...have cost us at least three presidential elections would learn that same lesson.

We are not owed votes. We have to earn them. When we tell them "Sorry about your pony.", we aren't exactly motivating them to support our candidates.

It's true that we are not owed votes.

It's also true that if you did not vote for the Democratic candidate in 2016/2024, you helped Trump and his MAGA Republicans get elected and roll back hard fought for progress and therefore you should NEVER call yourself a progressive because you are no ally but an enemy to progressive causes.

The R still gets just as many votes. Therefore, you didn't help or hurt the Rs.

You did fail to help the Ds...which brings us back to the whole "owed vote" thing.

They said they didn't want to choose between """the lesser of two evils,""" but guess what happens when you don't vote for """the lesser of two evils""" in an election where someone will win regardless?

You empower the greater evil, which is exactly what has been done here.

I wish Reoublicans believed your logic, because they wouldn't have worked so hard to get that segment of the left to sit out the election -- and they subsequently would have lost.

Let "X" = Democratic votes
Let "Y" = Republican votes

X - 1 does not affect "Y".
X - 3000000 does not affect "Y".

Can't put it any more simply than that.

The only way your logic works is if Z=X+Y. And one is forced to vote for either X or Y. That's not the case. One may vote for neither, in which case they are a non-factor in Z.

X+1>Y. in a democracy.

Failing to help "X" isn't helping "Y."

... where you can ultiatmely just leave the store with neither. Rather, if you can't decide between A and B at the ballot box -- well, surprise, you are getting one of them regardless. So you really do need to honestly figure out which candidate would give you greater heartburn the day after Election Day... and then cast your friggin' vote for the other candidate.

===================

The R gets the same number but the D gets more if fewer Dems fail to vote. If the D gets more, the D has a better change of getting more than the R.

It doesn't make sense either.

Some specificity would help.

In fact, the "R" doesn't enter into it at all.

The voter has three choices: "R", "D", or "other". "Other" includes not voting at all. The voter is not obligated to any of those. Your position is that the voter owes their vote to "D" and if they don't pay that debt then they are helping the "R". The "R" can make the same claim about the same voter, can't they?

A result WILL happen. And it will either be D or R. There isn't going to be any miracle third party winner. At least not the way things work now.

Does anyone "owe" one party or another a vote? No. Will that person with the choice to make be impacted by the result of their non-decision? Yes. Good impact or bad? Depends on the result that comes from their refusal to decide.

Not making a choice IS making a choice - to give up your right to steer the result in a way that is beneficial to yourself and to the rest of the country. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face.

That being said, I do agree that the Democratic party should actively work to gain the active support of voters. But they also shouldn't make false promises or discard their own values to do so.

JMHO.

That means no one is going to be even 60% happy.
The Republican Party has marketed itself as an identity, not a coalition.

So yeah, we are dealing with identity politics.
Unfortunately, we don't have a Parliamentary system where the disparate non-conservative voters can still come out and vote for Candidates that espouse at least 80 - 90% of their interests and still have a chance of participating in the Democratic Coalition.
With all the problems that need solutions that the Democratic Party recognizes, demanding that one particular problem is more important than just being able to get into the position to make a changes to go forward is basically giving the election to those who want you and your ideals dead.
The problem is that the Republicans don't allow other voices, but the Democrats do.
And we don't have a Parliamentary system.
Staying at home means your voice has absolutely no chance of being heard.

If not look it up.

But God Damn! why the fuck focus on the minuscule portion rather than the fucking problem.

I just need a couple million people who knew better to do the right thing Susan Sarandon, Jill Stein, Ralph Nader, Eddie Glaud, Jim Webb, Doug Wilder. The entire pack of frauds who could not vote for Hillary and instead voted to create the problems we have today. Shame on them and those who think like them. I have and will continue to say, there is no perfict candidate but there is always a best choice. Make the realistic best choice for the good of all.

of difference between Republicans and Democrats".

It’s not in my heart, think lower, down around my ass. What a fucking jerk.