Are you seriously disagreeing with the assessment of Biden committing (or being complicit in, potato potatoh) genocide? Or is it only talking about it that you have a problem with? Or making the assessment that it makes a politician unsuitable to hold office? In my not-completely-fucked-in-the-head reality, that’s pretty much the sane take.
I’m being an adult that accepts the reality I live in.
In that reality there is basically no scenario where America gives up its most important long-term ally in the Middle East over a never-ending religious conflict they’re having with someone else.
So, being that’s the reality we live in, I can determine that the situation is INFINITELY better off in the hands of one party than the other. So I voted for that party to mitigate the damage that we’re now going to see due to a bunch of idiots that didn’t want to accept the reality they lived in and ended up making the very thing they cared about worse.
I also voted for that party because I’m not a moron single issue voter and I know there’s a lot else at stake right here at home.
I asked what specifically you had an issue with, and gave three possibilities. Which one are you saying no to? This screams “evasion” that you just say “no” and then start in with a bunch of vague platitudes. You won’t even pin down what you’re saying. Speak up.
So, being that’s the reality we live in, I can determine that the situation is INFINITELY better off in the hands of one party than the other.
Genocide is not infinitely better than genocide. It is actually delusional to think that a political system comprised of two parties which have a near-total consensus on committing genocide are operating independently. You can frame this as a “tough choice adults have to make” as much as you want, but the fact that you have no coherent explanation about why this is happening shows you’re just playing games instead of facing reality.
I also voted for that party because I’m not a moron single issue voter and I know there’s a lot else at stake right here at home.
Again - genocide is not a “single issue”. It shows that on the spectrum of morality, a politician is at absolute zero. Pure evil. It negates every other stance they supposedly have, because it proves that they value absolutely nothing except their own benefit. If you can sacrifice millions of humans, you are an absolute devil. If you vote for someone like that, no much how much anguish you supposedly subject yourself to while you’re doing it, you’re a fool and a useful idiot at best, and as evil as the politician at worst. And back to the point of “the parties are not actually independent”, this speaks only to you failing to understand that voting for either of these parties sacrifices everything that’s at stake. It is the public shooting itself in the foot and thinking they’re being strategic.
![An independent voter explains why they chose a moronic, oligarcho-fascist demagogue over Joe Biden (c. November 2020) [Day 58]](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/a38a8c8d-3e86-4981-a58d-48c94062495e.png){kind=link}
Are you seriously disagreeing with the assessment of Biden committing (or being complicit in, potato potatoh) genocide? Or is it only talking about it that you have a problem with? Or making the assessment that it makes a politician unsuitable to hold office? In my not-completely-fucked-in-the-head reality, that’s pretty much the sane take.
No.
I’m being an adult that accepts the reality I live in.
In that reality there is basically no scenario where America gives up its most important long-term ally in the Middle East over a never-ending religious conflict they’re having with someone else.
So, being that’s the reality we live in, I can determine that the situation is INFINITELY better off in the hands of one party than the other. So I voted for that party to mitigate the damage that we’re now going to see due to a bunch of idiots that didn’t want to accept the reality they lived in and ended up making the very thing they cared about worse.
I also voted for that party because I’m not a moron single issue voter and I know there’s a lot else at stake right here at home.
I asked what specifically you had an issue with, and gave three possibilities. Which one are you saying no to? This screams “evasion” that you just say “no” and then start in with a bunch of vague platitudes. You won’t even pin down what you’re saying. Speak up.
Genocide is not infinitely better than genocide. It is actually delusional to think that a political system comprised of two parties which have a near-total consensus on committing genocide are operating independently. You can frame this as a “tough choice adults have to make” as much as you want, but the fact that you have no coherent explanation about why this is happening shows you’re just playing games instead of facing reality.
Again - genocide is not a “single issue”. It shows that on the spectrum of morality, a politician is at absolute zero. Pure evil. It negates every other stance they supposedly have, because it proves that they value absolutely nothing except their own benefit. If you can sacrifice millions of humans, you are an absolute devil. If you vote for someone like that, no much how much anguish you supposedly subject yourself to while you’re doing it, you’re a fool and a useful idiot at best, and as evil as the politician at worst. And back to the point of “the parties are not actually independent”, this speaks only to you failing to understand that voting for either of these parties sacrifices everything that’s at stake. It is the public shooting itself in the foot and thinking they’re being strategic.