But if we vote for the non-vegan ice cream place, we're telling the leadership that we're okay with non-vegan options and no progress will ever be made!

/s for the illiterate

I'm sorry but this is an old tactic in my country. 2 major parties always fighting for power, and the one always ask to vote them because the other party will destroy the country.

And the blame goes to the no voters or the ice-cream voters or the voters that turn their back, not to the party itself or to their voters that did shit when they were in power for many years. Maybe its time to pay attention to what caused the problem and not to the result.

As for the USA, Trump is the outcome of the Democrats acting as Republicans for decades.

Edit: Last sentence is a bit oversimplification of the story, but Democrats had abandoned the working class and the low income people. They acted like moderate Republicans, especially in the economy.

This is kind of a good analogy for ranked choice voting, to be honest.

If "harm" and "less harm" are the only two options, then the only question is how quickly you die. There's the argument that we have to do "harm reduction" in order to buy time to organize for something better, but we've been procrastinating for decades apparently. Since all of history informs us that humans act only when inaction is no longer tenable (and sometimes not even then), really the only material difference between "harm reduction" and accelerationism is, again, the timeline.

Is voting for controlled opposition harm reduction?

Like I agree that Kamala was the correct choice, but her inevitably milquetoast liberal policies would keep us stagnant until people voted in the next Republican out of boredom

These kind of idiotic, condescending analogies are all that libs have to offer. That's literally why they lose.

Keep upvoting tho. Feel good about yourselves. That's the real win. \s

(edit: Bonus points for this devolving into carnist attacks on veganism.)

FPTP is the real winner here. It's why we have Trump. Why can't we vote for proportional representatives or ranked choice?

I do agree with people voting. But the disanalogy is that in the last one both parties wanted to drive off the cliff. Neither stood against genocide.

Allowing the Democratic Party to keep fielding right-of-center neoliberals who've consistently and repeatedly made concessions to the far right over the last four decades without ever demanding anything back, and allowed them to shift the Overton Window way over to Nazi territory, is NOT harm reduction. If you hadn't been such cowards the last three elections, there could have been a credible opposition party by now, but no, you're just going to keep chickening out every single "most important election in history" (aka every election ever).

The analogy is wrong right analogy would have been either drive of the cliff or push a kid bound to wheelchair off the cliff.