• pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    there are two facts about this election

    1. there are only two outcomes—0.0% chance for a third party win
    2. both candidates have a bad stance on the genocide

    so neither outcome will help with the genocide. acting like voting third party helps in any way shape or form is disingenuous at best. so what should you do?

    my argument is that you should vote for the person you can hope to convince on this issue. phone calls, protests, social media, whatever means you have… which of these candidates is more likely to respond to any kind of public pressure about this?

    Harris might be responsive, and let’s be honest, she might not be. but you know for a fact that it’s definitely not the fucking orange turd. Natenyahu wants him to win. how can you ignore that?

    • kava@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      43 minutes ago

      which of these candidates is more likely to respond to any kind of public pressure about this?

      neither. 0.0% chance for either candidate.

      i only voted for kamala because she’s a woman and even though she’s an awful candidate at least we can get it out of our collective system, show little girls they can be president, and the neoliberal status quo is probably still better than Trump

      i’m not entirely sure on that because I think Kamala is more likely to lead us into a war with Russia… but Trump is more volatile in general I think

    • fuckdenialists@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      My argument is that the only good american is that dude who set himself on fire. You are a scumbag. You are no better than a german in the 30ies smelling the grilled flesh and thinking “this is fine, it’s still better than bolchevism”