edit: I scanned over the she modifier sorry. yes that would be true. but shes no better either.
— remains relevant to others in the thread.
She may lose either way; and you’re an idiot if you think people who are disgusted by us supplying weapons to the genocidal regime in israel are worse than trump.
if you’re in a swing state vote harris
if you’re in a democratic bastion feel free to vote third party, dont worry the majority of the liberal lemmings will vote for harris.
let your reps know you don’t support arming israel while they’re actively committing a genocide and refusing to commit to a cease fire which is against our laws and harris if she wants to claim is in favor of upholding the law needs to back.
I’d rather put boots on the ground to defend israel than let them continue a genocide of hundreds of thousands of innocents.
I’d add 2a: Even if you don’t vote for president be sure to vote down-ballot. You can just leave the president section blank. But don’t be tempted to write in someone because that may invalidate your entire ballot.
I love how you’re carefully avoiding the Abilene effect and how it could lose the election in even strong states.
Yes, lose. Because
it’s a binary choice
non-participation benefits the crueler conservatives
everyone votes in isolation while cognizant of others and assuming their intent
And even if we declare the two viable options - note I said viable there - to be guaranteed as equally detrimental for Gaza when we all know it’s not, it simplifies the equation. If we cannot appreciably affect the outcome in our election choice we move to the choice which has the most potential for effect after the election. CLEARLY
And that’s the programme. It’s been explained so many fucking times that I’m not sure how “but her emails” you need to be not to get it.
This is as clear the nose you sever to spite your face, and it’s truly sad to see such cognitive dissonance in someone not voting conservative out of greed or gambler’s mindset.
its not, as evidenced by the fact there are 5 options, now as we both obviously know FPTP is a horrible system and leads to a collapse of viable parties, but even in that situation you have 3 options. A,B, Neither. and I’m nethier. neither kamala nor trump have policies that i support. and trump can’t impact the larger scheme of things i care about my local government prevents that.
non-participation benefits the crueler conservatives
no its a neutral stance, and you’re upset that people dont care about your prefered candidate because she doesn’t bring anything to the table that my state doesn’t already have. if i lived in texas/florida the equation would be different but i don’t and harris will easily win in my state.
And that’s the programme. It’s been explained so many fucking times that I’m not sure how “but her emails” you need to be not to get it.
but you don’t get it. harris doesn’t bring anything to the table. if i was an arab in michigan right now i’d be looking at her ticket and going:
nothing to help with inflation.
nothing to help with labor rights.
nothing to help with corporate corruption (see above two issues).
and shes literally willing to support killing my family and friends in the middle east.
If voting 3rd candidate gets that person to the poll booth and they vote 3rd party/blank/etc and down ticket dems vs not showing up at all. I take that as a win. Its not our fault harris, the alleged law and order candidate, wouldn’t commit to enforcing the law on arms sales. if the zionists have a problem with that, well thats on them, maybe you should removed about them being intransigent about fucking genocide.
Try to clue in before voting, okay?
already voted mate, maybe get a clue in the future on the entire system before opening your mouth. you’re position only is rational by assuming there is only one office on the ballot. sadly harris didn’t turn it around in time to win my vote. but thats her fault not mine. I have a laundry list of issues that if she ticket any of them personally I would have voted for her. she didn’t. not my fault. genocide was just one of the ones where the ask was so small it should have been a no brainer. If the majority of the zionists are willing to support trump if harris won’t sell israel weapons I don’t particular care and think you should save your ire for them not me.
I’m not preventing harris from not being genocidal thats on her, I’m not stopping zionists from recognizing that israel’s behavior is unconscionable, thats on them. If harris loses because of israel’s behavior feel free to removed at those voters they’re the ones who caused the loss by not supporting their brothers and sisters of another faith from being subject to a genocidal war.
I’m not the one preventing us changing our voting system to ranked choice. that’s on the DNC/GOP. Hell I’ve canvased and gathered signatures for the damn thing in my state what have you fucking done to kill the spoiler effect?
I’m simply not going to give my vote to a candidate who won’t commit to supporting labor and won’t commit to not committing a genocide; especially when it won’t change the outcome in any manner.
Abilene effect
also what makes you think we’re part of the same group? This simply doesn’t apply.
edit: changed jews -> zionists, because its not the jews in america causing this problem.
edit: I scanned over the she modifier sorry. yes that would be true. but shes no better either.
— remains relevant to others in the thread.
She may lose either way; and you’re an idiot if you think people who are disgusted by us supplying weapons to the genocidal regime in israel are worse than trump.
I’d rather put boots on the ground to defend israel than let them continue a genocide of hundreds of thousands of innocents.
I’d add 2a: Even if you don’t vote for president be sure to vote down-ballot. You can just leave the president section blank. But don’t be tempted to write in someone because that may invalidate your entire ballot.
Writing in a name won’t invalidate a ballot, at least not in any state i’m aware of, what lead you to say that? genuinely curious.
In some states a write in has to be registered as a candidate for the write in to work.
At least that’s how it worked when I lived in MD.
lol wow thats nonsense. (that such a rule exists) =)
I love how you’re carefully avoiding the Abilene effect and how it could lose the election in even strong states.
Yes, lose. Because
And even if we declare the two viable options - note I said viable there - to be guaranteed as equally detrimental for Gaza when we all know it’s not, it simplifies the equation. If we cannot appreciably affect the outcome in our election choice we move to the choice which has the most potential for effect after the election. CLEARLY
And that’s the programme. It’s been explained so many fucking times that I’m not sure how “but her emails” you need to be not to get it.
This is as clear the nose you sever to spite your face, and it’s truly sad to see such cognitive dissonance in someone not voting conservative out of greed or gambler’s mindset.
Try to clue in before voting, okay?
its not, as evidenced by the fact there are 5 options, now as we both obviously know FPTP is a horrible system and leads to a collapse of viable parties, but even in that situation you have 3 options. A,B, Neither. and I’m nethier. neither kamala nor trump have policies that i support. and trump can’t impact the larger scheme of things i care about my local government prevents that.
no its a neutral stance, and you’re upset that people dont care about your prefered candidate because she doesn’t bring anything to the table that my state doesn’t already have. if i lived in texas/florida the equation would be different but i don’t and harris will easily win in my state.
but you don’t get it. harris doesn’t bring anything to the table. if i was an arab in michigan right now i’d be looking at her ticket and going:
If voting 3rd candidate gets that person to the poll booth and they vote 3rd party/blank/etc and down ticket dems vs not showing up at all. I take that as a win. Its not our fault harris, the alleged law and order candidate, wouldn’t commit to enforcing the law on arms sales. if the zionists have a problem with that, well thats on them, maybe you should removed about them being intransigent about fucking genocide.
already voted mate, maybe get a clue in the future on the entire system before opening your mouth. you’re position only is rational by assuming there is only one office on the ballot. sadly harris didn’t turn it around in time to win my vote. but thats her fault not mine. I have a laundry list of issues that if she ticket any of them personally I would have voted for her. she didn’t. not my fault. genocide was just one of the ones where the ask was so small it should have been a no brainer. If the majority of the zionists are willing to support trump if harris won’t sell israel weapons I don’t particular care and think you should save your ire for them not me.
I’m not preventing harris from not being genocidal thats on her, I’m not stopping zionists from recognizing that israel’s behavior is unconscionable, thats on them. If harris loses because of israel’s behavior feel free to removed at those voters they’re the ones who caused the loss by not supporting their brothers and sisters of another faith from being subject to a genocidal war.
I’m not the one preventing us changing our voting system to ranked choice. that’s on the DNC/GOP. Hell I’ve canvased and gathered signatures for the damn thing in my state what have you fucking done to kill the spoiler effect?
I’m simply not going to give my vote to a candidate who won’t commit to supporting labor and won’t commit to not committing a genocide; especially when it won’t change the outcome in any manner.
also what makes you think we’re part of the same group? This simply doesn’t apply.
edit: changed jews -> zionists, because its not the jews in america causing this problem.