• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    55 days ago

    No sane people were fine with it, but sane people have to live in the real world and not believe some fucking fantasy that there was another option at the time.

    • @Iceman
      link
      English
      135 days ago

      The democrats did have another option at the time.

    • @dx1
      link
      English
      15 days ago

      Let’s start with the very basic logic here. Let’s say 80, 90 million people come out and vote for, say, De la Cruz. Accounting for the electoral college and all that, enough to secure a victory. Is it not true that virtually all of us had the option to put a check next to her name, or write that name in? It is true. Is it true that we would have had a better outcome for the society with De la Cruz, than we would have with Harris or Trump? That is also true. So what - SPECIFICALLY - stopped this from happening.

      • SatansMaggotyCumFart
        link
        English
        -15 days ago

        If everyone who had voted for Harris had voted for De la Cruz instead she still wouldn’t have won.

        There are no serious third party options in the US currently.

        • @dx1
          link
          2
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          If everyone who had voted for Harris had voted for De la Cruz instead she still wouldn’t have won.

          And?

          There are no serious third party options in the US currently.

          As assessed by you, based on arbitrary criteria and questionable analysis.

          • SatansMaggotyCumFart
            link
            English
            -15 days ago

            I just gave you the results of a poll called the 2024 election.

            Is that based on arbitrary criteria and questionable analysis?

            • @dx1
              link
              English
              25 days ago

              For the ten thousandth time in this thread, it’s circular logic for a population not to vote for someone because they think no one will vote for them.

              • SatansMaggotyCumFart
                link
                English
                05 days ago

                That’s why I voted for myself.

                If I don’t then I will never win!

      • @CommissarVulpin
        link
        English
        05 days ago

        Because I’ve never heard of De la Cruz, or any of the other third-party candidates that people keep espousing. And even if I had, my vote would be split among the other dozen candidates. That’s the fundamental problem with anyone left of the Democrat party - they’re not unified. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what would be best, everyone seems to have a different favorite candidate. Now all the votes that might have gone D are lost in the noise, while the R’s just fall in line like they always do.

        • @dx1
          link
          English
          2
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          How is it that I had heard of them months before the election, and you’re still catching up?

          Back to the point I made elsewhere - the population is abdicating their responsibility to vote responsibly, that is the core problem here. Election came and went, and you didn’t even research the non-D/R candidates. As the saying goes, politics isn’t a spectator sport. Your approach is basically like going to a car dealership and asking them nicely to give the best deal. You gave up all your power at the door. You didn’t fight them on the random fees they threw into the price, you just went, well, at least it’s not the RAM dealership across the street. You didn’t look on Craigslist for used cars listed by sellers, you didn’t ask a mechanic what brand to get, nothing.