“We recognize that, in the next four years, our decision may cause us to have an even more difficult time. But we believe that this will give us a chance to recalibrate, and the Democrats will have to consider whether they want our votes or not.”
That’s gotta be one of the strangest reasonings I’ve heard in a while.
Punishing the lesser of two evils by rewarding the greater evil isn’t going to lead in the direction you want it to.
Just it will, it it makes the lesser of two evils to turn to be actually good, instead of lesser evil.
Ones power in democracy isn’t in given ones vote It is in withholding it. Your vote is your hostage and the political party is the hostage negotiator trying to get it from you.
If you give away the hostage before the bargaining even begins, you have no leverage. You are nobody, non-entity. Your opinion and your interests don’t matter. Since you always release the hostage, before the negotiating starts.
At some point in comparative lesser of two evils must come the moment of “in absolute measures the evil is too much, even the lesser evil”. Withold vote and the egotistical lesser evil, who doesn’t want to lose to the greater evil has to listen to your concerns and turn course.
Until the first moment you withhold vote, they can happily slide in behind the greater evil just two microns behind them in the evil slide.
Again they understand that for the next 4 years, the thought is after that
The last 4 years of a GOP president saw 3 supreme court seats that will cause brutal ripples though our country for 20-30yrs at least.
Thinking that “whatever happens will only last 4 yrs” is either wildly stupid or intentionally misleading.
It’s a non-trivial assumption that there would even be a genuine election after that.
So they will help put someone in power that will remove fair elections? That makes no sense as a long term plan, imo it’s more likely they are trying to push democrats a certain way but are not truly entertaining the notion of voting for a fascist.