on a party's program at election time, there is no mechanism to express loss of confidentality (from the general public's side), kinda "un-vote", during reign. you are not responsible for something you have no control over. or other words: you have as much responsibility over something as much control you have over it. so no, average Joe is so far removed from the executive and legistlative powers that he must not be considered responsible for them.

That’s a lazy excuse. For one, you vote representatives you expect to represent your political will. If they don’t do this as you would expect them to, you voted for the wrong party, and can correct that decision at the next election. Second, democracy isn’t something that happens in Washington, asking the rest of the country about their opinion every four years. It happens every single day, everywhere. If you just resign and say „I couldn’t have made a difference anyway, so I do nothing“, you’re on the level of German Wehrmacht soldiers after World War II that were „just following orders“. If you’re unhappy with politics, get involved and stand up against it. It you don’t do that, nobody else will. And lastly, even if you’re a Democrat, you’re living in a democratic country, and that means you carry the majority and take responsibility for it as a community.

About 90 million Americans didn’t vote in the election; 75 million voted for his opponent

That’s 165 million people—about 60%—of Americans who didn’t vote for the current president.

Those who did not vote but could have, effectively voted for whoever ended up being the winner. By choosing not to vote, they were indicating they were OK with whoever won.

> By choosing not to vote, they were indicating they were OK with whoever won.

That’s definitely not how it works.

I didn’t vote in 2016 but was definitely NOT okay with Trump winning.

I also live in a state where Hillary Clinton won every county that year, so my non-vote made no difference in the outcome.

On the other hand, if I lived in a swing state or if we elected the president by popular vote, I would have voted for Clinton regardless of my personal feelings.

Also many people choose not to vote to express their dislike for both candidates.

True but only because the last guy as well as the gal they offered as alternatives were so out of touch.

You can tell because now Newsom is singing a different tune. He even denies ever using the word “latinx” and Bernie now claims secure borders are a must…

Don’t put people is a position where they will make a choice you (the other guys and gals) will regret. Don’t “dare” them.

Bernie was never big on immigration [1].

He's just big on being a decent person. So don't do things like store people on concrete floors under 24h lights. It doesn't mean that he wants unfettered immigration.

> (2015) [2] So I was disappointed, if not surprised, at the visceral horror with which Bernie Sanders reacted to the idea when interviewed by my colleague Ezra Klein. “Open borders?” he interjected. “No, that’s a Koch brothers proposal.” The idea, he argued, is a right-wing scheme meant to flood the US with cheap labor and depress wages for native-born workers. “I think from a moral responsibility, we’ve got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty,” he conceded, “but you don’t do that by making people in this country even poorer.”

[1]: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/25/21143931/b...

[2]:

"look at what you made me do" - the narcissist prayer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com