Voting is about influencing who gets in power.That is what you are doing, you are making the voter choose only between 2 choices, when in fact they have more than one, because only one of those 2 choices are likely to get elected.
This is an incredibly bad way to look at voting in a system where doing so results in worse outcomes.Of course that is what you do. You vote per your conscience. If your conscience suggests that you do not want Trump to win, and if that is the priority for you, then you vote for whoever you think has the best chance of beating Trump. If your conscience suggests that you vote for Cornell West because the Israel Palestine issue is big for you, you vote for him, whether or not he wins.
Not at all.By that definition my choice to vote for say Cornell West or another independent, hurts Trump too. So your accusation that it helps Trump falls flat right there.
And produce an outcome.Both choices - Trump and Biden are detrimental for this particular issue of Palestine. Say I was a voter, I may choose Cornell West or some other to ensure my vote does not go to either of the two that I dont like. If Cornell West or other independent candidates did not exist as a choice, I may choose to not vote at all. It just means you voted per your beliefs.
EXACTLY!You are being presumptuous about what is good for the voter. The voter is an individual and they will make their choices that they find beneficial for them.
See above.That includes not voting for Biden or Trump, or even anyone at all. Or voting for an independent. What exact benefit would a pro-Palestinian person have in voting in Biden? None. Trump? None. So what do they do? They either choose to not vote at all, or vote for someone who speaks their mind. Its fair enough. So no, you are still wrong about this.
That isn't case closed at all and you know it.He literally said those sentences. Those were his words. He uttered those 3 sentences. Case closed.
I am interpreting nothing. I am repeating translation of 3 sentences that literally came out of his mouth, word for word.
He said "We will eliminate everything". What is in Gaza? People, infrastructure, animals. Everything is an all encompassing term. It proves genocidal intent without a shred of doubt. I am not even quoting his other pronouncements of Palestinians as "human animals", or Israel's president saying "there are no non-combatants in Gaza" etc., Just going off of his words alone is enough to show genocidal intent. As I said, if all they wanted was to take out Hamas, they could have just said so. Its not difficult. Hamas attacked them. They could have said "We will eliminate Hamas". But he did not. He chose to say "We will eliminate everything".
You are the one grasping at straws on this one. I am simply pointing out what Gallant very clearly said.
Who gets to power is the inevitable result of voting. The primary purpose of voting however is to exercise your opinion, representing your opinions, per your conscience and per what is important to you.Voting is about influencing who gets in power.
When there are only two results possible, everything you do is a choice about which of those outcomes you prefer.
That it might also provide some additional information is an add on effect. (And, again, one that is handled badly by plurality voting.)
There are LOTS of reasons I harp on about better voting systems and one is that I want people to have more meaningful choices.
The sentiment of the people should be represented in the government. That is the purpose of voting. It is about representation that you would other wise not have in a non-democratic system. They say for the people, by the people for a reason. Also the notion of "worse outcomes" is relative. A Trump voter's best outcome is for Trump to get to power. But when your choice isn't Trump or Biden you have to either not vote at all, or vote for someone else.This is an incredibly bad way to look at voting in a system where doing so results in worse outcomes.
Voting is a method to determine government, not a plebiscite about the sentiment of the people.
That people still believe that voting is supposed to be about your personal feelings about your vote is a pernicious myth and the quicker people can be disabused of this notion the better.
As it stands now if there was no other choice than Trump or Biden, meaning there were only 2 choices, I would choose to not vote at all. My preferred outcome is neither Trump, nor Biden. So no, your logic doesn't stand scrutiny. My vote for West, for example, would hurt both Biden and Trump equally and your accusation of it helping Trump falls flat.Not at all.
It hurts whoever of the two you would vote for if forced to choose.
Now, if what you are saying is that in a normal situation between Trump and Biden, you would choose Trump then yes, your choice to vote for West hurts Trump.
But the real issue isn't "who does it hurt". It is "which outcome do you prefer"?
If your preferred outcome is Trump over Biden, then voting for West hurts Trump. If your preferred outcome is Biden over Trump, then voting for West hurts Biden.
The important part is that voting for West hurts you because it makes your preferred outcome less likely.
Yes I said that before. But, you are fundamentally wrong in saying that my vote for West, is support for Trump. It is not. If Trump was pro-Palestinian, I would just vote for him. Why would I vote for West? If Biden was pro-Palestinian I would vote for him. But in this case both aren't, so my choice is to vote for West and not give either Trump or Biden the vote. Both of them are detrimental to the Palestinian cause and won't do anything to make it better.Now, if you truly believe there is absolutely no difference between Trump and Biden on Palestine, then your vote is rational.
If, however, you believe there is (even if both are bad), then you have made the situation worse because instead of putting the person in who gives you a result you prefer, you deprived them of your vote.
And that is, of course, an assumption that you have no preferences in any other way between the two people who might win.
If you have any other preferences between the two, then you have the same dilemma, even if you think they are exactly equal in all ways on the issue of Palestine.
As I said you are being presumptuous that one is detrimental and the other isn't, or at the very least that one is more detrimental than the other. I consider both detrimental to the Palestinian cause. The only right thing to do in this case is to vote your conscience, and vote for someone else.EXACTLY!
As I said above. "Voting your conscience" is detrimental for you.
This is key to why plurality voting is so reviled.
The only benefit it gives is you being able to say "I voted my conscience" while it actively contributes to making the situation you had a conscience about worse.
(Now yes, there is an argument that it is a long-term strategy. Making the situation worse will cause enough people to suffer that eventually someone will do the right thing about it. I don't think that's a good argument, but it is at least one that doesn't pretend the system is something other than it is.)
Interpreting is giving meaning to something. I am not. Those were sentences he said and it was translated and I copy pasted the translation. The meaning of that translation is clear. Genocidal intent.That isn't case closed at all and you know it.
You are absolutely interpreting things.
The whole clip would be reasonable to ask had his sentences been edited in the middle and words taken out of context - similar to that video of Joe Rogan saying the N word where only the N word was presented but not the entire sentence he used it in (It is still not okay to use the N word, but the purpose of the edited clip was to make him look white supremacist or whatever which I dont think he is).No, I'm not.
Look.
This is easy to settle.
Show the whole clip.
I think it is very likely he said something every bit as genocidal as you say.
But no one should take an edited clip on the internet without skepticism.
Trump is likely to be elected without the majority of Americans voting for him, just like last time.If the majority of Americans choose to vote for Trump, why should we not find it amusing? They dont think they are suffering if they elect him so why should we care?.
Oh Butler.Poor Val. He is watching in real time the actual reasons why Biden could very well lose the election to Trump, which is essentially why Hillary did.
And he is going to continue to gaslight with his elitist "I know better than you what's good so line up and vote what I say" because it's all he knows. He can't fathom another opinion.
LOL!This is what happens when you piss people off enough. They will vote their conscious and will accept eorse results to hope for later better options. Val essentially wants people to stay in a bad abusive relationship because he thinks it's worse leaving.
Those are the same rules that Biden is subject to as well.Trump is likely to be elected without the majority of Americans voting for him, just like last time.
Glad you posted his. Now we can identify the officer.
Rome fell to leftist propaganda?I always remember that Rome didn’t fall in a day. It was their inability to counter the leftist propaganda which caused them a slow but study death. However that’s for history lesson. lol.
Constable Mcguire should get a raise!Glad you posted his. Now we can identify the officer.
It might.I'd say it has cost them Michigan. Absolutely. Thats 100,000's of votes around Dearborn that are toast. And the margin is tight there.
But as shown in the various polls Frank linked to, it doesn't seem to be the prime factor driving votes.As for other parts it isn't about support politically but simply about taxpayer dollars bring spent and not on Americans. Isolationism has risen in the USA to a point imo it will be a factor in the swing states.
Because not voting is counter productive.How is voting for someone aiding genocide 'fixing the system' or 'nurturing democracy'?
The system is clearly fucked if your choice is between a rapist and convicted felon who attempted a coup and someone aiding genocide.
So you agree that my arguments about who to vote for would be based on who is running?No.
If this were an election between Biden and some more traditional republican you wouldn't be repeatedly arguing that not voting for rump will bring about the end of democracy and even more genocide.
You mean the massive, blowout loss of McGovern as a peace candidate in 1972 made the Dems more warlike for the next generation or so because they got systematically crushed in Presidential elections for 20 years and only won once in the aftermath of Watergate?Same way the protests and losing the election changed the dems after Vietnam.
You are the one who said that refusing to vote for him was to punish him.Have you at least moved on from saying that votes are owed to Biden and refusing to vote for him is 'punishing' him just for aiding genocide?
The reason the Dems are relying on is "Where else ya gonna go" when it comes to minorities. It's the one they have been using for decades. Well the polling is clearly suggesting they are willing to walk away anyway and see things get worse hoping it gets better later. Hispanics, Black men, Muslims, Young people are now willing in game changing percentages to stay home, vote Trump, or third party. Not because of anything I've said, but because of what Democrats have, of have not done depending on the question.Oh Butler.
You aren't silly enough to think this is how I would try to persuade voters do you?
This is TERB where none of you vote.
LOL!
That's a new version of the "We just need to beat them until they accept my point of view" approach you prefer.
Nice.
I'm sure you do, and don't even realize you do. You can't help yourself. You do it to anyone who attacks the Dems with legitimate attacks.Oh Butler.
You aren't silly enough to think this is how I would try to persuade voters do you?
This is TERB where none of you vote.
LOL!
That's a new version of the "We just need to beat them until they accept my point of view" approach you prefer.
Nice.
As usual, all you do is repost unrelated tweets, Geno. No direct responses from you..........ever.