is not voting despite being eligible an endorsement of the winner?
Context is king. For some places, sure, like in Japan the voter turnout is always around 40% and is typically seen as endorsement for the Japanese Liberal party that de facto rules the country for 70 years. But in the US, it is more nuanced than that. It could mean Americans who abstained don’t like either candidates, or felt that federal policies won’t affect their states and thus “Trump-proofed”. Or for the staunchly Republican states, they feel that voting for presidential elections won’t affect anything.
If Democrats really want to win the next presidential election, the party really needs to change and excite voters.
The main point of contention between the 2 comments is: is not voting despite being eligible an endorsement of the winner?
Context is king. For some places, sure, like in Japan the voter turnout is always around 40% and is typically seen as endorsement for the Japanese Liberal party that de facto rules the country for 70 years. But in the US, it is more nuanced than that. It could mean Americans who abstained don’t like either candidates, or felt that federal policies won’t affect their states and thus “Trump-proofed”. Or for the staunchly Republican states, they feel that voting for presidential elections won’t affect anything.
If Democrats really want to win the next presidential election, the party really needs to change and excite voters.