I don't hate Democrats, I just disagree with them.
I hate Republicans, and will side with Democrats if it can keep Republicans out of power.
Why don't you hate the party currently aiding a genocide? Seems worthy of hatred unless that's not one of the things you disagree with them about.
Classic trolley problem and you have failed it.
You want to hate the guy for pulling the lever that leads to fewer deaths at the expense of allowing the one who will ignore the lever and allow for the most death.
I didn't say I wouldn't pull the lever. I asked why you wouldn't hate the person who tied everyone to the tracks. Even if you pull the lever and kill fewer I would despise the person who set up the problem at all.
The person who set up the problem isn't on the ballot.
We're voting for the person at the lever.
Hatred isn't going to change anything. One could argue that hatred is how people end up in the tracks.
So the Democrats have not been complicit in the genocide and supported it? Because if they have they definitely seem more like the person tying people to the tracks than a simple lever puller. The voter seems more like the lever puller. Pull for trump to maybe kill more pull for Harris to maybe kill less.
But this is why analogies fall apart. I'm a voter I can vote for Kamala(who loves genocide), Trump(who LOVES genocide), or a third party (who won't win but maybe doesn't love genocide). Harris is a politician who supports genocide as is Trump. No levers and no trolleys.
Individually as voters we can decide if we think it's worth it to vote for the person who loves or LOVES genocide but that's our choice. But I still hate the people doing it whether or not they LOVE or merely love it.
Liberal nonsense to decry hate as the true cause. Yes people hate being killed. It is right and just to despise those killing you and your family. Absolute nonsense to suggest if we merely loved our oppressors somehow things would improve.
The problem in conversations is that there's a serious dissonance stemming from different individuals (forget about groups even) defining "lesser evil" as well as what constitutes "hate" and "condemnation."
The issue in any event is one that people familiar with the space are accustomed to -- leftists are, almost without fail, absolutists unable to conceive of policy because of their conviction in the correctness of their esoteric political philosophies. It's a group where second-order thinking is heresy because it may call into question a talking point which has been adopted as doctrine and which one must be seen as espousing lest they lose their status as a member of the group.
There's a reason that progressives have been so successful around the world, while leftists are stuck posting in insular online communities or preaching to the already converted when in public.
Hear hear idealists crumble when the rubber meets the road. They find it difficult to live in reality without an all or nothing kinda mindset
The whole "lesser evil" term is weird. It's about moving the Overton window.
Ranked Choice Voting
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
