• PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m not obligated to encourage anyone to vote for the lesser evil so long as the lesser evil still has an opportunity to be less evil.

    Wow. Literally saying the quiet part out loud - “As long as the Democrats are not 100% in line with my views, it’s okay to endorse inaction and the takeover of a fascist regime on the pretext that the Democrats Aren’t Good Enough™”

    • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Wow. Literally saying the quiet part out loud - “Some random bullshit I just made up that hardly resembles what you said”

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m not obligated to encourage anyone to vote for the lesser evil so long as the lesser evil still has an opportunity to be less evil.

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            5 months ago

            A lack of endorsement for a thing =! endorsement for the opposite thing

            Oh, when there are only two possible choices, it very much is, whether or not you want to confront that. If there is an infant drowning in an ankle-deep pool in front of you, doing anything other than saving the infant is endorsing its death.

            Before you is a very simple and very easy choice - fascism, or non-fascism. Yet your kind reject non-fascism, every single time. Curious.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              Oh, when there are only two possible choices

              Actually in this context there’s at least 4:

              • vote for a candidate AND endorse voting for the candidate
              • don’t vote for a candidate AND don’t endorse voting for the candidate
              • vote for a candidate AND don’t endorse voting for the candidate
              • don’t vote for a candidate AND endorse voting for the candidate

              Nobody has actually ‘voted’ for a candidate yet, all anyone has done thus far is endorse or not endorse voting for a candidate. Just as a reminder:

              I’ll vote for harm reduction if it comes down to it

              • Dkarma@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                Only because of the electoral college you’re entirely wrong here.

                There are only two choices.

                1. Biden gets to 270 ec votes
                2. He doesn’t and trump is appointed by Congress or gets to 270

                There is no other option in the long run.

              • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                14
                ·
                5 months ago

                Actually in this context there’s at least 4:

                All of which boil down to “Try to rescue the infant” or “Varying levels of letting the infant drown or hoping someone else will spontaneously see the infant and rescue them in your stead”

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      Democrats have to be perfect. Republicans just have to be on the ballot.