Sorry, but I find this to be an excuse.

Voters can hold elected officials accountable by not re-electing politicians, not donating to them, and supporting candidates that will better represent them.

The problem is that most citizens are not civically knowledgeable or engaged which is why we continue to have to choose the lesser of two evils that are often the same in policy.

▲

ryandrake a day ago | parent [-]

The choice is between Anti Consumer Jerk #1 and Slightly Less Of An Anti Consumer Jerk #2. One of them is going to be in charge. There is no choice to simply not elect someone, and writing in a non-jerk is unrealistic.

	▲	thepryz 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		A civically informed and engaged population also has a choice to organize against the political establishment, run their own candidates, or create political action committees. The PAC can endorse and otherwise work to support a better candidate to win a primary (See David Hogg's Leaders We Deserve PAC), or if you don't mind getting a little dirty, the PAC can raise enough money to buy the politicians and bend them to their will. I do admit that this is more difficult for Presidential elections, but certainly this can be effective at the state and local level and arguably could be used effectively within Congress if done right. In fact, we might be seeing some of that begin to happen in states like Maine given the response Graham Platner has already received. Kat Abughazaleh is another example. She's a progressive who is taking a somewhat novel approach to her campaign in Chicago. And of course you have Zohran Mamdani in NYC mayoral race. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Platner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kat_Abughazaleh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zohran_Mamdani