Summary
Donald Trump’s decisive victory in the 2024 election leaves no room for ambiguity or an “asterisk” in his legitimacy, as he won both the popular vote and the Electoral College.
This outcome represents a clear mandate from American voters, who knowingly chose Trump’s policies and approach.
The anticipated results include pardons for January 6 participants, attacks on the press, and an administration filled with controversial figures.
By voting for Trump, Americans prioritized divisive rhetoric over democratic values, accepting the resulting turmoil.
Translation: “I’m not listening or even willing to pretend to engage in nuance! Which means YOURE RACIST!”
You let a convicted felon, found legally to be a rapist, racist win because you didn’t vote due No True Scotsman, then yeah, you’re a progressive that condones racism and are a racist in my book. You don’t have to agree but then again, I honestly don’t give a crap what you think at this point.
No, you’re still not getting it. And I wasn’t the original person you were arguing with. I voted for Harris, but there is so much nuance involved in the decision that writing it all off as racism is beyond stupid and helps no one but you—the same way the “I won’t vote for Harris because it’s a vote for ____” people were only doing it for themselves. Basically, it’s a glass house and stones situation. You’re both guilty of the same thing.
I know you’re not the original person but you are extending the OP’s argument so I’m just taking it from there.
No I do get it, I simply don’t care about that particular nuance when your choice is “Man I won’t vote because of X so I’ll just let Mr. convicted criminal, rapist, overt racist win”.
You enable racists, then you’re a racist in my book and with 15 million voters, who again statistically are going to be a lot of bog standard Democrats here, who sat out and condoned racists at every level, yeah, that shows me that I was right in 2016 that this country is a racist country and I’m just going to have be okay with that.
Say you get two choices.
One is to poison a town’s water supply without telling them.
The other is poison that towns water supply, not tell them, and then pick off survivors as they flee from the town.
Can you stomach voting for poisoning a town’s water supply if you’re firmly against poisoning people, just because anyone fleeing the town would be able to leave if they managed to survive? That’s the choice we were being asked to make. I get that it’s definitely worse to shoot the survivors, but in the end…either way your vote was to poison people. Some people have strong feelings about it. So strong they couldn’t stomach being the ones to sign on to it.
We all know it’s worse adding the slaughter of the fleeing survivors…but signing your name to the poisoning is unthinkable for a lot of people. It kinda should be unthinkable for all of us.
And you’re just saying “well, all you people must love shooting survivors!”
Nuance, man.