This is complete trash. There are not 3 issue voters here. There are two. A non-vote for Harris is a full vote for greater support for genocide. A vote for Harris has a chance to change that. Any other thoughts on it are completely ridiculous.
How is voting for pro-genocide Harris going to reduce genocide?
If you have to choose between losing a hand and losing a whole arm, the correct choice isn’t choosing the hand, it’s fighting back against the system that forces you to make that choice.
You seem to misunderstand. I am not saying trump or Harris (not Biden) is a false dichotomy. I am saying, voting for Harris and fighting the system is a false dichotomy. Regardless of whether or not Harris is part of the system, you can vote Harris and protest the system.
I did think about what they said. They affectively say, I am willing to risk trump in a seemingly close election between trump and Harris because both are supportive of Israel and therefore they want to vote for a 3rd party candidate. So they are saying on a response to a post which is the meme in question, they are willing to risk a man who said that the IDF has to finish up and finish what they started because then he can feel better about his vote.
People are able to think past four years. Contributing to the current system ensures it will continue on.
You don’t vote against candidates you vote for them. Thats the crux of this problem. We are picking between who’s worst because thats culturally where america is.
Anyone who votes for their favorite candidate is doing it right. Anyone who votes to hurt another candidate is doing it wrong.
Please look into how the us election works and tell me again that it is cultural.
The us system is so broken that splitting the vote is a reality. If you believe that Harris is more your candidate than trump than voting third party makes it more likely than trump wins. That is sad reality. Voting third party is voting against your own best interest.
I feel bad for Americans but the land of the free doesn’t let you vote who you like but forces you to vote against who you hate.
Also what quote did you mean? I am still looking for an answer.
This part:
“You might lose your whole arm, instead of an hand, but that is a sacrifice that I am willing to take.”
The point here is that for most of these third party voters, the democrat and the republican are equally awful. There is no accidentally helping the opposition because both parties are the opposition.
A big problem is democrats acting like there is no comparison between them and the republicans. The democrats do awful stuff too, they have better PR and lawyers though.
And far more simply, if the democrats are currently helping kill your family and friends in your homeland, how could ou possibly argue they should vote democrat? Would you in their position?
If its not possible for her to gain more votes than she loses by taking a stance of peace, then thats not the fault of third party voters.
That quote was “misquoted” hahaha sorry but you realize that I made it up by combining the meme in the post of this comment section and the words of the user that I talked to, to highlight their nonsense. How is that misquoted? Like if I write “I am stinky”, i am not misquoting anyone because I am not assigning it to anyone. I am not claiming that it is a quote. and if I did, I would be the author of the quote and how the fuck do I misquote myself? So what are you on about here???
So now you want to tell me that a third party voter disagrees with Harris and trump in all point the same amount? What a ridiculous notion. What would they say? “I disagree that trans people should be allowed to exist but also I disagree that trans people shouldn’t be allowed to exist.” Get serious.
“Democrats acting like there is no comparison between them and the republicans” there isn’t though. One party supports a guy who has a history of praising Hilter and Nazi Germany in general, tells the IDF to finish up, supports white supremacists, and of course, expresses fascistic ideas. The other is in favor of democracy, her name is Harris. Sure, the democrats has their flaws, but there is no comparison.
“The democrats are helping to kill your family and friends…” Yes. Yes I would. Because my understanding of politics is practical and not idealistic. Harris can be convinced that supporting this is a big mistake. Trump wants them to finish up. Third party is a lost vote for the party that I agree more with, so a vote for trump in practice. So I would vote for Harris. I am sorry for the victims but I rather help them a little in reality than a lot in fantasy.
“Gain votes”: to this point, I wrote a lot and decided to keep it short. This is besides the point of our discussion. It is heavily implying that Harris is making her decision to maximize her voter turnout. It is naive to think voter turnout is the only concern of a vice president with foreign policy experience in regards of going against a close military ally and years of co-operation of their intelligence agencies. I don’t know if you know but a lot of security software used in the us is written and/or owned by former unit 8200 members; you know the israeli intelligence corps. There is a risk why the us banned Kaspersky, after Russia invasion. But as I think all of this is besides the point, I will leave this with a “I don’t support the way Israel is operating, regardless how one wants to call it, it is morally wrong. Don’t understand my criticism of nativity as a support of Harris’s stance”
My brother in Christ, it is an analogy. You cannot piss and moan about how anyone who doesn’t support Kamala, implicitly supports Trump, and then tell me that my analogy for how stupid that false dichotomy is, is itself a false dichotomy. I do not understand.
You think I missed the analogy? No, I used your analogy and it works perfectly fine. If you want to drop the analogy because you don’t think the analogy is good, be my guest. Tell me how that counters my point.
I don’t know if you know but due to the fact that the USA is a joke democracy, it sadly isn’t a false dichotomy. Unless you think, you can change NOW (as you don’t have the time to do it later) more than half of the citizens’ opinion and get a 3rd party candidate in power. Which is obviously realistic…
Where did they say the intention is for a third party to win this election?
Also just because you don’t understand the conversation doesnt mean you should be sarcastic and rude. Overaggressive democrat voters is sort of the joke here in the first place.
You are right… They talking about voting for Harris would be like cutting of a hand and implying that voting for trump is like cutting of a arm; and instead of choosing one of them, one should fight the System; certainly doesn’t carry the implication that one should vote third party.
But I am wondering what am I not understanding about the conversation?
There are multiple ways to “fight”, third party is one version of it. Obviously each group is going to think their plan makes most sense.
The bottom line is we all agree its a broken system run by psychopathic people, so maybe don’t point the blame at those who are trying to change things in good faith.
This isn’t a philosophical thought experiment. If there was a real life trolley problem, the solution is to find a way to stop the fucking train, isn’t it?
the solution is to find a way to stop the fucking train
And the solution to the electoral college is to just fucking abolish it? I didn’t know it was this easy! Surely any second the system decides to abolish itself! Any second now…
Unless you abolish the system before the November election, either Trump or Harris will become US president. It is mathematical certainty in the same way that neither Harris nor Trump will be teleported to Mars through spontaneous quantum tunneling.
The problem isn’t the fucking electoral college. That’s a smokescreen for the real issues at play.
Like it or not, if you vote for Harris, you are complicit in genocide. If you don’t like that, I strongly suggest doing something other than sitting around telling people on the Internet that they’re wrong for having morals which do not align with your own.
I will never vote for Harris for I am not allowed to do so.
By paying taxes in the US you are far more complicit in enabling genocide by the way. How many shells have you personally financed - including through your productivity when working - may I ask? Obviously you can choose to stop paying taxes and go to prison to become a financial burden. They can’t arrest everyone, can they? Clearly that’s the answer.
Every single US citizen is enabling genocide. The question is how you will stop it. And it most certainly won’t be through making a cross on a piece of paper every 4 years.
And if you have the ability to vote in the US election and don’t or vote third party, you are complicit in everything the winner does. Like it or not, your choice enabled their presidency.
Because genocide support from the US under Trump is likely to be substantially worse than it is under a democrat government.
Your metaphor makes no sense because you can both vote for a lesser evil and take action against genocide in lots of other ways (voting isn’t the only thing you can do)
I agree with you completely, the problem is that the majority of people will refuse to acknowledge that there’s even a problem to begin with, or even if they do, they act like it’s some sort of fact of reality that they can do nothing about.
All I want from Democrat voters is to acknowledge, “Yes. I am voting for a genocidal candidate, because unfortunately that is the position that my nation’s electoral system has put me in. And I will do everything in my power to change that by …”
I feel like I’m seeing that attitude a lot. I guess some other people also feel it, but worry that expressing it will reduce the dem vote. Which is unfortunate, but also understandable.
This is complete trash. There are not 3 issue voters here. There are two. A non-vote for Harris is a full vote for greater support for genocide. A vote for Harris has a chance to change that. Any other thoughts on it are completely ridiculous.
…did…you read what I said?
How is voting for pro-genocide Harris going to reduce genocide?
If you have to choose between losing a hand and losing a whole arm, the correct choice isn’t choosing the hand, it’s fighting back against the system that forces you to make that choice.
This sounds like the meme.
“You might lose your whole arm, instead of an hand, but that is a sacrifice that I am willing to take.”
Also false dichotomy. You can vote Harris and protest. You could literally vote for Harris and join a violent militia group to overthrow Harris.
Its not a false dichotomy, as the choice is trump or biden and you can only vote for one.
You also would be better off thinking about what the person wrote instead of parroting back a meme that uses similar words.
Not even sure where you think that comes from because its either horribly misquoted or its literally not a common saying.
You seem to misunderstand. I am not saying trump or Harris (not Biden) is a false dichotomy. I am saying, voting for Harris and fighting the system is a false dichotomy. Regardless of whether or not Harris is part of the system, you can vote Harris and protest the system.
I did think about what they said. They affectively say, I am willing to risk trump in a seemingly close election between trump and Harris because both are supportive of Israel and therefore they want to vote for a 3rd party candidate. So they are saying on a response to a post which is the meme in question, they are willing to risk a man who said that the IDF has to finish up and finish what they started because then he can feel better about his vote.
I am not sure what quote you mean.
People are able to think past four years. Contributing to the current system ensures it will continue on.
You don’t vote against candidates you vote for them. Thats the crux of this problem. We are picking between who’s worst because thats culturally where america is.
Anyone who votes for their favorite candidate is doing it right. Anyone who votes to hurt another candidate is doing it wrong.
Please look into how the us election works and tell me again that it is cultural.
The us system is so broken that splitting the vote is a reality. If you believe that Harris is more your candidate than trump than voting third party makes it more likely than trump wins. That is sad reality. Voting third party is voting against your own best interest.
I feel bad for Americans but the land of the free doesn’t let you vote who you like but forces you to vote against who you hate.
Also what quote did you mean? I am still looking for an answer.
This part: “You might lose your whole arm, instead of an hand, but that is a sacrifice that I am willing to take.”
The point here is that for most of these third party voters, the democrat and the republican are equally awful. There is no accidentally helping the opposition because both parties are the opposition.
A big problem is democrats acting like there is no comparison between them and the republicans. The democrats do awful stuff too, they have better PR and lawyers though.
And far more simply, if the democrats are currently helping kill your family and friends in your homeland, how could ou possibly argue they should vote democrat? Would you in their position?
If its not possible for her to gain more votes than she loses by taking a stance of peace, then thats not the fault of third party voters.
That quote was “misquoted” hahaha sorry but you realize that I made it up by combining the meme in the post of this comment section and the words of the user that I talked to, to highlight their nonsense. How is that misquoted? Like if I write “I am stinky”, i am not misquoting anyone because I am not assigning it to anyone. I am not claiming that it is a quote. and if I did, I would be the author of the quote and how the fuck do I misquote myself? So what are you on about here???
So now you want to tell me that a third party voter disagrees with Harris and trump in all point the same amount? What a ridiculous notion. What would they say? “I disagree that trans people should be allowed to exist but also I disagree that trans people shouldn’t be allowed to exist.” Get serious.
“Democrats acting like there is no comparison between them and the republicans” there isn’t though. One party supports a guy who has a history of praising Hilter and Nazi Germany in general, tells the IDF to finish up, supports white supremacists, and of course, expresses fascistic ideas. The other is in favor of democracy, her name is Harris. Sure, the democrats has their flaws, but there is no comparison.
“The democrats are helping to kill your family and friends…” Yes. Yes I would. Because my understanding of politics is practical and not idealistic. Harris can be convinced that supporting this is a big mistake. Trump wants them to finish up. Third party is a lost vote for the party that I agree more with, so a vote for trump in practice. So I would vote for Harris. I am sorry for the victims but I rather help them a little in reality than a lot in fantasy.
“Gain votes”: to this point, I wrote a lot and decided to keep it short. This is besides the point of our discussion. It is heavily implying that Harris is making her decision to maximize her voter turnout. It is naive to think voter turnout is the only concern of a vice president with foreign policy experience in regards of going against a close military ally and years of co-operation of their intelligence agencies. I don’t know if you know but a lot of security software used in the us is written and/or owned by former unit 8200 members; you know the israeli intelligence corps. There is a risk why the us banned Kaspersky, after Russia invasion. But as I think all of this is besides the point, I will leave this with a “I don’t support the way Israel is operating, regardless how one wants to call it, it is morally wrong. Don’t understand my criticism of nativity as a support of Harris’s stance”
My brother in Christ, it is an analogy. You cannot piss and moan about how anyone who doesn’t support Kamala, implicitly supports Trump, and then tell me that my analogy for how stupid that false dichotomy is, is itself a false dichotomy. I do not understand.
You think I missed the analogy? No, I used your analogy and it works perfectly fine. If you want to drop the analogy because you don’t think the analogy is good, be my guest. Tell me how that counters my point.
I don’t know if you know but due to the fact that the USA is a joke democracy, it sadly isn’t a false dichotomy. Unless you think, you can change NOW (as you don’t have the time to do it later) more than half of the citizens’ opinion and get a 3rd party candidate in power. Which is obviously realistic…
Where did they say the intention is for a third party to win this election?
Also just because you don’t understand the conversation doesnt mean you should be sarcastic and rude. Overaggressive democrat voters is sort of the joke here in the first place.
You are right… They talking about voting for Harris would be like cutting of a hand and implying that voting for trump is like cutting of a arm; and instead of choosing one of them, one should fight the System; certainly doesn’t carry the implication that one should vote third party.
But I am wondering what am I not understanding about the conversation?
There are multiple ways to “fight”, third party is one version of it. Obviously each group is going to think their plan makes most sense.
The bottom line is we all agree its a broken system run by psychopathic people, so maybe don’t point the blame at those who are trying to change things in good faith.
Good read but not really a response to what I said or what you said. I assume our conversation ended. Have a nice day
You can change things in good faith, when it is possible. At this point in the election, it is not.
And the solution to the trolley problem is obviously to stop the trolley from running over anyone. Thank you for solving this philosophical problem.
This isn’t a philosophical thought experiment. If there was a real life trolley problem, the solution is to find a way to stop the fucking train, isn’t it?
And the solution to the electoral college is to just fucking abolish it? I didn’t know it was this easy! Surely any second the system decides to abolish itself! Any second now…
Unless you abolish the system before the November election, either Trump or Harris will become US president. It is mathematical certainty in the same way that neither Harris nor Trump will be teleported to Mars through spontaneous quantum tunneling.
The problem isn’t the fucking electoral college. That’s a smokescreen for the real issues at play.
Like it or not, if you vote for Harris, you are complicit in genocide. If you don’t like that, I strongly suggest doing something other than sitting around telling people on the Internet that they’re wrong for having morals which do not align with your own.
I will never vote for Harris for I am not allowed to do so.
By paying taxes in the US you are far more complicit in enabling genocide by the way. How many shells have you personally financed - including through your productivity when working - may I ask? Obviously you can choose to stop paying taxes and go to prison to become a financial burden. They can’t arrest everyone, can they? Clearly that’s the answer.
Every single US citizen is enabling genocide. The question is how you will stop it. And it most certainly won’t be through making a cross on a piece of paper every 4 years.
And if you have the ability to vote in the US election and don’t or vote third party, you are complicit in everything the winner does. Like it or not, your choice enabled their presidency.
The trolley problem, where the person who is a murderer is the lever puller rather than whoever tied people to the tracks in the first place.
I think people are abusing that thought experiment a bit.
The people tied on the track-thing is somewhat new, the original was with a runaway trolley and workers on either track.
Wouldnt it still ultimately be someone’s responsibility they were there with no way to get out, or negligence?
Because genocide support from the US under Trump is likely to be substantially worse than it is under a democrat government.
Your metaphor makes no sense because you can both vote for a lesser evil and take action against genocide in lots of other ways (voting isn’t the only thing you can do)
I agree with you completely, the problem is that the majority of people will refuse to acknowledge that there’s even a problem to begin with, or even if they do, they act like it’s some sort of fact of reality that they can do nothing about.
All I want from Democrat voters is to acknowledge, “Yes. I am voting for a genocidal candidate, because unfortunately that is the position that my nation’s electoral system has put me in. And I will do everything in my power to change that by …”
I feel like I’m seeing that attitude a lot. I guess some other people also feel it, but worry that expressing it will reduce the dem vote. Which is unfortunate, but also understandable.
I’m not american, fwiw
So for political benefit we should suppress discussion of american complicity in genocide? I’m not sure that qualifies as understandable.
Removed by mod
Lmao .world’s censorship is completely ridiculous.
Can anyone explain what part of this, or her other comment that got removed, constitutes “misinformation?”