-70
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
-70 points (13.5% liked)
politics
19082 readers
3690 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Really? The trumpian "I'm rubber, you're glue" style of rhetoric?
I think though, you're missing the point of the earlier example so I'll simplify by labelling.
You want to eat some ice cream. (That's voting third party.) As you're about to take a bite, a small child runs into the road (this is the consequences of a trump victory, say more dead Palestineans, no chance to mitigate climate change etc.) Now, you are the closest "adult." Sure, the kid's parents (the rest of America) should be there to stop this from happening so you can just enjoy your ice cream. Unfortunately, saving the child requires dropping the ice cream.
That's kind of the scenario. Now, legally, I don't think you would be liable for choosing the ice cream over saving the child. But, morally.... Well, I'm just curious as to whether the answer is still "meh, screw 'em, I'd like my ice cream." or how the analogy doesn't apply.
To be a responsible member of a democratic society, it is important to consider, appreciate and acknowledge the choices of our votes.
I’m proud to vote third party because I believe in standing by my principles, without fear of what may or may not happen in the election outcome.
Voting should be about advocating for the future we want, not settling for what feels safe or easy.
Just because the analogy tries to guilt me into conformity doesn’t mean I should abandon my values—real change comes from voting with conviction, not fear.
Which is exactly why I am voting for who I want to. As I respect your right to vote for who you want to.
So that principle is "I won't be affected so screw everyone else who will be!" ?
And the future your preferences reveal is one governed by a trump administration.
Again, please explain the difference between your position and the analogy. If you would continue to eat the ice cream because the ice cream would make you feel good and you're not that child or that child's parents, just say so. Empathy isn't something with which everyone is blessed and while that's not ideal, it's life.
And how will "everyone else" be screwed? You all said that last time he was president. World didn't end then. Won't end this time. Regardless of who wins.
If I wanted to vote for Trump, I'd vote for Trump. Like almost half the country is going to do.
The analogy oversimplifies the situation and unfairly equates voting with neglecting a child in danger. My vote is about advocating for systemic change and challenging a broken system, not about disregarding the consequences, and it's possible to care deeply about the future while still voting according to my principles.
Again, I get to vote for who I want. Just like you do. Our rights are the same. Me and many of my friends are voting Green Party. Accept it, friend.
And the future that you want is one where trump wins the presidency. Otherwise you would act differently.
Now, if a trump presidency won't affect you that much, makes sense. I get that. I personally won't be harmed. But, I know others will be. So this is important.
Still waiting for an explanation of why the analogy doesn't hold up rather than just "I DON'T LIKE IT!"
No, if I wanted to vote for Trump, I'd vote for Trump.
But I'm not voting for Trump.
I'm also not voting for your candidate. I don't care how mad you get, how bullying you get, how much you call me a Trumper or a russian, or a troll or spin analogies, etc.
I'm not voting for your candidate. I've explained why. You don't like that. Ok, well that's fine.
This conversation is done. I've explained my viewpoints several times. You just don't like it. Then you turn around and say that I am acting like "I JUST DON'T LIKE IT!"
Nothing you have said has changed my mind.
Me, and many of my friends, are not voting for Harris. Accept it. Move on. You haven't changed my mind at all.
In fact, speaking with you has made me more determined than ever to not vote for Harris. So good job, friend!
It's a revealed preference. And your preference is to help trump, which is absolutely your right. As is enjoying ice cream while a child runs into traffic.
I haven't bullied you, called a stooge, russian, troll or anything of the sort. I have called your simplistic and nonsense opinion childish which seems appropriate.
I haven't "spun" an analogy (how would one even do that?) Though you seem to realize how accurate it is as you've refused to articulate why it doesn't apply other than that it highlights the moral abdication of your choices.
The folks who fought for democracy probably wanted even more progressive candidates but, thank heavens they, unlike you, realized the importance and consequence of their votes.
And after all that, I am still voting for Jill Stein. :)
Nah, if I wanted to vote for Trump, I'd just vote for Trump. I'm actually voting for Jill Stein.
And you totally respect and support my right to vote for who I want, just like I support and respect your rights to vote for who you want, right? Right?
As if anyone believes for even a moment that this cat is actually going to vote for Jill Stein and not Trump. lol