You’re at a work retreat for a month, and management is taking a vote on what to get for food. Word is that everyone else is about 50/50 split between BBQ ribs, and pepperoni pizza. You’re a vegetarian, what you’d really like is Indian food, but the only ones interested are a handful of other vegetarians. If ribs win, you starve, if pizza wins, you spend the next month picking off pepperonis. How do you vote?
Again, no one said anything about voting for republicans. How about you try on this hypothetical:
You’re president of the USA and the country that receives the highest amount of your foreign aid is committing genocide. If you continue sending billions in dollars and weapons then you lose votes, but if you stop supporting genocide, then you gain votes. How do you president?
But I’m not the president, I’m a voter. I’m not talking to the president, I’m taking to a voter. Hypotheticals about being the president offer no insight into beneficial behavior for myself or the one I’m taking to. Hypotheticals about voting strategy do.
Don’t bother with them. They’re just a bad-faith actor who goes everywhere they can to peddle “Well, aktually, voting for MORE genocide is GOOD” bullshite.
Are you bragging about not understanding American elections, being an actual fascist, or deliberately voting against your personal interests? It’s gotta be the fascism right? Who would brag about being ignorant or counterproductive?
No-genocide hasn’t been on the ballot for many, many years. Turns out, the voters who feel strongly enough about this particular genocide for it to affect their vote are a fairly small fraction with characteristically low turnout anyway. Sadly, not really worth actively pursuing as a candidate.
Your choices are between measured diplomatic tolerance of genocide, and enthusiastic acceleration of genocide (with a couple other genocides thrown in too). It’s a close race. No genocide doesn’t have a chance, and voting no genocide increases the odds of enthusiastic acceleration of genocide.
No-genocide is on the ballot right now and it’s being made loud and clear, but biden is choosing to ignore it and people like you are trying to shame the people who care about genocide into not caring about it with hogwash like this:
I care about genocide, which is why I’m trying to minimize it by preventing Trump from getting into office. Y’know, they guy who thinks Israel should’ve gotten it over with already? People like you are trying to shame voters into letting the guy who wants more genocide into office. Congratulations, you’re voting for more-genocide.
You’re at a work retreat for a month, and management is taking a vote on what to get for food. Word is that everyone else is about 50/50 split between BBQ ribs, and pepperoni pizza. You’re a vegetarian, what you’d really like is Indian food, but the only ones interested are a handful of other vegetarians. If ribs win, you starve, if pizza wins, you spend the next month picking off pepperonis. How do you vote?
Again, no one said anything about voting for republicans. How about you try on this hypothetical:
You’re president of the USA and the country that receives the highest amount of your foreign aid is committing genocide. If you continue sending billions in dollars and weapons then you lose votes, but if you stop supporting genocide, then you gain votes. How do you president?
But I’m not the president, I’m a voter. I’m not talking to the president, I’m taking to a voter. Hypotheticals about being the president offer no insight into beneficial behavior for myself or the one I’m taking to. Hypotheticals about voting strategy do.
Don’t bother with them. They’re just a bad-faith actor who goes everywhere they can to peddle “Well, aktually, voting for MORE genocide is GOOD” bullshite.
It’s never for them, it’s for the on-lookers who might think they have a point.
As an onlooker, I’m happy to inform you both that I’ve been convinced to vote third party thanks.
Are you bragging about not understanding American elections, being an actual fascist, or deliberately voting against your personal interests? It’s gotta be the fascism right? Who would brag about being ignorant or counterproductive?
Cool, who do I vote for to stop genocide?
No-genocide hasn’t been on the ballot for many, many years. Turns out, the voters who feel strongly enough about this particular genocide for it to affect their vote are a fairly small fraction with characteristically low turnout anyway. Sadly, not really worth actively pursuing as a candidate.
Your choices are between measured diplomatic tolerance of genocide, and enthusiastic acceleration of genocide (with a couple other genocides thrown in too). It’s a close race. No genocide doesn’t have a chance, and voting no genocide increases the odds of enthusiastic acceleration of genocide.
No-genocide is on the ballot right now and it’s being made loud and clear, but biden is choosing to ignore it and people like you are trying to shame the people who care about genocide into not caring about it with hogwash like this:
That is a ridiculous string of words.
I care about genocide, which is why I’m trying to minimize it by preventing Trump from getting into office. Y’know, they guy who thinks Israel should’ve gotten it over with already? People like you are trying to shame voters into letting the guy who wants more genocide into office. Congratulations, you’re voting for more-genocide.