archomrade [he/him] to Political [email protected]English • 4 months agoJust a remindermidwest.socialmessage-square53fedilinkarrow-up1198
arrow-up1198imageJust a remindermidwest.socialarchomrade [he/him] to Political [email protected]English • 4 months agomessage-square53fedilink
minus-squarearchomrade [he/him]OPlinkfedilinkEnglish13•4 months agoI’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.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink13•edit-24 months agoWow. Literally saying the quiet part out loud - “Some random bullshit I just made up that hardly resembles what you said”
minus-squarearchomrade [he/him]OPlinkfedilinkEnglish11•4 months ago it’s okay to endorse inaction What part of my comment was an endorsement of inaction?
minus-squarearchomrade [he/him]OPlinkfedilinkEnglish9•4 months agoA lack of endorsement for a thing =! endorsement for the opposite thing
minus-squarearchomrade [he/him]OPlinkfedilinkEnglish11•4 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
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink1•4 months agoOnly because of the electoral college you’re entirely wrong here. There are only two choices. Biden gets to 270 ec votes He doesn’t and trump is appointed by Congress or gets to 270 There is no other option in the long run.
minus-squareNougatlinkfedilink6•4 months agoDemocrats have to be perfect. Republicans just have to be on the ballot.
minus-squarearchomrade [he/him]OPlinkfedilinkEnglish3•4 months agoThat’s why democrats cannot afford to be complacent.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod
Wow. Literally saying the quiet part out loud - “Some random bullshit I just made up that hardly resembles what you said”
What part of my comment was an endorsement of inaction?
Removed by mod
A lack of endorsement for a thing =! endorsement for the opposite thing
Removed by mod
Actually in this context there’s at least 4:
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:
Removed by mod
Only because of the electoral college you’re entirely wrong here.
There are only two choices.
There is no other option in the long run.
Democrats have to be perfect. Republicans just have to be on the ballot.
That’s why democrats cannot afford to be complacent.