@woozle I think it's valid under SOME circumstances. In US in 2026, this is when votes really make the differences, even just to cancel out the one vote of Cybertrucker

@woozle

I don't want either major party because they're both ass.

Thankfully, the majority of our races here are at least technically non-partisan. Also there are almost always ballot measures to consider because we grind those out like bulk sausage here...

When you choose between two distasteful choices, your vote is a vector -- it is a line which starts with the candidate you rejected and goes through the candidate you reluctantly chose, with an arrow on the other side.

The direction towards which that arrow points indicates approximately which way you would like society to be moving.

(Not voting in that race means you're equally ok (or not) with either direction -- but society will move, one way or the other.)

@woozle Also: as long as the voting system itself still runs, not voting is always the worst choice. It ties with voting for the most obnoxious candidate standing for the election.

Not voting only becomes better than voting when the voting system has been so severely enshittified that who remains in power does not depend on whether other people are getting elected anymore. And even then, there have been cases where a would-be dictator gave up and called in the helicopter because the difference between exit polls and official results was so startling that he could not derive any legitimacy from the bogus results. One needs to exit the polling place in order to have a chance to be sampled by the exit poll.

EDIT: oops. fixed a really embarrassing typo that sort of reversed a big part of what I wanted to say. :blobcatblush:

@woozle

There are no morally blameless options but the popular background expectation is that there are and that if you just avoid all blame you’ll be blameless. Except that’s the recipe for incurring the most blame - caring more about your own reputation than other people.