this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
824 points (91.8% liked)
Occupy Democrats
65 readers
8 users here now
Occupy Democrats is a merger of the goals and interests of Occupy with those of the Democratic Party.
founded 1 week ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Have a better option?
Bernie Sanders?
Oh wait, my bad, the DNC wants status quo.
Not that I disagree with you but my question wasn't aimed at hypothetically better options but practical, feasible ones.
There's the rub that makes calamity of FPTP: at lower levels, working to enable better candidates is good and important, but at the presidential level, the definition of "better" is tightly constrained by realism. The greatest saint would be worthless if they can't get elected, and at worst they would be actively harmful if their spoiler votes pull the less-bad candidate below plurality levels.
Before Bernie would become an option, the voting system itself would need a reform. That's a tall order to be sure.
The top brass of DNC could've easily banded together and picked someone that the people could easily voted for. But no, instead, they fear the change would be too much for them, and they chose to "compromise". They "compromised" with the far right, the very people their supporters despise.
For that, they picked a senile old man whose only selling point was "I'm not like the other guy". Then wen that didn't worked, they pick a woman whose only selling point was that she's a woman.
It wasn't popular among the people, but you know among whom that decision was popular? The billionaires.
We can see in the upcoming NYC mayor election when Mamdani got more popular. Even after coming around, some of them are still endorsing Cuomo. They even enlisted some help from the far-right.
I'm with you on all the complaints. My question is: what to do? When they hold all the liberties hostage that the R would gut, there's not much of a choice, at least in the presidential race.
I guess there would need to be enough pressure in the run-ups to rally them behind the popular option, but how could that pressure be achieved?
Here's the problem with reality: It's neither fair nor sporting. Often, the practical, feasible options aren't good ones. Fall off a boat in the middle of the ocean? Your practical, feasible options are die now, or tread water for hours and die.
Reforming the voting system might compare to trying to swim a thousand miles to shore. But that's reality.
If getting back on the boat is impossible for whatever reason (the analogy has to work, after all), the next best option for survival would inded be trying to swim. After that, treading water and hoping something will come to rescue you. Both require action on your part.
What I mean with practical, feasible options is ones that have at least a slight chance of improving things. Voting Bernie Sanders is a nice idea, but unless half the US suddenly come around to it, it's bound to be a wasted vote. Any vote that could have gone D but didn't (whether non-voter, 3rd party, R voter) is a vote that doesn't oppose the R bullshit.
Democrats are by no means a good choice, but the alternative is worse. Whether you just wanna tread water and hope things resolve on their own, or whether you wanna make an effort to swim to safety, both are better than letting the anti-democratic party drag you underwater.
Reality isn't fair indeed.