Until we get ranked choice voting or similar the Green Party is a joke with zero chance of election. Voting for them only helps Republicans at this point in time.
If less enthusiastic Republican voters have a chance to vote for a neutral party instead of voting for a shitshow, then how is it helping Republicans?!
Lol it's not Republicans voting for the green party, the green party has only ever siphoned votes from the Democratic candidates.
the votes belong to the voters, not to the parties. democrats need to earn their votes just like everyone else.
The GOP is attempting to destroy democracy, the Dems are not. The GOP are trying to subjugate me as a queer/trans person and POC as well, the Dems are not. The GOP are removing human rights from us, the Dems are not. The Dems are trying to pass green energy legislation, gun control laws, and more while the GOP are blocking it.
Those are some pretty good god damn reasons.
under no pretext.
voting for Democrats facilitates fascism.
So you read all of that and you could only muster an emotional response.
I think that says all that needs to be said. You'd rather enable our democracy to be destroyed (and you know, make it harder to do anything about fascism later) and vote in a way that will make you feel a little better about yourself while it goes into the void.
I stated a fact. I don't know what you mean about emotion.
Stating a fact and making up a fact are 2 very different things.
what I said is true.
voting for fascist does make it harder to get fascist out of a power. that's why I don't vote for democrats.
we don't have a democracy and we never have.
Yeah see how that turns out if the republicans win next election. They facilitate fascism by being the only alternative to actual fascist politicians. They certainly aren't perfect, but seriously how do you think it plays out if enough morons like you vote for Putin apologist Stein? What do you think the end result will be?
Democrats are full fascist. they don't just facilitated by being fascism light.
Stein isn't a Putin apologist.
She's at least a dinner guest.
she paid for her own ticket and transportation and lodging. she's less a guest and more a customer.
Keep carrying that water.
people advocate for politicians they like, it's true.
Dines with Putin
Helped put Trump in office (Hillary's shit campaign helped too.)
Poised to help put him in office again.
Meh. Advocate to someone who has the slightest chance of being convinced to vote for her.
Neoliberalism was an attempt to save both the state and capitalism. Capitalism, however, cannot be rehabilitated. It will not save us from totalitarianism or state-sponsored genocide. Capital can absorb any product, service, or practice (including government practice) into itself and then reproduce itself. It is always primed for, always flirting with, the spectre of fascism. Source
if i would vote for jill stein or cornel west (i mean, i have to be honest, it's nice to have choices) or the libertarian or no candidate at all, how do any of those votes help republicans?
the only vote that helps republicans is a vote for a republican.
Wrong. Dead fucking wrong. Due to our current shitty system the only parties with any chance of winning are Dems or GOP, every vote that doesn't go to the Dems is another point the GOP has over them. If you don't vote for Dems you're facilitating fascism. Simple as.
I don't like our choices but we don't have the option to be fucking picky right now, there's fascists at the door and they're working hard to ruin our lives.
voting for the lesser evil will only serve to guarantee that you will forever be voting for the lesser evil and that you will reach the same evil that the alternative raced towards, but slower.
Thats really poetic but observe our choices in reality in relation to the systems we built to usher them in. You don't cut your parachute just because you're falling anyway.
My god, what a stupid take.
The lesser evil is by definition the better choice! If you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils, you are effectively choosing the greater evil. It does not get any stupider than that.
If you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils,
you are choosing not to vote for evil.
you are choosing not to vote for evil.
And allowing the greater evil to win.
in the trolley scenario, i don't touch the lever. you can choose to be a murderer, but i won't.
In the trolley scenario, you chose to let 6 people die. Neither choice makes you a murderer. But one choice causes much more harm than the other.
flipping the switch makes you a murderer.
This is exactly the kind of situation the trolley problem was invented to illustrate... and I've never seen anyone fail at it so badly with such a weird take.
You'll allow the greater evil to happen because you don't want to have any part or any responsibility in helping a lesser evil happen. But you do have responsibility, because you do have a choice. In the trolley problem, f you never knew about the lever, you couldn't be asked to pull it or not. In the election problem, if you can't vote you have no responsibility. But the trolley problem states you know about the lever, and in the election scenario, you do have a vote. So you are involved no matter what. And that means you're just as guilty as the person who acted; only your action resulted in more deaths than the person who acted either way. Yours was the worst possible choice.
Try flipping the words from evil to good. The greater evil is worse, and the lesser evil is better. Therefore, you are choosing the worse scenario rather than the better one. It's ridiculously absurd.
The trolley problem is a litmus test for finding your ethical system. I've long tended toward deontology. More recently I'm looking at virtue ethics but I still at the moment identify as a deontologist. just because you let the trolley problem mislead you into some form of ontological ethics doesn't mean that you got the right answer. it means that it taught you about yourself.
I'm going to vote for who I want to win. I'm not going to vote for someone I think is evil to any degree.
If your method of voting is to choose the best person you can imagine, rather than someone who has an actual chance of winning, why vote for any candidate? Why not just write-in vote for Superman? Surely he is less evil than any candidate on the ballot.
Voting is like a game with rules. Sometime you simply can't win. But if you want the best outcome for the game you need to pick the strategy that leads to that outcome. Folding your arms and refusing to change your strategy when your preferred outcome has no chance of success ensures that the people actually playing the game will have it their way. Demanding nothing but the absolute best to earn your vote, and thus not voting for someone with a chance, is statistically identical to supporting the worse evil. It's sheer foolishness.
This kind of purity contest accomplishes nothing but shooting yourself in the foot. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Dictionaries are often treated as the final arbiter in arguments over a word's meaning, but they are not always well suited for settling disputes. The lexicographer's role is to explain how words are (or have been) actually used, not how some may feel that they should be used, and they say nothing about the intrinsic nature of the thing named or described by a word, much less the significance it may have for individuals. When discussing concepts like racism, therefore, it is prudent to recognize that quoting from a dictionary is unlikely to either mollify or persuade the person with whom one is arguing.
Basic math. The stuff most of us learned as children.
these aren't magic phrases that change my vote for one person into a vote for another person.
No shit, it's quite obvious no one is going to change your mind and I'm not trying to. I answered the posed question in a public forum. Turns out other people also read these comments.
your response isn't actually an answer, though. it's just rhetoric.
No, it just seems that way because you don't understand basic math.
more rhetoric.
You don't know what that is either
Content Policy
5.0: Lemmy.World consists of a large number of communities from all around the world, leading our federated network.
5.0.1: Before using the website, remember you will be interacting with actual, real people and communities. Lemmy.World is not a place for you to attack other groups of people. Every one of our users has a right to browse and interact with the website and all of its contents free of treatment such as harassment ... and bullying...
Do you have a point? Preferably expressed in words that you know the definitions of
Until we get ranked choice voting or similar the Green Party is a joke with zero chance of election. Voting for them only helps Republicans at this point in time.
If less enthusiastic Republican voters have a chance to vote for a neutral party instead of voting for a shitshow, then how is it helping Republicans?!
Lol it's not Republicans voting for the green party, the green party has only ever siphoned votes from the Democratic candidates.
the votes belong to the voters, not to the parties. democrats need to earn their votes just like everyone else.
The GOP is attempting to destroy democracy, the Dems are not. The GOP are trying to subjugate me as a queer/trans person and POC as well, the Dems are not. The GOP are removing human rights from us, the Dems are not. The Dems are trying to pass green energy legislation, gun control laws, and more while the GOP are blocking it.
Those are some pretty good god damn reasons.
under no pretext.
voting for Democrats facilitates fascism.
So you read all of that and you could only muster an emotional response.
I think that says all that needs to be said. You'd rather enable our democracy to be destroyed (and you know, make it harder to do anything about fascism later) and vote in a way that will make you feel a little better about yourself while it goes into the void.
I stated a fact. I don't know what you mean about emotion.
Stating a fact and making up a fact are 2 very different things.
what I said is true.
voting for fascist does make it harder to get fascist out of a power. that's why I don't vote for democrats.
we don't have a democracy and we never have.
Yeah see how that turns out if the republicans win next election. They facilitate fascism by being the only alternative to actual fascist politicians. They certainly aren't perfect, but seriously how do you think it plays out if enough morons like you vote for Putin apologist Stein? What do you think the end result will be?
Democrats are full fascist. they don't just facilitated by being fascism light.
Stein isn't a Putin apologist.
She's at least a dinner guest.
she paid for her own ticket and transportation and lodging. she's less a guest and more a customer.
Keep carrying that water.
people advocate for politicians they like, it's true.
Meh. Advocate to someone who has the slightest chance of being convinced to vote for her.
do you think that you're going to win voters by calling them morons?
Just trying to help:
Genocide Joe isn’t earning your vote? /s
No idea why your being down voted. This is 100% correct.
I'm not blue no matter who. it's a cardinal sin
You're thinking of the "libertarian" party.
She's a democrat choice not a republican choice.
Source: voted for her in 2016
if i would vote for jill stein or cornel west (i mean, i have to be honest, it's nice to have choices) or the libertarian or no candidate at all, how do any of those votes help republicans?
the only vote that helps republicans is a vote for a republican.
Wrong. Dead fucking wrong. Due to our current shitty system the only parties with any chance of winning are Dems or GOP, every vote that doesn't go to the Dems is another point the GOP has over them. If you don't vote for Dems you're facilitating fascism. Simple as.
I don't like our choices but we don't have the option to be fucking picky right now, there's fascists at the door and they're working hard to ruin our lives.
voting for the lesser evil will only serve to guarantee that you will forever be voting for the lesser evil and that you will reach the same evil that the alternative raced towards, but slower.
Thats really poetic but observe our choices in reality in relation to the systems we built to usher them in. You don't cut your parachute just because you're falling anyway.
My god, what a stupid take.
The lesser evil is by definition the better choice! If you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils, you are effectively choosing the greater evil. It does not get any stupider than that.
you are choosing not to vote for evil.
And allowing the greater evil to win.
in the trolley scenario, i don't touch the lever. you can choose to be a murderer, but i won't.
In the trolley scenario, you chose to let 6 people die. Neither choice makes you a murderer. But one choice causes much more harm than the other.
flipping the switch makes you a murderer.
This is exactly the kind of situation the trolley problem was invented to illustrate... and I've never seen anyone fail at it so badly with such a weird take.
You'll allow the greater evil to happen because you don't want to have any part or any responsibility in helping a lesser evil happen. But you do have responsibility, because you do have a choice. In the trolley problem, f you never knew about the lever, you couldn't be asked to pull it or not. In the election problem, if you can't vote you have no responsibility. But the trolley problem states you know about the lever, and in the election scenario, you do have a vote. So you are involved no matter what. And that means you're just as guilty as the person who acted; only your action resulted in more deaths than the person who acted either way. Yours was the worst possible choice.
Try flipping the words from evil to good. The greater evil is worse, and the lesser evil is better. Therefore, you are choosing the worse scenario rather than the better one. It's ridiculously absurd.
The trolley problem is a litmus test for finding your ethical system. I've long tended toward deontology. More recently I'm looking at virtue ethics but I still at the moment identify as a deontologist. just because you let the trolley problem mislead you into some form of ontological ethics doesn't mean that you got the right answer. it means that it taught you about yourself.
I'm going to vote for who I want to win. I'm not going to vote for someone I think is evil to any degree.
If your method of voting is to choose the best person you can imagine, rather than someone who has an actual chance of winning, why vote for any candidate? Why not just write-in vote for Superman? Surely he is less evil than any candidate on the ballot.
Voting is like a game with rules. Sometime you simply can't win. But if you want the best outcome for the game you need to pick the strategy that leads to that outcome. Folding your arms and refusing to change your strategy when your preferred outcome has no chance of success ensures that the people actually playing the game will have it their way. Demanding nothing but the absolute best to earn your vote, and thus not voting for someone with a chance, is statistically identical to supporting the worse evil. It's sheer foolishness.
This kind of purity contest accomplishes nothing but shooting yourself in the foot. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
The fascists at the door were invited in by democrat enablers
voting for Democrats facilitates fascism.
Fascism is, by it's definition, a right wing ideology, not a left wing ideology.
It's OK to admit when you don't know something. We can help!
https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095811414
"An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization."
Democrats are right wing. it's okay to admit when you don't know something.
Democrats, at worst, are centrist, not right wing. If you can't comprehend basic terminology then perhaps this is not the community for you.
if you threaten to ban people who know what fascism is and what lexicographers' jobs are. maybe this isn't the right community for me
Tried to give you an honest chance, banned for argumentative trolling.
dictionaries are not the arbiters of a word's meaning.
They LITERALLY are.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
Basic math. The stuff most of us learned as children.
these aren't magic phrases that change my vote for one person into a vote for another person.
No shit, it's quite obvious no one is going to change your mind and I'm not trying to. I answered the posed question in a public forum. Turns out other people also read these comments.
your response isn't actually an answer, though. it's just rhetoric.
No, it just seems that way because you don't understand basic math.
more rhetoric.
You don't know what that is either
Content Policy
5.0: Lemmy.World consists of a large number of communities from all around the world, leading our federated network.
Do you have a point? Preferably expressed in words that you know the definitions of