• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    41 day ago

    Lmfao you are gonna love the next four years. Unless youre rich, then you actually are going to love the next four years. Probably a pot more than four years i suspect

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1122 hours ago

      I’m gonna hate the next four years because the dems ran a candidate that they knew couldn’t win and idiots like you shouted at people who pointed this out and called us trump lovers

      • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost
        link
        fedilink
        English
        517 hours ago

        “Anyone who wants the Democrats to win against Trump is actually a Trump supporter!”

        I hated hearing it in 2016, 2020, and 2024

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        216 hours ago

        Yes, democrats are vegetative. You can see my comment history, im the first one to point that out. But you are even worse than democrats if you actually thought that trump was the winning option.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            18 hours ago

            🤦

            I’m going to assume you are being intentionally obtuse. Its very simple.

            Trump bad.

            Any other option good in comparison.

            Arguing good option bad means you are arguing in bad faith.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              11 hour ago

              Yes Trump bad, that’s why I want the dems to run a candidate that isn’t a delusional failure so that we can keep Trump from doing bad things. The only way that “good” people can stop bad people is by winning power.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              33 hours ago

              Any other good in comparison

              Arguing good option bad…

              The second line doesn’t logically follow from the first - you’re talking about a relatively better option all the way to that top line and then you switch from “better than other” to “good” - it’s like going about how in a choice between being knifed twice versus being knifed just once the “just knifed once” is good in comparison and then jumping from that to saying that getting knifed once is good.

              Even beyond that totally illogical jump, the other flaw of logic is treating each election as a unique totally independent choice whose results have no impact on the options available on subsequent choices - I.e. that who the Democrat Party puts forwards and who the Republic Party puts forwards as candidates in an election isn’t at all influenced by how the electorate responded to previous candidates they put forward in previous elections - it is absolutely valid for people to refuse to vote for Kamala to “send a message to the Democrat Party” (I.e. to try to influence the candidates the party puts forward in subsequence election) and it’s around the validity or not of risking 4 years of Trump to try and get an acceptable Democrat candidate in at the end of it that the discussion should be (and there are valid points both ways) not the hyper-reductive falacy you seem so wedded to.

              Choices in the real world are a bit more multi faceted and with much more elements and implications than that self-serving “simpleton” slogan the DNC pushed out in its propaganda which you are parroting.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              24 hours ago

              I think it’s fair to say that, notwithstanding the badness of Trump, the Democratic Party needs vast improvement if it’s going to be part of an effective opposition to Trump and his gang of MAGAfascist oligarchs and lumpen God-bothering thugs. I’d even go so far as to say that, if any resistance emerges beyond finger-pointing and bleating, it won’t originate with the Democrats.