If neither candidate will stop the genocide, it’s our responsibility to refuse both candidates.
Okay, well reality doesn’t really afford us this option, as much as we’d like it. We can piss and moan all day about what we should do, but that’s a separate discussion from what we can do. And what we can do is make our votes be as impactful as possible with the options we have available.
You can do much more than vote. There’s people getting beat to shit by cops all over the country proving it.
This whole ‘you have a moral obligation to vote for 99% Hitler’ thing is pretty tired, as the logical conclusion of that line of reasoning is that you should vote for Hitler if anyone worse than Hitler is on the ballot.
Right, but this is specifically about the election, where the one and only thing you can do is vote. At the end of the day, we’re all still looking at the same two options on the ballot, that part isn’t changing.
I’m not giving Trump an advantage by throwing away my vote, so I’d argue that I do have a moral high ground in this case. By (effectively) not voting, you’re demonstrating that you wanna see how Trump will handle Israel, instead. That’s not a concession I’m willing to make, myself.
Argue all you want: you’re here saying you’re going to vote for a genocide and scolding others for refusing. If you want to call that moral, I guess I can’t stop you.
When that one thing is a genocide, I think it’s pretty fair to focus on. We’re not talking about our candidate’s favorite flavor of ice cream.
If neither candidate will stop the genocide, it’s our responsibility to refuse both candidates. Voting for Hindenburg didn’t stop the Holocaust.
Okay, well reality doesn’t really afford us this option, as much as we’d like it. We can piss and moan all day about what we should do, but that’s a separate discussion from what we can do. And what we can do is make our votes be as impactful as possible with the options we have available.
You can do much more than vote. There’s people getting beat to shit by cops all over the country proving it.
This whole ‘you have a moral obligation to vote for 99% Hitler’ thing is pretty tired, as the logical conclusion of that line of reasoning is that you should vote for Hitler if anyone worse than Hitler is on the ballot.
Right, but this is specifically about the election, where the one and only thing you can do is vote. At the end of the day, we’re all still looking at the same two options on the ballot, that part isn’t changing.
All appearances to the contrary, I am going to vote. I’m voting for the PSL candidate, Claudia de la Cruz, because she does not support genocide.
Oh, you believe in the viability of a third party vote in 2024. Sorry, I thought I was taking to a serious person, my bad.
Yes, I refuse to vote for genocide. No, I’m not under the impression de la Cruz will win the presidency.
You do not have the moral high ground here, friend, and trying to talk down to people will not help you reclaim it.
I’m not giving Trump an advantage by throwing away my vote, so I’d argue that I do have a moral high ground in this case. By (effectively) not voting, you’re demonstrating that you wanna see how Trump will handle Israel, instead. That’s not a concession I’m willing to make, myself.
Argue all you want: you’re here saying you’re going to vote for a genocide and scolding others for refusing. If you want to call that moral, I guess I can’t stop you.