• @Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -82 months ago

    That’s interesting. I have to support a party which supports killing innocent people to be against killing innocent people.

    Wow, humans sure are good at rationalising things in a nonsensical way. No wonder they’ve made such a fucked up world.

    • @bob_lemon@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      112 months ago

      That’s not what I’m saying. You can absolutely continue to condemn and fight the democratic party on any topic you deem worthwhile.

      But putting that tiny mark on the ballot paper might ever so slightly get the world moving closer to the ideal you imagine, instead of veering away from it.

      That is the rationale I’m using here.

    • @brygphilomena@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      62 months ago

      Voting doesn’t mean you support them.

      You aren’t giving them money, you aren’t campaigning for them. You are saying that between these two, admittedly fucked up, parties this is the one you think that will be better.

      So for the presidential election, vote to reduce harm - not to increase it.

      If you want to do better, support, fund, campaign for third parties down line. Local elections and build the momentum until they become a viable presidential candidate. Work to reform the electoral system that can dismantle the two party system.

      But don’t think voting for Harris is de facto supporting the Democratic party.

      • @Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        So for the presidential election, vote to reduce harm - not to increase it.

        Then give me a party which does not allow harm to be done to the innocent. I will gladly vote for them.

        Voting doesn’t mean you support them.

        Ah, so someone could vote for Trump, but then say “I didn’t vote for Trump because I support him.” Does that make sense to you?