• Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    198
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m with you on what the meme is trying to say, but the bottom track needs to be shown looping around to the Republican track and running over everyone.

    Because that’s where the third track leads.

    • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      104
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yep, not voting is unironically pretty much the same as voting for the party you least want in charge.

      Because you’re making it that much more likely.

      Don’t throw away a right that your ancestors fought for, as it may result in future generations no longer having that right.

      • GraniteM@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Hitler’s government was a popular government; the vast majority of Germans preferred the rule of gangsters to the effort of thinking and doing for themselves. They abdicated their franchise.

        […]

        The former Berlin businessman I referred to earlier told me that he blamed his own group, people with the time and the money and the opportunity to know better, for what happened to Germany. “We ignored Hitler,” he said. “We considered him an unimportant fellow, not quite a gentleman, not of our own class. We considered it just a little bit vulgar to bother with him, to bother with politics at all.”

        They thought of the government as “They.” The only possible route to a clear conscience in politics is to accept political responsibility, either as an active member of the party in power or as an equally active member of the loyal opposition.

        —Robert A. Heinlein, Take Back Your Government

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Similarly, MLK saw “the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice” as the biggest impediment to civil rights.

          The bottom line is that being secure enough in your position in society to think you don’t have to engage in politics, or that you can afford to vote your principles instead of tactically, is itself a form of privilege. Those sorts of privileged people think themselves neutral or uninvolved or maybe (in the case of professed leftists refusing to vote Dem as a protest) on their own third side, but the reality is that they are the right-wing authoritarians’ greatest ally every single time.

          • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            Lol imagine thinking “moderate white” doesn’t perfectly describe the majority of people walking into the 2020 primaries and voting for Joe Biden.

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              You’re not wrong about the primary, but you are wrong to conflate the primary with the general election when it’s the latter that we’re talking about here.

              • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                5 months ago

                Lol so I’m “radical” in the primaries when I don’t vote for Biden but I’m “moderate” in the general when I don’t vote for Biden?

                That’s not how labels work sir.

          • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            5 months ago

            The POTUS, from the party most opposed to civil rights act, is who signed it into law, very much so a white moderate more devoted to order. So, I’m gonna take a stance and say MLK was wrong about that one if that was his take before he died.

        • Aqarius@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          That’s not how it went, though. It’s, in fact, the opposite of how it went. Hitler had relatively little popular support, but full support of the industrial elite. It’s blaming the people for the crimes of the elite. “They abdicated their franchise” no, fuckface, half of them voted communist. “We ignored Hitler” no, fuckface, you put him in power because you thought he’d be malleable.

          I’m not surprised Heinlein bought it, though. And I’m not surprised people here are buying it.

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s funny that both democrats and third party voters will look at your comment and think you’re on their side.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        Well, mathematically it’s only half as bad.

        -1 lesser evil +1 greater evil

        Vs.

        -1 lesser evil +0 greater evil

        • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          5 months ago

          Your math is wrong. You wouldn’t be cancelling out the greater evil with the vote for the lesser evil, so its actually twice as bad (or 4x what you were thinking).

          0 lesser evil +1 greater evil

          • Glowstick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Exactly.

            There is unfortunately no option to wind up with a non-evil result, your only options are greater evil result or lesser evil result.

            By voting 3rd party you didn’t reduce the chance of greater evil result, AND you didn’t increase the chance of lesser evil result.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        “Oh, no, I’m not in any of those groups on the track, so I can safely not vote and have a clear conscience as it crushes everyone!”

        Then they came for me…

        • UltraGiGaGigantic
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          “All men were created equal”

          IS SLAVE STATE

          always jave been coming for us.

        • pachrist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          22
          ·
          5 months ago

          What a sad misunderstanding of a quote literally describing state enforced genocide. I mean, this is how it starts. Both sides would kill Palestinians. Can’t do anything about it I guess. Oh well, best not put my foot down and take a principled stand here.

          Who’s next?

          • samus12345@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            5 months ago

            You think that Republicans wouldn’t support genocide against anyone they consider to be their enemy?

            • pachrist@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              5 months ago

              I think that accepting that some groups, like Palestinians, will just be oppressed no matter what is what leads to things like the Holocaust. Saying you can’t afford to take a stand on your principles today and draw a line in the sand, but maybe you will tomorrow leads to the situation Martin Niemoller found himself in. It may be too late already, and making a stand won’t make a difference, but it’s never too early.

              • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                5 months ago

                And what happens when a significant chunk of the electorate does that? I bet all those poor Palestinians will really feel good about Israel being given the green light to bomb them harder because a bunch of people protested and got a dementia riddled fascist elected.

                These posts are just virtue signalling, because there’s never any forethought of what happens after the election to the people being discussed. You can speak from a place of privilege and moralize about the choice you’re making, but you’re pushing the same tactics that the republicans and alt-right push: don’t vote democrat.

                I don’t like that I have to vote for Biden, but I actually want to minimize the harm being done to people, not just talk about it on the internet. Crazy concept.

                • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  13
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  These don’t-vote-for-Biden weirdos don’t understand that it’s wrong to use the idea of a minority to push your political interests in a way that hurts that minority.

                • pachrist@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  If a significant portion of the electorate did that, Biden would be on the phone this minute applying all possible pressure to stop what is happening. Instead they are playing chicken with your vote. Children died today and every day for the past 8 months because a political party is betting that you’ll vote for them anyways.

                  Again, the original issue I raised is that it’s cruel to quote a man lamenting the fact that he and others like him didn’t do enough soon enough to stop the Holocaust. That same behavior is happening right now. But it’s fine. We just have to accept it. A few losses for the greater good. I’d bet you don’t have any Palestinian friends, but if you do, please let them know I’m the one who’s privileged and see what they say.

    • Pacmanlives@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      As someone who for the first time did not vote in 2016. I started voting in the Bush era. I fully agree, no action leads to fascism apparently. Don’t do what I did because I was pissed that Bernie was cheated out of the nomination. Vote or Trump will be back in office.

    • CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Doesn’t matter where the track leads if the trolley can’t get to it. It could lead to rainbows and sunshine, but that isn’t where the trolley is headed because there is no possibility that someone other than Trump or Biden is elected president. A few cry babies voting third party won’t get some third person elected. A vote for the third track is a vote for a track that will not be ridden.

    • shatteredsword@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It makes sense because you can see that the track exists and is better, but there’s no way to actually get the train onto it

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      the bottom track needs to be shown looping around to the Republican track

      Okay, but the guy at the controls needs to be the swing vote on the SCOTUS.

  • Ignotum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    105
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m guessing the joke is that third party voters ignore the trolley about to go down one of two paths, instead deciding to stand next to a short piece of track connected to nothing with no trolley on it, so they can pretend the imminent disaster happening on the other track isn’t real

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      And there’s also a contingent of people on the trolley who are trying to get it to slow down, working their asses off to improve long term actual outcomes in the real world, whether related or not to the little lever, and the guy standing next to the empty disconnected track is claiming to be one of them and saying you must be against them and how dare you, you person-running-over-enabling monster, if you say anything against his strategy.

  • intensely_human
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is why I, as an autistic person, think internally using a sort of infinite mechanical analog diagram sheet thing.

    Physical analogies are beautiful for how quickly they can convey a concept. Those disconnected tracks are a great representation of the third party voting situation we face, the “throwaway vote” problem.

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      You’ll have to be more specific about what blowing up the train maps to in real life before I can tell you whether or not doing so would also kill a shit ton of people.

      But to keep it in metaphor, there are also innocent people riding the train and blowing it up would kill them, too.

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yeah, if you made a habit of doing that we’d end to with more deaths and a lower quality of life overall.

            • Liz@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Most of them, sure. But killing them with any kind of regularity would have a number of knock-on effects that would severely decrease many people’s quality of life.

              If your friend has a brain tumor, you don’t point a gun to their head and shoot it out. You find brain surgeons and have them remove it under controlled conditions. Supposing you can’t find a brain surgeon, it would still be better to learn brain surgery yourself and do a careful and thorough job than it would be to just shoot your friend in the head and hope for the best.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            You say that as though you’re the arbiter of what’s “left” and what’s not.

              • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                I hope your strike blocking, genocide supporting candidate magically results in more workers rights and less genocide.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      The plan fails, the top track gets removed due to terrorist activities, and even more things are on the remaining track.

      (If you ask me: Jan 6 should have had even more consequences for republicans, but they like to bend the rules to their own benefits)

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s close enough to the tracks that it would hurt the hostages, and the wreckage would probably have enough momentum to hit them anyway.

      This is a good analogy actually. Blowing up the train would feel good, but that isn’t going to stop the momentum, and it’s unfortunately virtually impossible to outright stop it’s momentum at this point. All that blowing up the train would accomplish is sending fiery wreckage towards the middle track.

      This is why accelerationism is stupid.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Well, in context of philosophy being taught in class you would then change the prompt to a harder question. You would also debate whether the person who makes the decision is in fact responsible and how that dynamic changes when the prompt changes.

      So maybe you have to choose between 2 men only half as happy or handsome or one fully formed magical man with magic hands.

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          What if the train magically transforms regular men into new men? What if they were opposed to the transformation before it happened?

          Conversely, what about if it magically creates men causing potential overpopulation? What if the men it created morally oppose the tram, but more than half the local population feel like it is necessary to run no matter what?

          You can pretty much run this thought experiment forever, so far we’ve been going for 57 years.

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    5 months ago

    The problem is that we have two choices, and we will never not have two choices unless we do something about it. I can both say that Joe Biden sucks and we should do better and also vote for him because the other option is worse. This discourse that makes it seem like any criticism of Biden is pro trump is how we will end up in a slightly less terrible place. Cool. Really looking forward to that.

    Also like what the fuck…I guess we have to kill Palestinians no matter what.

    There is a third fucking option and it’s not doing a genocide.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      There is a third fucking option and it’s not doing a genocide.

      That’s only an option if you have a viable strategy for accomplishing it.

      • EatATaco
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        5 months ago

        Which, of course, they don’t. It’s a vanity vote. They want to pretend they have actually done something without actually having to do anything of consequence.

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          If we’re interpreting their “third option” as a voting strategy and not convincing Biden to step in and stop the genocide, we can at least implement Approval Voting so that they can vote for all the “no genocide” candidates without having to worry that doing so could somehow backfire. Then, if they want or need to, they can cast a strategic vote to differentiate between different magnitudes of genocide.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            we can at least implement Approval Voting

            No, you can’t. You do not have the power to implement Approval Voting, and nobody who does have the power wants to do it. So it’s not gonna happen, at least not in the short term. Right now, anybody who wins has to win in an environment of First Past the Post. Nobody capable of doing that currently supports Approval Voting, so right now it is effectively not on the ballot.

            This is what I mean about “hav[ing] a viable strategy.” Magically wishing Approval Voting into existence ain’t it.

            • Liz@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              Well the strategy is to work your way up from the local level because:

              1. It’s easier for people to make change at the local level, Fargo and St. Louis have already done it.

              2. Politicians tend to work their way up the ladder, and will be more open to using the system at higher levels if they already proved they can win under that system.

              You have to remember that any real social change takes years, even decades of organized to realize. We didn’t go from Jim Crowe to the civil rights act in a fortnight, it took big organizations applying decades of pressure in multiple different ways.

              If you want to be a part of the solution, join an organization dedicated to improving things. It doesn’t have to be the one I linked, but Election Science is the one working on approval voting. Local elections are such that one highly motivated person can build and run the organization to flip their local election laws, it could be you, but it won’t happen overnight.

          • EatATaco
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yes, we need to change the way we vote before voting for POTUS can really move away from a binary choice.

          • wanderer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Great. That is a state issue, so pay attention to your state government, vote for state representatives that support better voting methods, and contact your state representatives to push for reform.

            That doesn’t change this trolley problem.

            • Liz@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              As someone else pointed out, those in power are unlikely to change the voting system to reduce their own power. However, you really start at the local level with referendums, and work your way up. First, it’s easier to force change at the local level and second, politicians working their way up will be less hostile to changing to approval if they’ve already shown they can win under that system.

          • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            5 months ago

            Apparently we can’t in 2024. They didn’t hear us in 2016. They won’t hear us now in 2024. Maybe two Democrat juggernauts losing the presidential election to Trump of all people will convince them.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      The problem is that we have two choices

      The problem is that we don’t. If you’re not in a “swing” state, all the votes in the world for Joe Biden are meaningless. Win California by another million votes. Win it by another 10M. Have every single eligible voter in California turn up and vote for Joe Biden. He still loses the EC when the SCOTUS tells Arizona to stop counting ballots the minute Trump is in the lead.

      Also like what the fuck…I guess we have to kill Palestinians no matter what.

      We have to keep sending money to Israel because its the means by which we control the Suez Canal.

      Except… the Houthis have control over the back end of the canal so long as they’re able to scare off shipping in the Gulf of Adan. So now we’re endorsing a genocide just for shits and giggles.

      • pachrist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s almost like two organizations have totally monopolized US politics. It’s a billion dollar industry, and they’d both rather alternate losing to each other and keep their seat at the table than let anyone else play the game.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because of a shitty situation set up by countless past people and events completely out of your control you have to make a choice here. And in my mind, it’s not even a difficult choice. Yes, either option will support Israel, that’s a given, but there is no third option so it might as well not even be a factor in choosing a candidate.

      If you want more parties and to remove first past the post then you need to elect the party who supports those stances. That is one of your two options. Real fucking simple.

  • Katana314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s interesting how much the vote DOES resemble a trolley problem. Generally, the only real point in favor of not pulling the lever is “You’re killing someone, it’s immoral to get involved. Life shouldn’t be in your hands.”

    Which is still setting aside all the conscious choice by other human beings that IS happening come election season. Probably the biggest way it diverges is that a trolley is moving under its own “natural” momentum. In reality, it’s as though some Nazis are pulling the trolley along the track to the 5 people.

  • SnerkRabbledauber@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    If that third track were an option the trolley problem would never have existed. If there really is a third track in the real-life situation, then the trolley problem is not a good analogy of that problem.

    Sadly, in this election there is no third track and we are forced into choosing the lesser of two evils.

    If you want a third track, push for ranked choice voting!

    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      5 months ago

      So, why do some blue states want to continueusing FPTP voting? Why continue using a voting system favored by Republicans? In states controlled by Democrats, there’s no Republican opposition hindering electoral reform efforts.

      FPTP favors whichever party is currently in power in a two party system. Solid blue states don’t want to switch because it makes their hold on power less secure. Same reason as Republicans in red states.

    • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      You’re factually correct, and I support your long term goal, but it’s not something we can achieve by November.

      • chaonaut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        I swear I hear this regardless of how close we are to the next presidential election. Can we maybe focus on some of the other races on the ballot? I would love if we could get a Congress that was actually able to make good things happen, instead of trying very hard to do nothing so bad things don’t happen.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Congress might also have been able to get more done if there was a filibuster-proof majority for more than several months in the last several decades.

          I do vote for the most progressive person available in the primaries tho.

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            The fact that we even need a filibuster proof majority to get anything done is yet another glaring example of how fucked we are.

          • chaonaut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yeah, the focus on winning the presidency ignores the down ballot, small market and “off-cycle” races, and, to get to fillibuster-proof majorities, those races are the ones that need to be won. Berating progressives in urban areas to vote for moderate liberal candidates for president is not exactly harm reduction.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Sorry, media is now handled at the national level so covering local and state races outside of ones that get clicks isn’t profitable

    • FatCat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Electoral systems is a pretty nerdy topic (despite how important it is for who gets power), so it is not an issue the typical voter cares for. Therefore there is not enough political capital for such large reforms to be taken on by politicians.

  • darth_tiktaalik@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m assuming the third track being entirely disconnected and therefore not a real option is intentional.

    Either way, accurate

  • BadlyTimedLuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Guys, I don’t know what’s going on in the world and their wars. I just want a president who isn’t abhorently evil. Do we have to revolutionize to find that 3rd option orrr?

    • GoodEye8
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Do we have to revolutionize to find that 3rd option

      Pretty much. It’s against the interest of both parties to have more options because both are near-guaranteed to lose power if there were more options.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      I assume your “abhorently evil” comment is based off support of the genocide in Palestine (which is a completely reasonable thing to describe as abhorently evil, I’m just being clear about my premise).

      In which case, sorry, bad news, you can’t have that. Your options this time round are genocide supporter or genocide supporter. Somewhere down the line, years from now, the US electoral system may have been sufficiently reformed to make third parties viable. But this year that’s not going to happen.

      So that decision is completely out of your hands. But here’s what you do get to decide; you can have an outright fascist, leading a party of outright fascists who have openly publicised their plans to turn your country into a fascist theocracy. Or you can have the guys who strengthened workers rights and went after major companies for union busting, hit Microsoft for $20 billion in back taxes, had the FBI raid a major landlord for illegal price hikes, brought antitrust lawsuits against Amazon and several other large tech firms, and secured billions in aid for Ukraine in their fight for their freedom. And that is literally just a tiny sampling of the good things that Biden’s government has done.

      I don’t even see how that’s a choice. One of these two options is clearly and manifestly better than the other, no matter how disgusting it feels. A vote for Biden is not an endorsement of his position on Gaza. It is a tactical choice, nothing more. And if nothing else, its a tactical choice that will prevent the fascists from filling even more seats on the supreme court.

      It sucks, but those are the only options. Sometimes life just be like that.

      • Ibuthyr@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        This guy gets it. I don’t see how this is so difficult to understand. Not voting is essentially skewing the vote towards the diaper-wearing Nazi-Clown you once already had for a president. Vote for the least evil party, it’s all you can do.

      • orcrist
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Your argument is made every four years. The someday you talk about never seems to arrive. Which means the reasoning is missing something important.

      • Crikeste
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think the choice is really: Does America deserve the lesser evil?

      • III@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        But what if I am a bad faith actor that only pushes the “no moral choice” position because I want to ensure that the fascists take power? Better yet, what if my Russian paycheck demands it. Then what do I do?

        • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Are you forgetting about all the registered Democrats who voted uncommitted in the 2024 primaries? Not everybody who hates Biden is a Russian troll bud.

    • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m certain ballots with good options are unavailable absent a revolution, but if we tried under present conditions we’d likely only get worse governance and maybe destabilize the global balance of power catastrophically.

      • cmbabul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Thank you! We may eventually have to but revolutions do not have certain outcomes and we face a second problem that in general will require a mechanism for global cooperation which is hard to do when the state with the military, cultural, and economic influence the US currently has plunges into chaos

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      We can have it for the low price of demanding it. Tell the Democrats you won’t vote for Biden if he doesn’t stop supporting the Israeli genocide.

      • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        You realize why the Ashley Biden rape showers with grandpa suddenly became nearly mainstream news and will suddenly go away if Biden does what he’s told?

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          If that’s how it is then we’ve already lost. People who would make up stories like that would rather take the mask off and destroy democracy then let us get in their way.