The crazy part is that that 1/3 refuses to admit that the Nationalist Christians will not hesitate for a fucking second to put them up against the wall if they manage to gain and cement their hold on power in the US.
It’s not quite that bad (remember, “lead” means the difference between voting intention for each candidate, not the total voting intention for one candidate). Of those intending to vote, 8 percent intend to vote for Trump (still way too damn high; fucking turkeys voting for Christmas), 77 percent are voting for Harris and the rest are voting third party. That third party vote is also too high, but it’s down to a combination of Harris being smeared (unjustly) as anti trans rights, and people who just refuse to vote for a party that supports genocide, no matter how bad the alternative is.
Yes; I wasn’t talking about how many plan to vote for Harris or Trump, but about the fact that in the current election format, not voting for Harris makes Trump more likely to win, as all other votes are protest votes that won’t actually elect a candidate.
Once FPTP is eliminated and states use a ranked voting system, your argument comes into play. But surely people in the LGBTQ community understand that not voting for Harris in this election means not caring that Trump gets elected?
Sure, but 23% of LGBTQ voters aren’t voting for Harris, which is significantly less than a third (33%). Still higher than it should be, granted, but I am pretty sure that is what the original reply comment was pointing out.
That boggles the mind; 1/3 of LGBTQ voters are OK with Trump getting elected?
The rich gays only care about themselves. It’s a class war.
I feel like this concept should be named after Peter Thiel.
Thielist
The Theory of Thiel
The Thieoly of Everything (that personally affects him).
The crazy part is that that 1/3 refuses to admit that the Nationalist Christians will not hesitate for a fucking second to put them up against the wall if they manage to gain and cement their hold on power in the US.
It’s not a third. She has a 67% lead, not 67% of people.
1/3 of them have been pushed up against the wall their whole lives, so it’s not really a threat anymore.
Not just the rich gays. Gays that think they’re gonna be rich in the future.
Not really a gay thing specifically. Lots of temporarily embarrassed millionaires out there…
It’s not quite that bad (remember, “lead” means the difference between voting intention for each candidate, not the total voting intention for one candidate). Of those intending to vote, 8 percent intend to vote for Trump (still way too damn high; fucking turkeys voting for Christmas), 77 percent are voting for Harris and the rest are voting third party. That third party vote is also too high, but it’s down to a combination of Harris being smeared (unjustly) as anti trans rights, and people who just refuse to vote for a party that supports genocide, no matter how bad the alternative is.
I was very intentional in my wording.
I’m confused. Did I miss understand your wording?
100 - 77 = 23; 23% < 33%
77 - 10 = 67 point lead
Admittedly the way we talk about a “point lead” is confusing and it’s always useful to look at what the real numbers are and what they actually mean.
Yes; I wasn’t talking about how many plan to vote for Harris or Trump, but about the fact that in the current election format, not voting for Harris makes Trump more likely to win, as all other votes are protest votes that won’t actually elect a candidate.
Once FPTP is eliminated and states use a ranked voting system, your argument comes into play. But surely people in the LGBTQ community understand that not voting for Harris in this election means not caring that Trump gets elected?
Sure, but 23% of LGBTQ voters aren’t voting for Harris, which is significantly less than a third (33%). Still higher than it should be, granted, but I am pretty sure that is what the original reply comment was pointing out.
The Log Cabin Republicans aren’t known for being self-reflective.