Donald Trump reveals plans for second term
- Thread starter squeezer
- Start date
That you want to pretend the system works differently than it does is the problem.
You've just admitted your entire argument is "Reality is too depressing, I will pretend something else instead."
I get that it's irrelevant.
You can't vote, so holding onto this delusional idea of voting doesn't actually affect much in the Presidential election.
But I'm just going to keep telling you that "I really want things to work this other way and so I will just pretend that they do and hopefully things will work out" is a terrible way to approach politics.
(Again - you aren't alone in taking this "head in the sand" approach.)
I realize that reality makes you mad.
Since you can't actually vote, I have no reason to coddle you.
Because you keep saying things like "it's too pessimistic".
That's a lot of self-soothing.
Good.
Funny that when it actually involves your own vote in your own riding in your own system, you pay attention to the reality of what the system produces.
See.
You have gone right back to thinking about this in terms of "reward".
Because less evil is always better than more evil.
Since you are proposing putting more evil in charge, you aren't really have any position to level accusations at anyone, are you?
This is you saying you don't accept my reasons for my views.
Ok
Ok, still on that same line.
Ok, more of the same.
I'm not mad.
Really?
No, I'll vote that way regardless of how the outcome looks.
I vote for the party I back.
No, I made reference to your views to see if you understood.
Genocide now - very fucking evil
Possible genocide later with democratic fuckery - likely also evil but later
Its still 'never again'.
I don't accept that voting for genocide is pragmatic, I think its enabling genocide.
You use the exact same justification that MAGA use when you confront them with backing a corrupt, racist, lying POS.
They will argue all politicians are all evil so you back who the one who is less evil or will at least do what you want (or even not do what you don't want done). You now argue that because both choices back aiding genocide then you need to choose the genocidal one that will at least do .......
What you are doing is enabling the corruption and decline of democracy by voting for someone you have admitted is likely aiding genocide. This is a really stupid electoral choice, it should be totally unimaginable, a shakespeare 'no one would believe' type situation where you choose between two ancient white men both backing aiding genocide. But it is what it is. A moral choice as problematic as Oppenheimer. Your total certainty that your choice is the best is your personal choice. But right now he's pissed off most youth in the US, the same kids who would be spending the summer knocking on doors for the dems and rallying their votes are now watching him back calling out the riot police on them for protesting genocide in a foreign country.
If you're happy with looking back and saying 'well, I only voted for a little genocide but it was pragmantic', that's your choice.
My choice is easier, vote NDP and work against the liberals even as we see the tiniest movement from them.
I know.
This is counter productive in a first past the post system, but you are determined not to understand that.
I haven't once argued this.
That you can't tell the difference isn't great.
Finish your sentence.
Right.
You believe your vote should show what kind of a moral person you are.
What it accomplishes or how it affects the world is beside the point to you.
As long as you get to pretend you washed your hands of it.
That isn't how voting works, but the reality upsets you too much, so you continue to pretend.
What?
The situation in Canada is different and so you have different choices?
What a shockingly complete agreement with my position.
Which is why the US system seems unable to change.
That you can't see the similarities is sad.
Left wingers here have argued for years that we wouldn't have voted for rump because we'd turf someone out for corruption.
Here you are arguing that the corruption/genocide doesn't matter because all choices are corrupt so vote for the corruption that works for you.
Its your own favourite definition of conservatism.
Your thinking is very within the box and very binary. Very reductive.
So there is a genocide, a country that has destroyed every university in Gaza.
Across the US, students chose to protest towards implementing BDS and change.
That is a democratic choice, an active participation in the system and a choice geared towards making the system respond better.
Your position is that the only thing that matters is your binary choice, ignoring 3rd party, ignoring spoiled votes and ignoring trying to change the system.
Just vote for Biden, the system is screwed, rump is more evil, so don't fix it, just keep it going on the slightly less evil path.
The US electoral system isn't going to change by this.
Unless you are calling for the violent overthrow of the government now?
The US electoral system changing is a long, hard, fight that has been going on for generations and made very slow progress.
Even getting to the simple next stage of a popular vote for President is going to be incredibly difficult.
There are even moves already to repeal the 17th amendment and stop having direct election of Senators.
It's an ongoing struggle.
Nice try.
I do applaud the effort.
The difference is, of course, that the whole issue of "turfing him out for corruption" involves what the other option is.
That you seem to have never even understood what the argument was against Trump and what the GOP was doing is actually somewhat surprising.
One I fully support.
Participation in the system beyond voting is incredibly important and the idea that the only thing that matters is your vote is pernicious and a huge problem in civil participation both in the US and Canada.
Obviously and completely wrong.
Also, third party votes and spoiled votes don't change the system.
You should be trying to change the system.
That involves understanding it and not doing things that don't change the system and work against your goals.
Nothing you are proposing will "fix" it though.
That's what I've been trying to explain to you.
"We should have the worse evil and make sure things are worse" isn't a good tactic.
It's a fucking terrible one.
Last edited:
Seems like a long term losing struggle, though.
Its seems to be getting worse.
You would have argued Al Franken shouldn't have resigned because his opponent was worse?
Or that you should vote Menendez instead of having him resign because his opponent was worse?
(ignoring the fact that politicians now don't resign at all for affairs)
You're just confirming my claim, that you claim to have morals but they are superseded by politics.
great
How is stating you should just vote for Biden working towards change?
All that does is enable the status quo.
What you won't accept is that some people view aiding genocide right now to be the worst evil compared to what might happen in the future.
What is happening right now is real, the future? We don't know for sure.
Welcome to democracy, where things are long term struggles.
Al Franken was replaced by a Democratic senator.
She was as good, maybe better, than he was.
There was never the case of "He is running against a Republican who is more rapey so what do we do?" involved.
Menendez did resign.
He may run as an independent.
I encourage no one to vote for him.
I see your understanding of morality is also narrow.
When the other option is make the status quo worse, it is a simple choice.
Why would I want to make the change I want harder?
Why would I want to make things go actively in a worse direction so I have to waste time making up lost ground?
I do accept that.
The problem is that isn't an argument you are making, since you have repeatedly insisted that the vote will have no effect on the genocide at all, since it will have stopped before the election.
That's a terribly short sighted view, now isn't it?
Last edited:
