• archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialBanned from communityOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    11 months ago

    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.

      • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Wow. Literally saying the quiet part out loud - “Some random bullshit I just made up that hardly resembles what you said”

              • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialBanned from communityOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                11 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

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Democrats have to be perfect. Republicans just have to be on the ballot.