• Communist
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    If you made a list of your top choices for president, from 1-whatever, would kamala be higher than trump, or lower?

      • Communist
        link
        fedilink
        English
        521 days ago

        Then you would indeed be a kamala supporter and you are indeed negatively impacting your better choice with this

        • OBJECTION!
          link
          fedilink
          -320 days ago

          Wrong. I wouldn’t support Kamala regardless of her being the lesser evil. I would abstain, because neither of them are at all acceptable to me.

          • Communist
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            20 days ago

            that accomplishes nothing but improving the odds of your last choice. It’s not like your vote is an endorsement… everyone knows about strategic voting, so, the fact that you’re voting strategically makes it obvious that you don’t support that person just because you voted for them.

            • OBJECTION!
              link
              fedilink
              020 days ago

              I doesn’t improve either candidate’s chances at all. And voting is an endorsement, no matter how much you pretend otherwise.

                • OBJECTION!
                  link
                  fedilink
                  0
                  edit-2
                  20 days ago

                  Not voting for the candidate when you could’ve doesn’t improve the opponents odds?

                  No, it doesn’t. Not voting for a candidate neither increases nor decreases their chances. Voting for a candidate is what increases their chances, voting for their opponent is what decreases them.

                  Actually mathematically false. You’re saying 1+1=4 because if it doesn’t your feefees will be hurt.

                  Nope, it’s actually mathematically false, you’re the one twisting numbers around. Remove me from existence and Trump and Kamala’s chances will be the same, so I’m not increasing or decreasing either’s chances.

                  Voting is in no way shape or form an endorsement of anything

                  Definitionally, endorsing a candidate is when you say, “This candidate is the best choice and I intend to vote for them.” It doesn’t mean, “I agree with everything this candidate says or does.” If you vote for a candidate, tell people you vote for them, and encourage others to vote for them, that is definitionally an endorsement.

                  You’re obviously a teenager whose brain has not fully developed. If you’re an adult, god help us.

                  I’m in my 30’s. You’re just wrong about everything you said.

                  • @Rhoeri
                    link
                    English
                    120 days ago

                    Seriously man… how many people are you going to let eat your lunch before you just tap out?

                    You’re all over this post getting wrecked left and right. Just stop man. It’s getting sad.

          • @ultranaut
            link
            1
            edit-2
            20 days ago

            Your logic doesn’t make sense. We only get one or the other of them, that is the inevitable outcome of the election. It is going to be either Trump or Harris. You just said Trump is worse than Harris in a previous comment. If you legitimately believe Trump is worse then it is basic harm reduction to vote for the person who is capable of defeating him. Choosing to not vote or to vote third party reduces the chances of Harris winning and increases the chances of Trump winning. Either you actually do want Trump to win and are trolling or your ethics and values are incoherent.

            • OBJECTION!
              link
              fedilink
              -220 days ago

              Trump is worse than Harris, and one of them will win the election, that is true. But I don’t agree that that means I should vote for Harris. I believe it is necessary to hold politicians to a minimum standard, and that refusing to vote for a candidate that doesn’t meet that standard is a means of enforcing it. Even if a third party can’t win this election, voting for them still serves to establish a credible threat of defection. This is one of many reasons why the ideology of lesser-evilism is incorrect.

              Choosing to not vote or to vote third party reduces the chances of Harris winning and increases the chances of Trump winning

              It does neither of those things, actually. It neither increases nor decreases the chances of either candidate winning.

              • @ultranaut
                link
                120 days ago

                The things you believe do not make sense or map to actual reality.

                What do you think voting is doing if its not increasing or decreasing the likelihood of a candidate winning?

                If there’s only two possible outcomes between three choices, and one of those choices is clearly the worst outcome and another one of them is clearly not a possible outcome, which choice would you make and why?

                • OBJECTION!
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -120 days ago

                  If a large enough bloc of voters won’t vote unless you support a specific policy, then you have more of an incentive to support that policy. Do you dispute this?

                  • @ultranaut
                    link
                    220 days ago

                    There’s not a yes or no answer to that question except in a theoretical abstraction. In reality politics is complicated, messy, and frequently dumb. The only real answer is it depends on the policy, the demographics and voting habits of the bloc, the politician and parties involved, and myriad more factors beyond these obvious ones. I dispute that allowing Trump to win by not voting for Harris will accomplish anything useful or positive, no one will be taught the lesson you purport to be teaching if that happens.