147
submitted 1 day ago by pete_link@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/21396125

Stephen Starr in Hamtramck, Michigan
Mon 14 Oct 2024 11.00 EDT

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 8 hours ago

It's more of a difference in practical values. At what point does the "lesser evil" itself become intolerable evil? Some people insist that you should vote for Hitler over 101% Hitler, that there is no intolerable level as long as there is a miniscule difference. Others have firm red lines in the sand, like genocide, where they advocate for abandoning them and pushing as hard as you can, even advocating for moves outside the electoral system like revolution.

[-] apotheotic@beehaw.org 1 points 1 hour ago

So to put this in more practical terms, one would neither vote for Hitler or 101% Hitler, and instead vote for The Other Person who Isn't Much Hitler At All, or abstain or something, and protest and take action in other ways?

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 hour ago

The "correct" answer is to vote for "Not Hitler" and join a revolutionary org, such as FRSO or PSL in the US.

[-] averyminya@beehaw.org 1 points 57 minutes ago

Which candidate who opposes both Russia and Israel's genocide has a path to the presidency? Legitimately, fully feasible path in 3 weeks to get this candidate to have 270 electoral votes?

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 55 minutes ago

The point isn't to win the presidency, but to show the votes the Dems threw away by being genocidal, and again, joining revolutionary orgs.

this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
147 points (80.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7166 readers
760 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS