• archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’ll vote for harm reduction if it comes down to it but if democrats want an endorsement they’ll have to do more than what they’re doing now.

    I’m not obligated to encourage anyone to vote for the lesser evil so long as the lesser evil still has an opportunity to be less evil.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m not obligated to encourage anyone to vote for the lesser evil so long as the lesser evil still has an opportunity to be less evil.

      Wow. Literally saying the quiet part out loud - “As long as the Democrats are not 100% in line with my views, it’s okay to endorse inaction and the takeover of a fascist regime on the pretext that the Democrats Aren’t Good Enough™”

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m not obligated to encourage anyone to vote for the lesser evil so long as the lesser evil still has an opportunity to be less evil.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              A lack of endorsement for a thing =! endorsement for the opposite thing

              Oh, when there are only two possible choices, it very much is, whether or not you want to confront that. If there is an infant drowning in an ankle-deep pool in front of you, doing anything other than saving the infant is endorsing its death.

              Before you is a very simple and very easy choice - fascism, or non-fascism. Yet your kind reject non-fascism, every single time. Curious.

              • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                Oh, when there are only two possible choices

                Actually in this context there’s at least 4:

                • vote for a candidate AND endorse voting for the candidate
                • don’t vote for a candidate AND don’t endorse voting for the candidate
                • vote for a candidate AND don’t endorse voting for the candidate
                • don’t vote for a candidate AND endorse voting for the candidate

                Nobody has actually ‘voted’ for a candidate yet, all anyone has done thus far is endorse or not endorse voting for a candidate. Just as a reminder:

                I’ll vote for harm reduction if it comes down to it

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Actually in this context there’s at least 4:

                  All of which boil down to “Try to rescue the infant” or “Varying levels of letting the infant drown or hoping someone else will spontaneously see the infant and rescue them in your stead”