I’m not in USA but if there are 2 movie style bad guys and 1 says pick me I’ll kill strangers, and 2 says pick me I’ll kill strangers and your friends and family, maybe you as well, and then some random 3rd guy says, pick me or no one and I won’t kill anyone, but one of those 2 bad guys will be picked for you via a coin flip, but at least you get to feel good that you didn’t personally pick the death of people, it’s not illogical to pick the first one.
Maybe you have such good morals you can pick the 3rd or refuse to pick at the expense of possibly additional people you care about, or maybe you don’t personally have anyone in your life that would be affected by the 2nd bad guy so it doesn’t matter to you, but if that’s the case, you’re equally guilty of choosing the choice that makes you feel good just because you don’t have to deal with the consequences of your choice and can ignore what’s actually happening.
What an insane take. If both sides are equal on one completely undefendable thing, then you vote based on other issues. One of the two parties are going to be in power at the end of this election cycle, regardless. Both are permitting genocide, and it’s a fucking problem, meanwhile only one of those parties are actively working to strip the people’s right to do something about that.
All this “both sides” bullshit feels disingenuous. If you were really concerned, you’d be focused on paths to solutions, rather than focusing strictly on trying to devalue Democratic votes. I certainly don’t see any path to stopping this genocide that starts with permitting a Trump presidency.
I’m not in USA but if there are 2 movie style bad guys and 1 says pick me I’ll kill strangers, and 2 says pick me I’ll kill strangers and your friends and family, maybe you as well, and then some random 3rd guy says, pick me or no one and I won’t kill anyone, but one of those 2 bad guys will be picked for you via a coin flip, but at least you get to feel good that you didn’t personally pick the death of people, it’s not illogical to pick the first one.
Maybe you have such good morals you can pick the 3rd or refuse to pick at the expense of possibly additional people you care about, or maybe you don’t personally have anyone in your life that would be affected by the 2nd bad guy so it doesn’t matter to you, but if that’s the case, you’re equally guilty of choosing the choice that makes you feel good just because you don’t have to deal with the consequences of your choice and can ignore what’s actually happening.
The argument basically comes down to you being fine with genocide as long as it doesn’t affect you personally.
What an insane take. If both sides are equal on one completely undefendable thing, then you vote based on other issues. One of the two parties are going to be in power at the end of this election cycle, regardless. Both are permitting genocide, and it’s a fucking problem, meanwhile only one of those parties are actively working to strip the people’s right to do something about that.
All this “both sides” bullshit feels disingenuous. If you were really concerned, you’d be focused on paths to solutions, rather than focusing strictly on trying to devalue Democratic votes. I certainly don’t see any path to stopping this genocide that starts with permitting a Trump presidency.