I didnt say "love genocide", now thats you assuming I want it, or to elicit something from me. Very strange attempt to blame-shift. We could have protested and made Harris change her position. She wasnt vocally for or against the horrific and ongoing genocide due to who funded her campaign. AIPAC is evil. Netanyahu is very easily described as evil. That isnt up for discussion.

The reason it leads people to assume you didnt at least try to uphold democracy is how disgusted you seem to be about basic reality.

I dont like any of the ones we have elected, at least not for a long time. "Both sides"-ism is what lead us to fascism, though. Worship? Thats a weird deflection and assumption. "One group isnt shooting at us, they suck at their job, we only get a little healthcare and rights under them" vs "lets take over the capital and kill everyone" is a pretty easy choice, if you dont have the memory of a goldfish.

As for new methods of voting and who would put them in place, the voting rights act was effectively removed. Itll be a very different group of people you have no desire to vote for. If you wont vote against a fascist, you must be one. Otherwise you wouldnt sit at their table.

Ahh you're one of the reasons why more genocides are happening, now, caused by someone we definitely cant get to stop through protest. Remember, you voted for this.

Great foresight.

As for "not evil", I want to know who has been "not evil" by your definition.

Maybe you should argue for a different method of voting instead, then. Liberal lesser evil didnt give us the orange diaper dumpster, the two party system based on money and gerrymandering is what did it.

Compulsory voting + Ranked choice. Are you for something like that, or are you against it? It would be a great thing to continue promoting, and its much less hateful and directly confrontational.

Id love to debate but it would just be about logical fallacies that arent really related to your intent, as your intent is expressed well.

Relax, its not that deep.

Well we tried that and now we have satan in office.

Im still trying to figure out how people like you think half the population voted for him. He won a plurality, which means more than his opponent. A majority is over 50%.

Only <65% people of voting age even voted (including 3rd party candidates). He didnt even win a majority amongst only those who voted. And who of the remaining 35%+ is fascist or anti-fascist? They're pretty vocal, now.

Any other option lmao. Dude, he's the least popular president in history. What are you huffing?

Regardless of supporting someone who attempted to overthrow our government, he is surrounded by convicted rapists and pedophiles. Why would he do that?

Regardless of his fascination with dictators and his love of rapists and pedophiles, his Iran war BS is being used explicitly for stock market manipulation. Presidents are not allowed to manipulate the stock market for profit. They actually have some pretty specific rules about what kind of money they can gain, use, and their possession of property is typically very scrutinized for a variety of reasons.

A rapist and pedophile loving, dictator admiring, stock market manipulating, genocide supporting and threatening, wonderful president.

Let me ask: Who won in 2020?

So is the implication that they are or were percieved as equivalent evils?

I think anyone rational would see that a man who would invade the capital of the country to overturn the results of an election isn't very trustworthy. Voting against him is a simple way to denounce and oppose a rapist who supports strongmen and other genocides.

Supporting Israel, or not publicly denouncing them, was certainly supportive of an evil country. AIPAC absolutely has too much power in this country. How does that relate to Trump also supporting the country? And, you know, idolizing Netanyahu amongst other fascist leaders and strongmen? (I believe we can easily say Netanyahu is as much a fascist as a gymnast is flexible)

Idolizing strongmen currently committing genocides in multiple countries, attempting to overthrow the government, spreading false information leading to millions of deaths because... horse dewormer was touted as a remedy is equivalent to a moderate pretend-democrat conservative with bad opinions that could be changed, and opposed, how exactly? Project 2025 was already public information prior to the election. Equating a solid plan for introducing and attempting to cement fascism in the USA to that is a little weird.

I cant quite recall the Carlin quote, forgive the extension, but its along these lines:

"Asking about the differences between the options we have right now is like being given 2 options of airline food: Shards of glass, or (airline, yuck) chicken, and asking how the chicken is cooked."

Like I said, poor paraphrasing. The obvious point is that a man who tripled the debt in one term and supports other genocides isnt going to attempt to stop a different genocide.

No, I don't want to angrily tell you how to vote. I just want affirmation from potentially reasonable people that they won't attempt to equate such obviously different candidates, and such obviously different parties. Schumer and a select few dinosaurs are not the democratic or republican party, but if you consider them a negative influence on our government and democracy, I would agree with you.

Stubbing your toe intentionally sucks. Intentionally sawing off your legs sucks a little more.

I would like to see how this post inverts its intended meaning, and how there are few reasons to vote against fascism which has repeatedly publicly announced itself as opposed to voting for it. Im truly curious how there are less pro-Trump or pro-fascist ideas and complaints with substance and more Kamala and liberal based complaints. If the message is inverted, you must be quite knowledgeable. I do want to learn, despite snarkiness, as I clearly do not understand their equivalence

I dont like her like I dont like airline chicken parm. Which is definitely equivalent to broken glass. 100%

Kamalaposters means what, exactly?

Claiming both are the same, this is impressive and sad. It indicates a serious misunderstanding of history since Reagan's tax changes amongst other policy changes. It shows people don't remember Citizens United. It means people don't remember the massive economic change the Ford vs Dodge decision had in the earlier 1900s.

We live in a world where it's easier to hold on to a belief than to challenge it. The amazing breadth of information we have access to can be frightening, but it shouldn't prevent you from researching and attempting to disprove your ideas.