I don’t understand why people can’t understand that multiple things can be true.
Someone can have voted for Harris, donated to her campaign, preferred her to be president, felt that personally their own lives would have been better if Harris were president, and also be disgusted that Harris is pro-genocide.
There would be no ice raids like this all over the country. No tarrifs. No allies lost due to insults and threats. No threats against lgbtq+, no concentration camps for immigrants(or no newer ones from bidens term. No loss of Nato. No that of nuclear proliferation. Stronger Ukraine. And less support for Israel and more support for Palestine though obviously not to the level needed.
It’s like being ok with Hitler because MacArthur Churchill hated Indians.
Sure. But this goes right back to the idea that centrists can’t imagine anyone thinks, believes, or acts differently than they do.
You clearly follow utilitarian ethics. But others don’t. Seriously, two of the main branches of ethical philosophy are utilitarianism and respect for persons. You clearly follow, or at least pretend you follow, utilitarian ethics. But moral philosophers have long recognized the severe limitations on judging everything based on only the greater good. Most of histories greatest atrocities were done in the name of utilitarian ethics. Hell, everything Trump does is baed on utilitarianism, completely rejecting the respect for persons branch of ethical philosophy. Fucking Mengele justified what he did based on appealing to the greater good.
A respect for persons framework in voting would say that true red lines do exist. You can’t just look at the utilitarian consequences of your vote; you have to ask if the candidate you’re voting for has truly done something unforgiveable.
When you solely focus on utilitarian principles, you are ironically aligning yourself morally with MAGA far more than you know. You both say the ends justify the means.
And less support for Israel and more support for Palestine though obviously not to the level needed.
You don’t know that. Regardless, I guess this all could have been avoided had Harris not alienated her own constituency by playing a game of Who’s the bigger narcissist.
I can confidently say that israel receives more support and less restraint with Trump than anyone else. Literally. He loves tyrants.
this isn’t some wild conjecture.
Regardless, I guess this all could have been avoided had Harris not alienated her own constituency by playing a game of Who’s the bigger narcissist.
yeah and kerry was a commie and dean’s scream should have ended his campaign. there’s always some great reason to dump solid candidates when you believe BULLSHIT
“BULLSHIT” like believing Harris would be better on Palestine?
or
“BULLSHIT” like the 2020 Democratic Primary Results -The last primary she participated in and concidentally where she received less than 1% of the vote?
you can choose to be apathetic, you can choose to stick your head in the sand, but it won’t change the fact that kids in palestine would be better off today - and now they’re getting trump fucked. great fucking job
you can choose to ignore reality, you seem very experienced there
It’s pretty easy to understand. The people who don’t get it are the ones who are only capable of one-dimensional thought. They can’t hold multiple, complex beliefs, so they assume you can’t either.
They also cannot understand that someone can say something centrists want is a losing issue and still be willing to vote for a centrist candidate, while being able to notice that they’re gonna lose if they keep it up.
Also explains the reaction to Mamdani. Centrists didn’t get the sex pest they wanted and went from “blue no matter who” to “party unity my ass” immediately. No progressive legislators badmouthed harris like gillibrand did with her disgusting Islamophobic attacks against Mamdani.
Centrists think everyone is like they are, inasmuch as they don’t believe at all in their stated principles and will vote third party if they don’t get their very first choice. We saw this in 2008 as well when they formed a fucking PAC to elect mccain because they didn’t want to vote for a black man. For all the blame they throw at the left for 2016 and 2024, progressives never formed a PAC to elect trump. But if Sanders had won the nomination in 2016 or 2020, I have no doubt that we would have seen centrists campaigning for trump like we saw them campaigning for cuomo and mccain.
If they can adopt and make bipartisan the entirety of Trump Term 1 and support genocide without any electoral liability, what will you not approve of? This means that any opposition to literal genocide or authoritarianism is only justified if it is the Red team doing it. If Democrats do it, they are definitionally the lesser evil, so they should be supported in genocide since Republicans also would do it.
Also, kicker, Trump forced Israel into two ceasefires that reduced the killing, despite it not actually being a stop to the genocide since Israel is still restricting aid and killing at a slower pace. But that literally means Trump is less genocidal on that one issue that Biden/Harris. The bar is on the floor and they still fail!
So clearly you prefer what is happening now. This is what you wanted? Americans gunned down in the streets by federal occupiers? A president literally invading foreign countries for the expressed purpose of taking their oil? Federal agencies adopting Nazi and white nationalist slogans? I swear to fucking Christ, leftists hate anything that they don’t think is left enough and it will lead to the world burning down. You have to compromise. You CANNOT have everything you want in this life. It will NEVER be perfect. And if we don’t accept that fact and work with what we are given, it will be taken away from us entirely.
I don’t want to see genocide happen either. But we really ought to fix our own shit before we try to fix the rest of the world. America is not special. It should not be our job to police the world like we had in the past. Remove the log in your own eye and all that jazz. Be mad, but compromise. Otherwise we will be nothing at all.
Nah, fuck you dude. I am the furthest thing from a Nazi. If you think me not wanting to elect the felon, treasonous, pervert is me being a Nazi, you can get bent dipshit.
Yeah, it was pretty simple for anyone capable of making decisions without deferring entirely to their feelings.
The stats prove Dems are better for our economy (and rights). We were coming off a legislatively successful Democrat presidency. Serious strides were made for the working class and we were recovering from the pandemic better than any other 1st world nation. The Dem candidate was a career prosecutor with a doctorate in law.
On the other hand we had the side that the stats show are awful for our economy (and war). The candidate was an already failed president with two impeachments and an insurrection under his belt. With a doctorate in nothing but dipshittery.
You have to be pretty stupid to NOT go with option 1, including by staying home or voting for a 3rd party candidate with absolutely ZERO possibility of winning. Regardless of whether you’re mad that they’re maintining an allegiance with a foreign nation you aren’t exactly happy with. Foreign affairs aren’t exactly simple. Especially with an ally you want to keep for their strategic geopolitical position.
But, as we’ve learned, most Americans prefer to think with their feelings instead of their intellect. And now gestures broadly.
I just don’t see how things are going to get better with a nation full of people this dumb.
I guess my question is whether “reluctant” (yet unrepentant) Trump voters ought to be held responsible for the awful shit Trump does, for the things that they were aware of but did not consider to be a deal-breaker. Because I think they should, and I think it’s perfectly valid to criticize “reluctant” Kamala voters on the exact same basis.
Ultimately, you make a decision, and if your reservations about a candidate are not significant enough to be represented in that decision, then do they really matter? Do they matter enough that other people ought to be expected to care about them? “Libertarians” who vote Republican are just Republicans, they don’t consider their differences significant enough to break with them, so why should I bother to make a distinction?
my question is whether “reluctant” (yet unrepentant) Trump voters ought to be held responsible for the awful shit Trump does, for the things that they were aware of but did not consider to be a deal-breaker
The fact that they were aware of the awful things Trump said he would do, believed that he would do them, and it wasn’t a deal breaker is more than enough to hold them responsible. (And to hold them in contempt)
I don’t understand why people can’t understand that multiple things can be true.
Someone can have voted for Harris, donated to her campaign, preferred her to be president, felt that personally their own lives would have been better if Harris were president, and also be disgusted that Harris is pro-genocide.
probably the part where she doesn’t care that people are disgusted by her being pro-genocide
There would be no ice raids like this all over the country. No tarrifs. No allies lost due to insults and threats. No threats against lgbtq+, no concentration camps for immigrants(or no newer ones from bidens term. No loss of Nato. No that of nuclear proliferation. Stronger Ukraine. And less support for Israel and more support for Palestine though obviously not to the level needed.
It’s like being ok with Hitler because
MacArthurChurchill hated Indians.Greenland wouldn’t even be in the fucking news. Canada would still consider us an ally. Gaza wouldn’t be cut up by Kushner.
We’d probably be doing the Venezuela shit still, but with a little less explosions and a little more puppeteering to keep the visible violence down.
“Most lethal” country, and all that.
Sure. But this goes right back to the idea that centrists can’t imagine anyone thinks, believes, or acts differently than they do.
You clearly follow utilitarian ethics. But others don’t. Seriously, two of the main branches of ethical philosophy are utilitarianism and respect for persons. You clearly follow, or at least pretend you follow, utilitarian ethics. But moral philosophers have long recognized the severe limitations on judging everything based on only the greater good. Most of histories greatest atrocities were done in the name of utilitarian ethics. Hell, everything Trump does is baed on utilitarianism, completely rejecting the respect for persons branch of ethical philosophy. Fucking Mengele justified what he did based on appealing to the greater good.
A respect for persons framework in voting would say that true red lines do exist. You can’t just look at the utilitarian consequences of your vote; you have to ask if the candidate you’re voting for has truly done something unforgiveable.
When you solely focus on utilitarian principles, you are ironically aligning yourself morally with MAGA far more than you know. You both say the ends justify the means.
You don’t know that. Regardless, I guess this all could have been avoided had Harris not alienated her own constituency by playing a game of Who’s the bigger narcissist.
I can confidently say that israel receives more support and less restraint with Trump than anyone else. Literally. He loves tyrants.
this isn’t some wild conjecture.
yeah and kerry was a commie and dean’s scream should have ended his campaign. there’s always some great reason to dump solid candidates when you believe BULLSHIT
“BULLSHIT” like believing Harris would be better on Palestine?
or
“BULLSHIT” like the 2020 Democratic Primary Results -The last primary she participated in and concidentally where she received less than 1% of the vote?
keep changing the subject.
you can choose to be apathetic, you can choose to stick your head in the sand, but it won’t change the fact that kids in palestine would be better off today - and now they’re getting trump fucked. great fucking job
you can choose to ignore reality, you seem very experienced there
It’s pretty easy to understand. The people who don’t get it are the ones who are only capable of one-dimensional thought. They can’t hold multiple, complex beliefs, so they assume you can’t either.
Centrists will never understand this.
They also cannot understand that someone can say something centrists want is a losing issue and still be willing to vote for a centrist candidate, while being able to notice that they’re gonna lose if they keep it up.
Also explains the reaction to Mamdani. Centrists didn’t get the sex pest they wanted and went from “blue no matter who” to “party unity my ass” immediately. No progressive legislators badmouthed harris like gillibrand did with her disgusting Islamophobic attacks against Mamdani.
Centrists think everyone is like they are, inasmuch as they don’t believe at all in their stated principles and will vote third party if they don’t get their very first choice. We saw this in 2008 as well when they formed a fucking PAC to elect mccain because they didn’t want to vote for a black man. For all the blame they throw at the left for 2016 and 2024, progressives never formed a PAC to elect trump. But if Sanders had won the nomination in 2016 or 2020, I have no doubt that we would have seen centrists campaigning for trump like we saw them campaigning for cuomo and mccain.
If they can adopt and make bipartisan the entirety of Trump Term 1 and support genocide without any electoral liability, what will you not approve of? This means that any opposition to literal genocide or authoritarianism is only justified if it is the Red team doing it. If Democrats do it, they are definitionally the lesser evil, so they should be supported in genocide since Republicans also would do it.
Also, kicker, Trump forced Israel into two ceasefires that reduced the killing, despite it not actually being a stop to the genocide since Israel is still restricting aid and killing at a slower pace. But that literally means Trump is less genocidal on that one issue that Biden/Harris. The bar is on the floor and they still fail!
So clearly you prefer what is happening now. This is what you wanted? Americans gunned down in the streets by federal occupiers? A president literally invading foreign countries for the expressed purpose of taking their oil? Federal agencies adopting Nazi and white nationalist slogans? I swear to fucking Christ, leftists hate anything that they don’t think is left enough and it will lead to the world burning down. You have to compromise. You CANNOT have everything you want in this life. It will NEVER be perfect. And if we don’t accept that fact and work with what we are given, it will be taken away from us entirely.
I don’t want to see genocide happen either. But we really ought to fix our own shit before we try to fix the rest of the world. America is not special. It should not be our job to police the world like we had in the past. Remove the log in your own eye and all that jazz. Be mad, but compromise. Otherwise we will be nothing at all.
You are applying the ethical calculus of Dr. Mengele. Anything for the greater good, right?
Nah, fuck you dude. I am the furthest thing from a Nazi. If you think me not wanting to elect the felon, treasonous, pervert is me being a Nazi, you can get bent dipshit.
Because Lemmites only see things in binary.
You’re either a communist or a disgusting fascist nazi
Yeah, it was pretty simple for anyone capable of making decisions without deferring entirely to their feelings.
The stats prove Dems are better for our economy (and rights). We were coming off a legislatively successful Democrat presidency. Serious strides were made for the working class and we were recovering from the pandemic better than any other 1st world nation. The Dem candidate was a career prosecutor with a doctorate in law.
On the other hand we had the side that the stats show are awful for our economy (and war). The candidate was an already failed president with two impeachments and an insurrection under his belt. With a doctorate in nothing but dipshittery.
You have to be pretty stupid to NOT go with option 1, including by staying home or voting for a 3rd party candidate with absolutely ZERO possibility of winning. Regardless of whether you’re mad that they’re maintining an allegiance with a foreign nation you aren’t exactly happy with. Foreign affairs aren’t exactly simple. Especially with an ally you want to keep for their strategic geopolitical position.
But, as we’ve learned, most Americans prefer to think with their feelings instead of their intellect. And now gestures broadly.
I just don’t see how things are going to get better with a nation full of people this dumb.
I guess my question is whether “reluctant” (yet unrepentant) Trump voters ought to be held responsible for the awful shit Trump does, for the things that they were aware of but did not consider to be a deal-breaker. Because I think they should, and I think it’s perfectly valid to criticize “reluctant” Kamala voters on the exact same basis.
Ultimately, you make a decision, and if your reservations about a candidate are not significant enough to be represented in that decision, then do they really matter? Do they matter enough that other people ought to be expected to care about them? “Libertarians” who vote Republican are just Republicans, they don’t consider their differences significant enough to break with them, so why should I bother to make a distinction?
The fact that they were aware of the awful things Trump said he would do, believed that he would do them, and it wasn’t a deal breaker is more than enough to hold them responsible. (And to hold them in contempt)
Exactly my point.
Glad we agree.